Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich - Report Example

Introduction: The 20th century saw number of leaders and social, political systems that were based on the concept of superiority towards self and inferiority towards others. Few of these individuals who managed achieving their goals and objectives accomplishment to a considerable degree included people like Saddam Husain and Adolf Hitler. Both have had significant impact on world politics and global peace and order. Adolf Hitler and Saddam Husain were dictators to start with. They had come to power through ousted of the elected members and enforced their rule and regime through fist and crushing of the rivals. The overall statement can be drawn and dissected into three major parts. The first is that of the Third Reich understanding and defining its historical perspective. The second part is the historic significance and value of Saddam Husain while the third is by comparing the nature, characteristics and the reason based on which the two were being contemplated as the world’s most dangerous leaders. Third Reich: Third Reich is the epoch that has historic significance with regard to the major event that took place in the middle of 20th century. It was a mindset and philosophy that led the entire world into Second World War. Broadly this phase lasted from the period that marked the end of the Weimar Assembly to the beginning of the Second World War and till the end where Germany was beaten and Hitler and his party went to ruins. It was a philosophy and mindset aimed at restoring the lost glory. Even if it was at the cost of human rights violation and annihilation of the other nations. According to this concept, the Germans were a superior nation and they had more privileges against their contemporaries; Austrians who according to this mindset were the inferior tribe. Austria was considered as the sole responsible for the downfall and the defeat suffered by Germany in the First World War. The aim was to restore the lost glory which they had suffered in form of the termination of the First and Second Reich that had long existed previously. Both the events had led Germany to significant role and say in the European Continent and each was aimed at establishing a German Empire. The annexation of the Russian Empire was another dream and desire that the entire German nation driven by the aspiration of establishment of Third Reich wished to be fulfilled. For this purpose Adolf Hitler engaged large number of troops and other sources of military might to overcome their supremacy. The dream was to annex the land between Ural river and Vistula. However Adolf Hitler could not succeed in his ambitions in this regard (Dobrenko & Balina, 2011.242). Iraqism: Iraqism was a concept based on the same lines of establishing territorial superiority and cultural and social influence. The pioneer of this idea was Saddam Husain who undertook number of offensives in this regard against the neighboring regions. He took up the battle to the likes of Kuwait and Iran. In the case of Kuwait, the global powers were dragged into it, giving rise to the First Gulf War. Saddam Husain came to power in the summer of 1968(Sassoon, 2011, 163), initially as an interim set up and later on strengthening its grip on power. Comparison of two personalities: From critical view point, both the personalities had sparkling resemblances and contrasts with regard to the aims to achievements. Adolf Hitler may be termed more effective with regard to the annexations and territorial aggrandizement made by Adolf Hitler. Other differences may appear in the context of nepotism seen (Borowitz, 2010, 102). Saddam Husain’s reign showed traces of nepotism with his family members and other associates being assigned important roles in decision making and political corridors. Adolf Hitler was the lone responsible individual who brought about the occurrence of the Second World War. It was based on the number of factors. One of the most evident one was the establishment of the Third Reich, while other side products of the entire mindset were hostility, vengeance, the military alliances, role of partners, hostility towards the western powers and quest and desire for strategic influence and nullifying the events, orders and dictums that had been announced in form of the League of Nation’s verdict and working for nearly 20 years after the First World War. The scale of damages incurred as a result of the jingoism and massive manslaughter launched by Adolf Hitler was far greater. His destructions amounted to millions, while Saddam Husain’s ambitions led to indirect casualties from different wars. Saddam Husain and his Kuwait’s adventures: Saddam Husain Invaded Kuwait in the Iraq- Kuwait war and overtook the oil reserves and depots. The invasion lasted for nearly six months. It was similar to the Hitler’s invasion of Poland, Denmark and Norway. Both driven by the desire to annex strategic location. The atrocities and highhandedness of Saddam Husain and his regime led the Western Powers to indulge into the war and expel Iraq out of Kuwait in the first gulf war. The entire event took place in 1989-1990. Iranian Offensive: The offensive and war that lasted for good eight to nine years made it one of the longest full fledged war in those days. Its span of occurrence lasted from 1980 to 1988. The outcome was complete destruction, manslaughter, human rights violation and complete disregard for charter of United Nations. It was based on the same lines and principles of hatred towards the neighboring region as was Hitler’s philosophy which was based on downward looking attitude towards Austria and other Jewish communities. To some experts, Iran was to Saddam Husain what Russia to Adolf Hitler was. Both fought had and invested a lot of energy, resource and troops into these two areas, however each had to eat a humble pie at the end of the day. The failure of two in context of their desired lands annexations can be compared for another point of similarity between these two leaders and mindsets. Similarities existed on account of the outward expansions undertaken by each. Hitler aiming to ensure and establish control in states like Austria, Poland and the likes of Demark and Norway that he undertook early in the Second World War. Saddam Husain aimed at fulfilling this Reich by expressing his aims and ambitions of annexing Kuwait and Iran for the same purpose based on the ideological and territorial differences and vested interests. Kurds for Saddam, Jews for Hitler: This was another point of sparkling identity between the two leaders. For Saddam Husain Kurds were as despicable as were Jews for Adolf Hitler. Saddam Husain undertook the offensive against the Kurds in 1988 in one of the most infamous events of those days in the form of Halabja chemical attacks (Kelly, 2008, 88). The local population was subjected to the use of chemical weapons and other chemical substances. Th Halabja event was not the only one in this category and the overall atrocities that took place through his regime included many other instances of similar accounts. Another similar and quite horrifying event that took place at that time was that of Al Anfl Campaign aimed at persecution of the Kurd community and through the use of similar chemical weapons (Totten & Bartrop, 2008, 13). This fell in line with the human rights violation. The unarmed people had little support and standing against the most barbaric event of 20th century for the first time since Second World War. Adolf Hitler had undertaken similar offensive during the Second World War when he established containment centers and mass annihilation centers that were directed towards the crushing of the Jews. This was done so in the name of Holocaust. The amount of causalities and deaths caused as a result of this in millions (Reimer & Reimer, 2012, 85). Another point of similarity: The two usurpers had their own signs of declaration and victory that marked their superiority and domination over the rivals. Hitler for this regard made use of the “Swastika” and Saddam Husain “The Arc of Triumph” or the “Hands of Victory”. The hand of Victory had historic and political significance with regard to the war with Iran that was engulfed in the 80s decade. Adolf Hitler and Nazis on other hand made use of the Swastika sign indicating the dominance and superiority of the Aryans over the rest of the nations. It was sign of ethnocentric mindset by them. Hence both had two clearly distinct marks and symbols based on their historic precedence and aims that were to be achieved. Both the parties and individuals made their respective countries one party state. There was no place for the opposition in the domestic sphere of politics. The name of opposition was akin to revolt, rebellion and treachery towards the land. The choice of Weapons: Adolf Hitler gave little regard and respite to the human rights factor. Saddam Husain followed his footsteps and adopted the same means to crush his rivals. In case of the former, gases and other containers filled with chemicals and flesh boiling water was used. Saddam Husain used the same tactics against the Kurds when he used chemical weapons against them. The only difference was the development of technology and period which gave Saddam Husain’s efforts a more horrifying and more evil look. Secret agencies and police forces: Both the leaders had integrated severe measures ensuring no domestic purges take place against them. They had secret police forces in place. Iraq Intelligence Agency was notoriously famous for its affectivity with regard to reporting to Saddam Husain and crushing and thwarting any effort that may had been contradictory to the mission and agenda of Saddam Husain. Adolf Hitler in the same context inducted S.S( security Service) force that would work directly under the command of Adolf Hitler. The Schutzstaffel would make sure no purge takes place. Adolf Hitler during his reign from 1933 to 1945 (Kershaw, 2002) came across number of purges each being silenced through the effective presence of secret police force. Other dimensions of the statement: To the first part” there will never be again a reproduction of Third Reich…..”( Wolin, 2004, 389) provides the details that the establishment of the entities like United Nations Organization and the splitting of the world in to two super powers has considerably blocked the way for another similar attempt and Reich establishment based on the principles and mindset of superiority of self and inferiority of the other regions and its people. United Nations Organization has a strong enough structure and entities such as Security Council and General Assembly that takes into account any development that may be based on the lines of Adolf Hitler’s annihilation of complete set of nation Present day circumstances: Little traces of such effective and consolidated power can be seen in modern times. The case of Cuba may come to forth, however it was a socialist outset oriented mindset and it did not entail the territorial aggrandizement based objectives achievement. Saddam Husain followed what was being followed by Adolf Hitler and Mussolini each desiring to annex maximum land, and bring upon downfall on the rivals. Syria’s Bashar Al Asad is modern day usurper in this context who can be compared to the atrocities performed, he too is held accountable for using chemical weapons on his own citizens. His objectives do not entail outward expansion as was aimed at by Saddam Husain. However his offensives beside this do not entail any foreign invasion ambitions or creating any rift and panic in the international sphere such as one caused by Saddam Husain in Iran and Kuwait respectively. Saddam Husain suffered a fate nearly same as that of Adolf Hitler, in his case the Western powers enforced influence and the final blood was drawn by United States of America. In the case of Hitler the same set of allies brought about the downfall and demise of Adolf Hitler. The two of them go down into history as two military dictators who ran amok in the corridors of peace and human rights and ultimately ended up in ruins with destruction of their own empires and ambitions set forth against it. References: Borowitz, A., 2010. The Borowitz Report: The Big Book of Shockers. s.l.:Simon and Schuster.Press. Dobrenko, E. & Balina, M., 2011. The Cambridge Companion to Twentieth-Century Russian Literature. s.l.:Cambridge University Press. Kelly, M. J., 2008. Ghosts of Halabja: Saddam Hussein and the Kurdish Genocide: Saddam Hussein and the Kurdish Genocide. s.l.:ABC-CLIO. Kershaw, I., 2002. Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich, Bavaria 1933-1945. s.l.:Oxford University Press. Reimer, R. C. & Reimer, C. J., 2012. Historical Dictionary of Holocaust Cinema. s.l.:Scarecrow Press. Sassoon, J., 2011. Saddam Husseins Bath Party: Inside an Authoritarian Regime. s.l.:Cambridge University Press. Totten, S. & Bartrop, P. R., 2008. Dictionary of Genocide: A-L. s.l.:ABC-CLIO.Press. Wolin, R., 2004. The Seduction of Unreason: The Intellectual Romance with Fascism : from Nietzsche to Postmodernism. s.l.:Princeton University Press. Read More