The Role of Propaganda in the Nazi Takeover When one thinks of the term "propaganda", what comes to mind? Would it bring a positive response? Would it bring a negative response? When one thinks of "propaganda" in association with the Holocaust, what comes to mind? A positive response or a negative response? Most likely a negative response. Why is "propaganda" any different from what any political party or regime does, namely to disseminate its views? Is "propaganda" simply the name we give to views which we do not like or which we think to be untrue? And finally, was the role of "propaganda" in the Nazis’ assumption of power overstated? (Daniel Goldhagen, 1996) As many people who are learned in the field of the Holocaust will agree, propaganda played an extremely vital part in the Nazis’ rise to power, as well as their brain-washing of the German population into detesting all, of what they considered, "heretics" to the degree of accepting their murders. Validity of the accusations upon which they attempted to justify their action against the Jews was not an issue. The issue in this case was its power of persuasion. Although to achieve this goal the Nazi party deemed it necessary to monopolize the communications, media, and entertainment industries, Germany already had a strong anti-Semitic background. European anti-Semitism is an outgrowth of Christianity. Since the time of the Roman Empire, Christian leaders preached boundlessly against Jews. It escalated from generation to generation, for as long a the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, the Jews "challenged" the whole belief system of Christianity. The idea that it was the Jews that killed their savior also evolved from that time period. Along those lines, the notion that all Jews of forever were responsible for Jesus’ death, for they approved of the crime, would have certainly done it again (according to the anti-Semitics), and had always rejected his teachin...
