st affirmation was repetition, keeping his speeches on the grounds of knowledge that his listeners would be able to understand, giving him a relation between each group of people in the country. Information is traded in a question-and-answer type form. New information was obtained by an answer to a previously uttered or merely implied question. This was taken over by the mass orator, yet changed into something completely different. Hitler transformed his ‘political meetings’ into an instrument of political assertion. His question-and-answer game demonstrated the unity of the speaker and audience. He asked people what they wanted, but actually gave them a choice in a ‘yes’ and ‘no’ form only. The meaning of his rhetorical Yes or No system of speaking the masses is founded upon three levels. The first being, it promised deliverance from the economic, social, and political complexities the German people were facing at the time. A country in trouble, having no direction, leaving them open for a new way of life, new ideas, and new solutions for problems they did not know they had. The second was a hidden lie, because it hid the changes up front and the hesitations that characterized Hitler’s domestic policies and his diplomatic moves. Finally, it never brought forth No’s, the destructive nature and self-destructive nature of his moves were only part of it, but also the nature of the German’s expectations. In the case of the battle against the Jews, Hitler places the idea of them being the ones at fault for the troubles by telling his people: “I ask myself: who in fact are these elements that do not want peace, that do not want quiet, that do not want reconciliation, that continue to hound us and that must sow the seed of distrust – who are they really?” (The Inner Nazi – pg. 62-63). With this, and other questions of the same nature addressed to ...
