Interpretations of the Reichstag Fire

i) Van der Lubbe was a madman, and he restrict preempt to the Reichstag e really last(predicate) by himself, but the national socialists genuinely believed the energise was the start of a Communist uprising.ii) The Reichstag Fire was started by the Nazis to give them an excuse to take urgency powers and lock up or kill the Communists. Van der Lubbe was used by the Nazis.Which interpretation is topper supported by the depict in these sources and your noesis of the period? Explain your answer.Its difficult to incline the balance to any of two interpretations because some(prenominal) of them submit evidence to backup them. radical A for instance, supports the beginning(a) interpretation, it suggests that Lubbe acted a lone and Diels to backup his words tells that it would be substantially right the fire because the old furniture, dry wood, and heavy curtains would made the fire overspread rapidly, while Lubbe could be starting fires elsewhere in the building cart track th rough the long corridors. In the other hand microbe I contradict directly the other source, because it verifys that a man who was handicapped some(prenominal) physically and mentally, without experience of the orient and with the brief time given couldnt perhaps stria the fire on its own.As we can see both of the sources use well supported theories, however, Source I seems to be best well supported because despite the inflammable materials which were there, he was handicapped, didnt know the place and he didnt even have time, also, Source I its from an history contain what suggest me that the theory would been well studied by historians to arrive that conclusion.In support of command i) Source B shows Lubbes confession which tells I garment fire to the Reichstag all by myself, here we could vocalise that Lubbe set the fire on his own, and due to his madness he could set the fire on his own for then boast about his great job. still there are too many reasons were he coul d be un uprightness to take in favour this source, he could be protecting communists, or maybe under pressure by the own Nazis, or patently despite he was helped he would preferred to tell everyone he set the fire on himself to show off.In the other hand, we have other sources suggesting that the Nazis were implicated in the fire, Source E for example shows prevalent Franz utter that on Hitlers birthday three years before, pierce say The only one who really knows about the Reichstag building is I, for I set fire to it, General Franz could have reasons to tell the truth because know he didnt have any kind of Nazi pressure on him and also he might had nothing to loose. Anyway, he also could be fable show the reliability here is very questionable, he could be telling that for saving himself, to revenge on him. However, it was at Hitlers birthday, so Goring could been easily drunk and say that in a joke (despite there was the gap that the alcohol could shape say what he should nt say).Goring in Source F describes of ridiculous the statement before, he could be telling the truth and said that in sense of a joke while he was drunk, which explains why he didnt remember nothing he said, so maybe the two are telling the truth Halder could take too disadvantageously what for Goring was a joke while he was drunk to make some fun on Hitlers birthday. However it Halder was telling the truth and Goring said that seriously its obvious that Goring would have defend himself as shown in Source F. Most likely Halder could misunderstand Gorings joke so the value of his evidence could wakelessly support the second statement.D and G are two of the less reliable Source shown here, they are both pieces of propaganda by blaming the enemy for the fire. The two of them were published in convenience of the political party and both of them lack of evidence to backup them so we cannot consider them seriously.It appears that Source H the best well supported source contradicting the second statement though its took from an history admit so the evidence on it is intimately likely to be true. It suggest that the Nazis didnt expected the fire at all because the measures taken after it couldnt be plan, most importantly the fact that the Nazi party had to use out-of-date lists to arrest the communists and that the Nazis had hoped to destroy the Communists after the preference (however, this last statement is very subjective). Obviously, the Nazis would have made ample preparations if they mean the fire and this source shows they didnt, this possibly one of the bests pieces of evidence (if we assume the book is telling the truth) against the theory that the Nazis were behind the fire.In conclusion we can say that none of both interpretations is more supported by the sources than other because they well-nigh balance equally with sources in favour or against. We have to say that some sources suggest that that Lubbe didnt acted alone which in the same way that suggests that could been helped by communists they could be also helped by the Nazis. The most important thing is the pitch and reliability that each source have, and all of them have reasons to not be true.For my interpretation of the sources and my knowledge it would be more likely that the Nazis took part in the fire. The first statement isnt very well supported because despite the evidence in their favour (such the fact that the fire could be spread very rapidly due to the materials inside) Van der Lubbe couldnt make such a amply damage and devastation as shown in source J, its very hard to believe that all that damage could be done a person who hardly had any time (before being caught), who didnt have any knowledge of the place, and who had a severe sight problem and so mentally ones. The unmated thing that makes you think is that the fire was made just one hebdomad before the elections, very possibly the Nazis could have planned the fire as an excuse to use the emergency p owers, by blaming the Communists of an uprising and so crushing the opposition in favour for their elections. Because we got to remember that Hitlers greatest fear at that time was the Communism.