Editing Diplomatic history (section)

===Mason–Overy debate on internal pressures inside Nazi Germany===
A notable example of the ''Primat der Innenpolitik'' approach was the claim by the British [[Marxist historian]] [[Timothy Mason (historian)|Timothy Mason]] who claimed that the launch of World War II in 1939 was best understood as a “barbaric variant of social imperialism”.<ref>Kaillis, Aristotle ''Fascist Ideology'', London: Routledge, 2000  page 7</ref> Mason argued that “Nazi Germany was always bent ''at some time'' upon a major war of expansion”.<ref name="Kaillis, Aristotle page 165">Kaillis, Aristotle ''Fascist Ideology'', London: Routledge, 2000  page 165</ref> However, Mason argued that the timing of such a war was determined by domestic political pressures, especially as relating to a failing economy, and had nothing to do with what Hitler wanted.<ref name="Kaillis, Aristotle page 165"/> In Mason's view in the period between 1936 and 1941, it was the state of the German economy, and not Hitler's "will" or "intentions" that was the most important determinate on German decision-making on foreign policy.<ref name="Kershaw, Ian' page 88">Kershaw, Ian'' The Nazi Dictatorship'' London : Arnold 2000 page 88.</ref> Mason argued that the Nazi leaders were deeply haunted by the [[German Revolution of 1918–19|November Revolution]] of 1918, and was most unwilling to see any fall in working class living standards out of the fear that it might provoke another November Revolution.<ref name="Kershaw, Ian' page 88"/> According to Mason, by 1939, the “overheating” of the German economy caused by rearmament, the failure of various rearmament plans produced by the shortages of skilled workers, industrial unrest caused by the breakdown of German social policies, and the sharp drop in living standards for the German working class forced Hitler into going to war at a time and place not of his choosing.<ref>Kaillis, Aristotle ''Fascist Ideology'', London: Routledge, 2000  pages 165-166</ref> Mason contended that when faced with the deep socio-economic crisis the Nazi leadership had decided to embark upon a ruthless “smash and grab” foreign policy of seizing territory in Eastern Europe which could be pitilessly plundered to support living standards in Germany.<ref>Kaillis, Aristotle ''Fascist Ideology'', London: Routledge, 2000  page 166</ref> Mason's theory of a "Flight into war" being imposed on Hitler generated much controversy, and in the 1980s he conducted a series of debates with economic historian [[Richard Overy]] over this matter.  Overy maintained the decision to attack [[Poland]] was not caused by structural economic problems, but rather was the result of Hitler wanting a localized war at that particular time in history. For Overy, a major problem with the Mason thesis was that it rested on the assumption that in a way unrecorded by the records, that information was passed on to Hitler about the ''Reich''{{'s}} economic problems.<ref name="Mason, Tim page 102">Mason, Tim & Overy, R.J. “Debate: Germany, `domestic crisis’ and the war in 1939” from ''The Origins of The Second World War'' edited by Patrick Finney, Edward Arnold: London, United Kingdom, 1997 page 102</ref> Overy argued that there was a major difference between economic pressures inducted by the problems of the [[Four Year Plan]], and economic motives to seize raw materials, industry and foreign reserve of neighboring states as a way of accelerating the Four Year Plan.<ref>Overy, Richard “Germany, ‘Domestic Crisis’ and War in 1939” from ''The Third Reich'' edited by Christian Leitz,  Blackwell: Oxford, 1999 pages 117-118</ref> Moreover, Overy asserted that the repressive capacity of the German state as a way of dealing with domestic unhappiness was somewhat downplayed by Mason.<ref name="Mason, Tim page 102"/>