Final answer:
Hitler's reign is not considered a form of leadership because it was an extreme form of totalitarianism, focused on the suppression of freedoms, consolidation of power, and implementation of genocidal policies rather than ethical governance.
Step-by-step explanation:
Hitler's reign is not considered a form of leadership because it was characterized by an extreme form of totalitarianism. This type of government differs from other autocratic systems by seeking to dominate all aspects of society, suppressing individual freedoms, and using systematic violence. As Hannah Arendt describes in The Origins of Totalitarianism, under totalitarian rule, laws are constantly changing, and the government aims to fundamentally reshape the identity of individuals, turning them into mere extensions of the state. Hitler's National Socialism was marked by the consolidation of political power in the hands of the Führer, the dismantling of democratic institutions, the enforcement of a single party-state, and the implementation of genocidal policies, all of which stand in stark contrast to more ethical and representative forms of leadership.
Hitler's reign is deemed non-leadership due to its authoritarian, totalitarian nature, controlling all aspects of German life. Nazism, a fascist ideology, embraced extreme nationalism, racism, and opposition suppression. Hitler consolidated power, merging President and Chancellor roles, utilizing propaganda, and enforcing Nazi ideology through violence. This dictatorship, lacking democratic principles and individual freedoms, signifies manipulation and domination rather than leadership, as it subjugated the state and its citizens completely.