Ian Kershaw is right that while Hitler was responsible for executing the German foreign policy that inevitably led to World War II, Hitler was not free from the influence of outside forces. Kershaw, professor of history at the University of Sheffield, is a structuralist. Structuralists generally believe that Hitler cannot be held solely responsible for World War II and that he was "a product of the environment he helped create." When it comes to specifics, structuralists tend to emphasize different aspects; for example, one might focus on the effects of socioeconomic pressure while another might focus on the lack of a coherent plan (343). Kershaw's article draws on many aspects of structuralism and provides a sufficiently comprehensive argument in his excerpt. German foreign policy during the Third Reich is a great source of great debate. Many historians agree that Hitler made major foreign policy decisions after 1933. However, disagreement arises when discussing the extent to which foreign policy stemmed from Hitler's “ideological possessions and program” (356). According to structuralists, foreign policy emphasized expansion and contained unclear and nonspecific goals. This was due to the “uncontrollable dynamism and radicalizing momentum of the Nazi movement and system of government” (353). Hitler's foreign policy emphasized his image and ideological fixations, not his direct intervention and initiative. Hitler is seen as an opportunist who makes impulsive decisions, rather than a man with a concrete plan (354). Kershaw provides support for his thesis by including the views of other structuralists, such as Hans Mommsen, Martin Broszat , and… halfway through the paper… men imposed their own restrictions on Hitler’s maneuverability.” Therefore, Hitler made those decisions based not only on his own beliefs, but also in accordance with the beliefs of his followers and his fellow leaders. Many of the developments that occurred under Hitler's reign would probably still have happened if Hitler had not been elected, because "they were in some respects as probably if not as inevitable as the unfinished business of the First World War and the post-war settlement." There are few discontinuities in German foreign policy after 1933, which gives reason to believe this theory. His choices were based on the traditions of German politics and aimed at achieving dominance in Central Europe, which leads to the conclusion that the Second World War was not the result of Hitler's master plan, because it could have been the result regardless of who was in command. loaded at that time (360).