o.k.-6 months ago, my history teacher gave my Advanced Higher History class a list of dissertation questions. we had to pick one. we had to write a 4000 word dissertation on one of them. so, 6 months, numerous bars of chocolate, multiple cold coffees, an agony right hand, lotsa peices of A4 paper, some very sore fingers, 4029 words, two sleepless ngihts and a numb mind later: the result. just under 30% of my grade. thus-it means diddly-squat. i don't need the award-i just took the subject to keep me busy...so-i thought-what's the point in writing over 4000 words so that my history teacher (who wears pink shirts, and blazers with genuine leather elbow pads 😉) and some guy from the SQA can read it-why not let some random people read it! i mean-all that effort...
so, tis about a borderline B, maybe a C if the markers very strict, according to my teacher...but i've jiggered it since then, so it's kinda better 😉 my conclusions kinda crappy though still-but hey, nobody's perfect...
so-yes:
---------------------------------------------------------------
An Evaluation of the factors enabling the Nazi’s to become Germany’s largest political party by 1932.
Historical debate has long raged over both the reasons and the nature of the rise of the Nazi party; Kershaw argues that this was “against all odds”(1), whereas A.J.P Taylor believed it to be inevitable(2). However, the fact still remains that over the space of 8 years, the NSDAP grew from being a provincial party with 6% of the vote in 1924, to gaining 13.7 million votes (37.5 😵 in the general election of June 1932. This essay shall examine the factors that allowed the Nazi Party to become Germany’s largest political party by 1932.
Between June 1920 and 1932, there were 14 coalition Governments in Weimar Germany, none of which ran their full four-year course. The Weimar Constitution, although advanced, was politically flawed. Proportional representation encouraged a multiplicity of splinter groups, which made coalitions inevitable, thus fuelling internal disagreement, and “made politics more impersonal…confusing issues.”(3) The internal disagreement fuelled by proportional representation, as well as by the growing sectional interest which can be seen in the SPD’s more Marxist policies and the failure of the two liberal parties to unite, was further encouraged by the economic crisis suffered during the Weimar period. However, the large number of parties and deep-seated political fragmentation was evident during the Kaiser Reich, involving social, regional and religious divisions, so proportional representation did not produce the disagreement, but instead sustained it. Although many of the parties that filled the political spectrum of German politics had been in existence under the reign of the Kaisers, they had no power and were unskilled in the art of politics. Therefore, they were ill prepared to handle the responsibilities of democracy. In 1929 the so-called “Great Coalition”, consisting of the SPD, the centre, the DVP and the DDP, collapsed, leading to a decline in party politics, a growth of authoritarian government, and less recourse to the Reichstag, leaving Germany in what was described by Lee(4) as an “ideal situation for the Nazi party”. Article 48, described by Snyder(5) as the “suicide clause”, was another thorn in the flesh of Weimar. Originally introduced as the creators of the Weimar constitution believed the President would be dominated by the Reichstag, thus allowing emercency dictatorial powers for the president in times of crisis. It was used to good effect by Ebert against the Kapp Putsch of 1920, but could equally be used against the Republic, as shown by Hindenburg after the collapse of the “Great Coalition”. Therefore, as is the opinion taken by Cockery and Stone, the Weimar Constitution was not a factor in the rise of the Nazi party because it caused democracy to fail, but rather because it helped sustain problems in Germany of a “long standing and complex nature”(6)
In 1914, the German mark was worth 4.2 U.S. Dollars, but in January 1923 this had become 17’972 Dollars, and in November of the same year; 42 trillion. This economic crisis of hyper infalation had many causes, with its origins lying in WWI, which developed into hyperinflation in 1923. This had a profound impact on the politics of the time, with parties unwilling to implement anti-inflationary measures such as high taxation and cuts in government spending as these would have been highly unpopular at this time of political unrest, when Weimar was under attack from the right and the left of the political spectrum. One of the main factors in this hyper inflation of 1923 was Cuno’s policy of ‘passive resistance’ in the Ruhr, which united Germans against the common foe of the French occupation, leading to further support for Weimar, but ultimately led to the collapse of Cuno’s Government. This was replaced with Stresemann’s ‘Great Coalition’, which provoked a political backlash by radical nationalists in Bavaria, and ultimately Hitler’s Munich putsch of November 1923, and the left in Hamburg and Saxony and Thuringia. The rise of the left led to Stresemann declaring a state of emergency, crushing the KPD uprisings as well as overthrowing democratically elected Governments that he saw as a threat, such as the SPD-KPD coalition in Saxony and Thuringia. This strong action caused Von Kahr to abandon Hitler’s putsch, and the SPD’s resignation from the Grand Coalition. It, along with the ruin caused by the inflation, helped make the physiological impact of the inflation deep and long lasting. The impact on German politics can be clearly seen in the increased votes for radical, anti-democratic parties in the 1924 elections-the KPD’s vote rose by 10%, while the radical right gained 25% in 1924, and increase of 11% from 1920. Therefore, the inflation that crippled Germany after the war had a profound physiological impact on the German public and, ultimately, “Hitler was to be the beneficiary”(7). He used this crisis to his advantage, gaining 7% on in this first national election, 1924.
Initially, there was little support for the early Nazi movement; in 1920 it was a small fringe group with merely 2000 members, planning to gain power through revolution. The next year, 1921, Hitler was elected leader, and the SA was founded, and in 1923 the party attempted to overthrow the Bavarian Government by means of an armed revolt-the “Munich putsch” as it was called. This took place on the 8th and 9th of November, but failed “because of a lack of support from the army and the police.”(8) The putsch’s failure and Hitler’s subsequent trial gave him, for the first time, a National platform, which he used to great effect. Not denying his part, he claimed that the putsch was a patriotic act, slating the army and the Government-he was “more accuser than accused”(9). He became a hero to many German’s who had never heard of him before, and the NSDAP gained recognition as being on the forefront of German right-wing politics. After the failed putsch, Hitler saw that he could not achieve power through revolution, but that he would have to achieve it through the ballot box. “Revolution would follow (power) rather than achieve it.”(10) Therefore, the Munich Putsch was a vital factor in the rise of the Nazi party, thus changing a hitherto unsuccessful policy and catapulting a formal provincial party into National politics.
Subsequent to the Munich Putsch, the electorate wanted to abandon their traditional loyalties, but did not want revolution. Hitler appealed to these people, as is the opinion of the historian Lee(11), by making general policies, thus cutting through class differences. Hitler capitalised on the unpopularity of the Treaty of Versailles and defeat in war by exploiting the “stab in the back”, tugging at the people’s heartstrings, claiming that he would make Germany great once more. After his spell in prison, he reorganised the chaotic party, basing it around Fuhrerprinzip. He redesigned the party programme and strategy, with only the 25-point programme remaining fixed. He depicted the party as more of a movement, introducing brown shirts for the SA storm troopers, adopting the swastika in imperial colours, and introducing the famous Nazi salute. As well as his leadership skills, his strength also lay in his speaking abilities-he was described as “one of the greatest orators of the 20th century”(12)-and his contagious will power, acting as a man of the people and inspiring many. Therefore, without Hitler the Nazi’s may not have been able to grow at the rate that they did, nor have such a great charismatic appeal. Their success was based on his organisation of the party and his ability to sway crowds, persuading them, as is the opinion of Hite and Hinton (13), to dismiss logic in favour of emotions.
The years of 1924 to 1929 are often described as the Nazi Parties ‘lean years’. During this time, Germany appeared to be basking in relative economic prosperity, and so people were unwilling to support anti-democratic fringe parties such as the NSDAP or the KPD, unlike during times of economic hardship. Despite Hitler’s decision, post Munich, to follow the legal route to power by participating in democracy and destroying it ultimately from within, Hitler wanted the party to boycott elections as he himself was ineligible to stand for election due to the fact that he was not a German citizen and, as is the opinion of Bulloch(14), he felt others standing would threaten his personal position. Success during this period was due mainly to the socialists Gregor and Otto Strasser, especially in the North of Germany in securing the support of the farming community hard pressed by falling prices and by foot and mouth disease. However, their radical socialist views contrasted with Hitler’s, and a confrontation erupted between them over the issue of the expropriation of the Hohenzoll
Hey Genius,
I think you have made many good points. I am a reductionist when I analyze war. It always comes down to whether there are people willing to face the gun and stand against tyranny BEFORE THE WAR BREAKS OUT.
In the case of the Nazi's, the german people never dared to stand up and say no to Hitlers thugs. Just like the Iraqi's now don't dare stand up against the Brotherhood if Islam thugs. It is dangerous to do so. So just go along and do the best you can.
This is why it was such a shock to the average good german citizen when they were force marched through the death camps in the aftermath. They had no idea. They still can't quite believe it happened. Many still deny it. They were just doing their best to avoid conflict and come to no harm. They were protecting their families. Weren't they?
Right. I guess.
The inevitable results of cowardice is evil. Just getting by always empowers the zealot. The zealot always kills for truth.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyGenius, I think something's backward. I believe the dollar was worth 42 trillion marks, not the other way around as your sentence says....
Hey Genius,
I think you have made many good points. I am a reductionist when I analyze war. It always comes down to whether there are people willing to face the gun and stand against tyranny BEFORE THE WAR BREAKS OUT.
In the case of the Nazi's, the german people never dared to stand up and say no to Hitlers thugs. Just like the Iraqi's now don' ...[text shortened]... owardice is evil. Just getting by always empowers the zealot. The zealot always kills for truth.
Originally posted by StarValleyWySVW: " ....... In the case of the Nazi's, the german people never dared to stand up and say no to Hitlers thugs. ..... "
Hey Genius,
I think you have made many good points. I am a reductionist when I analyze war. It always comes down to whether there are people willing to face the gun and stand against tyranny BEFORE THE WAR BREAKS OUT.
In the case of the Nazi's, the german people never dared to stand up and say no to Hitlers thugs. Just like the Iraqi's now don' ...[text shortened]... owardice is evil. Just getting by always empowers the zealot. The zealot always kills for truth.
That is not true. Hitler had to destroy the German opposition first in order to be able to go to war in 1939. The prisons were filled with opponents of his regime and many, many Germans were executed.
.
Originally posted by ivanhoeWrong again Joe. Hitler was IN PRISON for murder and treason while he wrote Mein Story. He was just a good boy gone wrong. He could be salvaged. Right? He was turned loose because NOBODY HAD THE GUTS to kill him. Or did you miss that part of world history? What would the world have been like had he and a couple of thousand of his thugs had been lined up and shot in 1929? Quite different I think. But there is no way of knowing who or what else might have come along. The point is that when people SEE THE GOOD in every life... millions die. Reality isn't the most pleasant place to live, but it beets the hell out of the pseudo-love world of liberals. That world always generates a good rousing dose of genecide and war.
SVW: " ....... In the case of the Nazi's, the german people never dared to stand up and say no to Hitlers thugs. ..... "
That is not true. Hitler had to destroy the German opposition first in order to be able to go to war in 1939. The ...[text shortened]... opponents of his regime and many, many Germans were executed.
.
As to the fact that the german people let him loose and he executed thousands in his assension... you reinforce what I said. Nobody had the guts to oppose him. It was too dangerous. Just like Iraq today.
Originally posted by StarValleyWy
Wrong again Joe. Hitler was IN PRISON for murder and treason while he wrote Mein Story. He was just a good boy gone wrong. He could be salvaged. Right? He was turned loose because NOBODY HAD THE GUTS to kill him. Or did you miss that part of world history? What would the world have been like had he and a couple of thousand of his thugs had been lined up ...[text shortened]... orce what I said. Nobody had the guts to oppose him. It was too dangerous. Just like Iraq today.
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. Hitler even had to eliminate opposition within his own Nazi party. Remember, he had Röhm & Friends murdered, the Night of the Long Knives. It seems like Herr Hitler followed the same rules of killing those in his way as you are suggesting here and now to wipe out those who are in our (democratic ?) way. The "problem" with being civilised is always the same it seems. You're always one step behind ......
Originally posted by ivanhoeSo you say that it was just destiny and a good thing that nobody opposed hitler? And that by me saying good people should have had the courage to fight and try to kill him... that I and hitler are moral equals? Thanks Joe. I really appreciate that.
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. Hitler even had to eliminate opposition within his own Nazi party. Remember, he had Röhm & Friends murdered, the Night of the Long Knives. It seems like Herr Hitler followed the same rules of killing those in his way as you are suggesting here and now to wipe out those who are in our (democratic ?) way. The ...[text shortened]... roblem" with being civilised is always the same it seems. You're always one step behind ......
All I have said is that he murdered his way into power. He could have been opposed and stopped. He was not.
What grand assignations you make to me don't change history.
The fact that hitler killed Nazi's getting into power is your justification for nobody else trying to destroy him? Nobody knew he was evil? That seems to be your answer to this whole question. I will grant you that point. It is obvious that nobody thought him to be dangerous. For me to set here at RHP where ninty percent of the people opposed the war to remove Saddam... it would be a stretch for me to say that people can see obvious evil. Nobody does now. Why should they have done so then?
I concede this entire argument. There is no way to prevent evil. It is just too darned hard to spot. I actually am starting to think that the german people were just a bunch of victims. I'm sure you see it that way too. Damned americans fault.
Originally posted by StarValleyWy
So you say that it was just destiny and a good thing that nobody opposed hitler? And that by me saying good people should have had the courage to fight and try to kill him... that I and hitler are moral equals? Thanks Joe. I really appreciate that.
All I have said is that he murdered his way into power. He could have been opposed and stopped. He was ...[text shortened]... ople were just a bunch of victims. I'm sure you see it that way too. Damned americans fault.
Stop, stop, stop ! Where are your brakes ?
SVW: "So you say that it was just destiny and a good thing that nobody opposed hitler? .... "
No, I didn't say that.
SVW: ".... And that by me saying good people should have had the courage to fight and try to kill him... "
There indeed were good people trying to stop him. He all killed them. That's the reason they were killed .....
SVW: " ...... that I and hitler are moral equals? Thanks Joe. I really appreciate that. .... "
Don't jump to any conclusions SVW !!
SVW: "....All I have said is that he murdered his way into power. He could have been opposed and stopped. He was not. ... "
He was not stopped until 1945. Sure, but that doesn't mean nobody tried before in the thirties for instance.. Those who did are now dead. It took millions and millions of casualties to remove that man from power among which were many Germans who opposed him during the thirties and later.
Please don't say nobody tried to stop him. Millions died in doing so. Let's remember them and lets honour and respect them ....... and remember, in the end he was stopped !
Originally posted by ivanhoeJoe,
Stop, stop, stop ! Where are your brakes ?
SVW: "So you say that it was just destiny and a good thing that nobody opposed hitler? .... "
No, I didn't say that.
SVW: ".... And that by me saying good people should have had the courage to fight and try to kill him... "
There indeed were good people trying to stop him. He all killed them. That ...[text shortened]... them and lets honour and respect them ....... and remember, in the end he was stopped !
Thanks. I think. You just argued my point perfectly. It was too dangerous to oppose him. That's the reason nobody did. JUST LIKE IRAQ TODAY.
All I'm saying is that he was an obvious threat to world peace and should have been killed early on. JUST LIKE SADAAM.
Think about it Joe. The reason it took "millions and millions" to stop him was because good people failed to oppose and destroy his evil government when they saw that it was evil and dangerous. JUST LIKE IRAN AND SYRIA AND NORTH KOREA.
I really don't think we as a civilization are capable of learning. So we will just keep repeating the "hitler" dilemma over and over and over.
The dilemma is that good... decent people don't want and can't tolerate violence and killing. So evil triumphs over them. And millions die. It's not debatable. It's just history. And I sure don't and didn't play any part in it.
As to the honored dead. I respect them enough to oppose obvious evil in the hopes of preventing the "hitler" dilemma. That brave people must die fighting evil is forever to their credit. As you have said on occasion... "freedom is not free".
Originally posted by StarValleyWyhe was in for treason, not murder-and he plead guilty...nobody had reason to kill him, to be honest. the judges were favourable to his cause-they let luddendoft off! c'mon people! he pleaqd guilty to treason, and he's aquitted...
Hitler was IN PRISON for murder and treason while he wrote Mein Story... NOBODY HAD THE GUTS to kill him
and his aims weren't completely clear-mein kampf wasn't published till after, and neither was the 25-point programme...
Originally posted by geniusOk. Point taken on why he was in prison. Everyone knew he had murdered. There was nobody brave enough to testify. The treason was for the unsuccessful coup wherein how many innocents died? Is that not murder? But he never hid his intentions and nobody held him up for examination until it was too late because it was too dangerous to do so.
he was in for treason, not murder-and he plead guilty...nobody had reason to kill him, to be honest. the judges were favourable to his cause-they let luddendoft off! c'mon people! he pleaqd guilty to treason, and he's aquitted...
and his aims weren't completely clear-mein kampf wasn't published till after, and neither was the 25-point programme...
From the time he became chancellor until the invasion of Poland he never wavered in declaring his intent. Nobody dared oppose him and he gained almost universal appoval BECAUSE NOBODY DARED OPPOSE him. It was too dangerous.
Cowardice is the main cause of war. Nobody in their right mind will challenge a madman. If they do they are treated like ... like...
I'm searching for a word to describe how appeasers treat bravery. I guess the best adjective to to say that they treat those who oppose a repeat of history "like Bush and Blair". Not a good thing these days to be so treated.
Originally posted by ivanhoeWell. In quotes of the day. I'll give you credit for it though if you want it. It is true. Another truth might be that facism unopposed is an invitation to a slaughter. If history means anything.
SVW: "... As you have said on occasion... "freedom is not free".
"Did I say that ? mmmmmm ....
Which I am seriously starting to doubt. It's like we are just determined to let it happen the same way again. Wonder what there is in our nature that seems to demand that? Fear of change?
I have no clue. Weird world we live in.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyWe are attracted by evil because we think we will benefit from it. We believe, yes believe, this is true by using our "rational" reasoning. That is called seduction ..... We delude ourselves into believing that evil is good. A disease of all times. A disease also of our times. We believe that we can change evil into good ....... Abortion, active euthanasia, beastiality, necrofilia, infanticide.
Well. In quotes of the day. I'll give you credit for it though if you want it. It is true. Another truth might be that facism unopposed is an invitation to a slaughter. If history means anything.
Which I am seriously starting to do ...[text shortened]... d that? Fear of change?
I have no clue. Weird world we live in.
.