...in germany by 1932 (nsdap=nazi btw)
anyone? it's not details-but historical opinions, where i can find those opinions, and a rought outline of the reasons...e.g. the inherent weaknesses of weimar, the failure of the radical left to unite with the spd so they could not form cooalition governments so they could not form a strong governemnt etc.
also-which histoian said that hitler was going to come whatever happened-and that if it hadn't been hitler it'd've been someone else?
(i have a history dissertation for a couple of weeks on this topic. i've had 6 months or so to do it. i've done some notes and planned it a bit. i am screwed. help?...btw-i don't actually need to pass the essay or anything-it'd be nice, but i'm into uni etc, so don't hold back information cause u belevie it's immoral 😉)
Originally posted by shavixmira zillion sites, but how many are credible?i'm sitting with books by, like, kolb and bullock and hite and all these otehr -erm- respected historians...proffessors and doctors etc. and then you put something by some guy that did history till the end of highschool and thinks he's a genius (please not: i'm writing the essay, so i'm not that guy...)
Any old google search should offer you a zillion sites on the subject.
Or, alternatively, go to the library and read: The world at war.
also-i'm too lazy to sift through the sites looking for ones that actually tell me what i'm looking for...
Originally posted by stammerthe nazi's never gained a minority-but they came damn close. i think it was in 1933 that they gained 48% (1933? 48%? i think it was 1933, and it was just less than 50%...twas just after hitler became chancellor, he called another election)of the vote-the highest ever recorded, beating the spd's second highest...and yes they intimidated-they had a paramilitary branch...but so did almost every other party in the state. intimmidation could reeeeeeally be seen during the enabling act...
My understanding is that while the Nazi party was certainly in the minority, their ability to intimidate non-party members into going to the polls played a significant role. I believe the most the Nazi party ever received was 35% of the vote.
My friend Google came up with these.
Here goes (All English language sites):
http://www.tutorgig.com/encyclopedia/getdefn.jsp?keywords=Weimar_Republic
http://www.freeessays.cc/db/26/hte434.shtml
http://www.equity.appstate.edu/~brantzrw/GermanHistory/collapseofwemar.htm
http://klar.bz/academic/weimar.html
http://dmorgan.web.wesleyan.edu/materials/weimar.htm
[i]Originally posted by geniusOne of the historians who stated that the rise and fall of the NSDAP was NOT an incident or an accident is Konrad Heiden.
also-which histoian said that hitler was going to come whatever happened-and that if it hadn't been hitler it'd've been someone else?
See for instance the bottom of one of the essays I mentioned in my previous post:
http://klar.bz/academic/weimar.html
'Hitler and National Socialism - they were not unfortunate accidents, nor incomprehensible derailments in the path of German history; they were, as Konrad Heiden said, a "German condition".'[17]
An essay that claims otherwise. The last paragraph:
http://www.courseworkbank.co.uk/coursework/did_weimar_republic_survived_apparantly_insurmountable_problems_that_it_faced_-_900/
"It can be argued that the Weimar Republic never actually had a real chance of survival from the start. In my opinion it had a particularly unfortunate amount of problems but nevertheless it triumphed in overcoming them. It was pure bad luck that in 1929 not only was Weimar confronted with more economic adversity but also Stresemann died at this crucial time. The Nazis were in the right place at the right time in order to exploit this misfortune. If it had not been for these fateful circumstances, I believe that the Weimar Republic would have survived longer."
Originally posted by geniusInterestingly enough, I've just been reading John Toland's biography of Hitler. It seems fairly unbiased (I suppose it is difficult not to be with Hitler, but many sites/books are just so biased as to be untruthful). Also, before I started reading this, I read around the internet at a few sites.
...in germany by 1932 (nsdap=nazi btw)
anyone? it's not details-but historical opinions, where i can find those opinions, and a rought outline of the reasons...e.g. the inherent weaknesses of weimar, the failure of the radical left to un ...[text shortened]... so don't hold back information cause u belevie it's immoral 😉)
It seems that one of the main reasons was the economical situation in Germany, the reparations under the Versailles treaty making it worse. There was an injured German pride due to the drastically reduced size of the country after the first world war (Versailles again). But one of the things which seems to come out in Toland is that the vast majority of Germans were fearful of the Communists and Hitler was seen as the best hope of preventing them from gaining power.
As for intimidation, the German police must have been pretty ineffectual at this time, because there were constant street battles between nazis and communists (not just in Germany either),