Referat Why The Nazis And Not The Communists
Mai jos puteti citi fragmente din
Referat Why The Nazis And Not The Communists si de asemenea puteti face
Download Referat why the nazis and not the communistsCiteste fragmente din Referat Why The Nazis And Not The Communists
Why the Nazis and not the Communists?
Why, by 1934, had the Nazis benefited more than the Communists from the
shortcomings of the Weimar Republic?
Adolf Hitler, head of the NSDAP, became Chancellor of Germany on the
30th January 1933. Following the ’legal revolution’ of the following
months and President Hindenburg’s death on the 2nd August 1934, Hitler
made himself FÑŒhrer and Reichskanzler. The Nazi revolution was complete
and Germany was subject to a dictatorship of the extreme political
right.
As Ian Kershaw explains, the Weimar Republic was failing: "the survival
chances of Weimar democracy might be regarded as fairly poor by the end
of 1929, very low by the end of 1930, remote by the middle of 1931 and
as good as zero by Spring 1932." In a period of Depression and when
unity and firm government was essential, Mьller’s Grand Coalition
broke up in March 1930. Logically, there were several political
alternatives other than Hitler and the Nazis.
There could have been a return to parliamentary Party politics. There
were some signs to show that democracy may have been revived. During the
continuous utilisation of Article 48 to govern, the Reichstag gave their
vote of no confidence in challenging the executive use of it. Also, a
section of the public appeared to still support the Republic; the Centre
Party and SPD continued to have steady support until 1932. However, it
seems that any chances of democracy were ruled out. The political
Parties were still inclined to pursue their own political interests when
a united, broad and moderate front was needed. Two moderate Parties even
defected to Hitler after the offensive from the right and Hindenburg
made little effort to restore the influence of the Reichstag.
Alternatively, Germany could have become a presidential dictatorship
backed by the army as von Schleicher or von Papen would have preferred.
In order to do this, the authoritarian regime would have had to adapt
slightly from what it was in 1932. The long-term use of Article 48, the
emergency decree, would have been impractical and impossible. Perhaps
the conservative elites were looking to Hitler for a new identity as
they couldn’t return to the days of the Second Reich as well as
thinking they could control his power. A military regime would have
meant that there was no dominance from the extreme right or left of
politics. Judging by the situation of Germany at that time, it was quite
possible that this may have resulted in civil war.
So why was it the Nazis who came to power when there were so many other
right-wing political Parties? Obviously, other Vцlkisch Parties did not
have Hitler, who emerged as a great orator and charismatic leader. The
NSDAP had also adopted the use of modern propaganda techniques, had
effective communication methods and a well organised structure of Party
apparatus. Their violent exploitation of scapegoats, such as the Jews,
appealed to the disillusioned and discontented public who were looking
for extreme policies to bring Germany out of economic Depression.
This adds another argument. The German Communists, representing the
extreme left of politics, had a substantial increase of support in the
polls but why did the vote lurch so strongly to the extreme right as
opposed to the left? The electoral breakthrough of the Nazis acted a
significant reason why Hitler gained the Chancellorship and eventually
absolute power. There are many factors that need to be considered when
attempting to identify why the Communists were not as successful as the
Nazis.
Firstly, it is important to divide the Left and Right into two different
forces. There were several vцlkisch Parties who worked for similar
means, but major divisions in the Left. Where the NSDAP were given a
‘helping hand’ by the DVNP, the KPD were constantly in competition
with Parties from their side of the spectrum! The Communists caused the
decline of the SPD, even calling them "social fascists" in 1929. In
contrast, the NSDAP practically dismantled the liberal Parties!
The KPD was a well established Parties who’s popularity peaked in the
1920s. This was well before the Nazis became a widely acknowledged
Party, who only achieved weighty gains in the election of May 1928. This
was the period of the Great Depression, and also when extreme Parties
started to pull votes. However, at this time, the Communists were the
fourth biggest Party in the Reichstag and the NSDAP received less than
three per cent of the franchise. By September 1930, the NSDAP were the
second largest Party in the Reichstag, falling behind only the SPD. The
Communists never developed as a mass Party like the Nazis and Hitler
became especially worried about the KPD, recognising the Party as a huge
source of opposition. The thoughts of William Carr confirm this: "(in
September 1930) two out of every five Germans voted for Parties bitterly
opposed to the principles on which the Republic rested." This shows that
two out of every five voters opted for the extreme Left or Right of
politics. Hitler aimed to convert voters of the Left to voters of the
Right.
The social and economic factors of the late 1920s and early 1930s should
have, in theory, acted as an advantage for the KPD. The crisis of
Depression could have suggested that capitalism was fundamentally
threatened and that Germany could have experienced the revolution that
eluded it in 1919. The Communists were confident that chaos would
radicalise the working-class and pull votes, the little-known Nazis saw
it as a God-sent opportunity to steal the limelight. The support that
the Communists gained in the 1920s, in the form of strikes,
demonstrations and votes, was more to do with ‘knife and fork’
issues than a genuine desire for political change. Hitler most
definitely made the most of the situation and changed strategy to fit
the changing conditions of the country. He noted early on, after the
Munich Putsch, that the NSDAP would not gain power using coercion
policies. Soon after time in prison to gather his thoughts, his strategy
changed to one of ‘legality’. The Communists expected things to
happen in Germany like the way the Bolshevik Revolution occurred in
Russia in 1917. They also changed to legal means but had no method of
delivering the rest of the strategy. They looked to Moscow too much for
advice, but in Germany the proletariat did not unite to overthrow the
Government as in Russia. Therefore, they were following a ‘plan’
that had worked in a country completely different to their own!
Although Communism was well founded, it did not really have a solid
reputation. The general feeling regarding Communism was fear. An English
newspaper, The New Statesman, reported on the 27th September 1930 that
"young voters (in Germany) find the Communists too sectarian and
Russian." The Nation, an American newspaper in 1936, later published
that Communism was "Russian", "cruel", "unindividual" and
"anti-nationalist." This may show why the Nazis attracted so many new
voters, both young and old. The Marxist historian Franz Newman argues
that Hitler got into power due to support from German industrialists,
bankers and middle-class bourgeoisie who feared and exaggerated the
threat of Communism. The NSDAP were a new Party, people did not know
what to expect of them and looked to Hitler’s promises. Generally, the
KPD were seen as more potentially dangerous than the NSDAP and many
measures were put against them, both in Germany and abroard. The USA and
UK invested in Germany’s relative prosperity during the 1920s,
principally for the reason they did not want the country to fall to
Communism following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. The Bolsheviks
were internationally feared and Russia perceived as a ‘backward’
country. When von Papen took over the Prussian government from the
Communists in 1932, he avoided calling a General Strike in fear of it
benefiting the Communists. Although there was considerable evidence,
such as a confession, to link the Communists to the Reichstag Fire of
1934, there was special effort made to accuse them. Following this, they
were eliminated from the next election which resulted in the Nazis
gaining their long-awaited majority in Government.
ò
ö
KPD and the NSDAP. In 1924, on Hitler’s release from prison, the Red
Front were the stronger force of the two. Hitler recognised the
importance of the fighting stating, "we will have to teach Marxism that
Socialism is master of the streets." A vital element of his
‘legality’ policy was that, in economic chaos, the unruly SA took on
groups of Communists to stir up popular discontent. When the SA became
out of favour with the army, and therefore the powerful conservative
elites, Hitler won support by destroying the SA in the "Night of the
Long Knives" and adding another paramilitary wing, the SS.
Finally, the KPD had no one like Hitler. Hitler was a charismatic,
inspirational figure who many people viewed as an idol: the basis of the
"Hitler Myth." The KPD looked to Stalin for their inspiration and
strategy, but in Germany, Stalin symbolised the communism that the
public feared. Stalin looked to govern his own country and his policies
were aimed for Russia, not the distant Germany. In hindsight, it would
probably have suited Stalin to have Hitler in power as Stalin’s
foreign policy was based around causing conflict between western
capitalist states!
In conclusion, the Communists had many faults within their Party.
Initially, they were off to a bad start with the tides set against them
due to the international hatred of Communism and then increased this
with their unrelenting desire to mirror Russian politics in Germany.
Although their faithful voters remained steady and were unlikely to
defect to another political alliance, they failed in attracting new
voters with a commitment to Communism. As aforementioned, they remained
distant and had no character like Hitler to relate to the public as a
whole.
ì¥Â@