90 years ago, You Know Who became the chancellor of Germany

[buritobr]

Today, there is an aniversary. You Know Who became chancellor of Germany 90 years ago, after he was appointed by the president Hindenburg. His party had 1/3 of the votes in the November 1932 election, and won a plurality.

[Sir Mohamed]

A reminder that there shouldn't be any cooperation with the far-right. The conservatives at the time helped to get him into power and thought they could control him, that he was in a sense their useful idiot. Turned out to be vise versa with horrible consequences.

[gerritcole]

didn't realize the nsdap was comparatively weak in bavaria

[TheReckoning]

A reminder that there shouldn't be any cooperation with the far-right. The conservatives at the time helped to get him into power and thought they could control him, that he was in a sense their useful idiot. Turned out to be vise versa with horrible consequences.

Very important lesson to keep in mind with some of those around today…

didn't realize the nsdap was comparatively weak in bavaria

Overwhelming Catholic Bavaria voted Centre, as did all Catholic parts of Germany.

[buritobr]

Adolf Hitler was born in the catholic Austria, he received the catholic baptism, he started his political career in the catholic Bavaria, but his party did better in the most lutheran states.

Even before the Cold War divide of Germany, the KPD did better in the east. The NSDAP too. And today, Linke and AfD do better in the east than in the west.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Overwhelming Catholic Bavaria voted Centre, as did all Catholic parts of Germany.

'Voted for' in that sense isn't a useful concept when proportional representation is used, but the largest party in Bavaria was the Bavarian People's Party (BVP) which was a particularist splinter from the Zentrum and which, unlike it, was not part of the 'Weimar Coalition' of reliably pro-democracy parties.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Rather than "History", can we change this forum's name to "Don't ask German Watch Makers what they did between 1933 and 1945."

[palandio]

Adolf Hitler was born in the catholic Austria, he received the catholic baptism, he started his political career in the catholic Bavaria, but his party did better in the most lutheran states.

Even before the Cold War divide of Germany, the KPD did better in the east. The NSDAP too. And today, Linke and AfD do better in the east than in the west.

There was a 'red' social milieu and there was a confessional Catholic social milieu. Both were fully established at the end of the Kaiserreich and determined their "members'" lives in politics and many other aspects. The outlook of the other social and political milieus in Germany at that time was far less comprehensive and it showed in less stable political allegiance already before the rise of the NSADAP.

"The East" in the sense you use it makes little sense. The KPD was strongest mostly in industrialized areas of Central Germany (today: Eastern Germany) and cities like Berlin. The NSDAP was strong in rural and stagnant areas, its absolute stronghold were in areas that Germany had to cede after WWII. The NSDAP results in what is today Eastern Germany were even below its results in the Protestant parts of Western Germany.

There may be some continuity between left-wing/far-left and right-wing/far-right strength in today's Eastern Germany, but that can in my opinion mostly be attributed to the GDR and FRG and not to a direct continuity from the Weimar Republic. Because otherwise the AfD would be stronger in Protestant rural areas of Western Germany than in Eastern Germany and the Left would be stronger in the Ruhr area than in many parts of Eastern Germany.

The left-wing/far-left and right-wing/far-right tendencies in Eastern Germany certainly have some overlap and common causations, but there are notable differences. While the Left is a logical vehicle for GDR nostalgia and apologetic, the stance towards the GDR that many AfD voters in the East hold is more shaped by cynism and "they all suck". The areas in the East where the AfD is most succesful are usually areas where already during GDR times resignation and discontent were above average. When some of them say that today's political system is worse than the GDR and that they'd rather have the FRG back, it's not out of nostalgia but out of a certain kind of apolitical cynism that can be found among some people from an Eastern Bloc background in certain other countries as well.

[2952-0-0]

This is something of relevance to this day. It has been determined that, in those parts of Germany that saw an increase in non-natural mortality in the 1930s, there was a greater increase in support for the Nazi Party. The authors also remark that there was no correlation for increased support for Communists or any other party. The authors note a similar pattern in the UK for the Brexit vote, and in the US for the 2016 election.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350621001311

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

[President Johnson]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which could have been false flag operation by the nazis.

[buritobr]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Are there enough proofs or the false flag is just an hyphothesis?

[Unpoisoned Chalice]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Are there enough proofs or the false flag is just an hyphothesis?

Most historians agree that van der Lubbe acted alone in setting the Reichstag on fire and that it was neither part of a larger communist conspiracy nor a Nazi false flag.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Sorry what? Even our Cornelsen history school book didn't provide that alternative fact.

[President Johnson]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Are there enough proofs or the false flag is just an hyphothesis?

Most historians agree that van der Lubbe acted alone in setting the Reichstag on fire and that it was neither part of a larger communist conspiracy nor a Nazi false flag.

You're correct, I fixed the post. I actually thought that was long confirmed, but I looked it up. Most likely I got confused with the start of the World War II on September 1, 1939, which was obviously a false flag operation by the Nazis and not an attack by Poland.

[Georg Ebner]

Adolf Hitler was born in the catholic Austria, he received the catholic baptism, he started his political career in the catholic Bavaria, but his party did better in the most lutheran states.

Even before the Cold War divide of Germany, the KPD did better in the east. The NSDAP too. And today, Linke and AfD do better in the east than in the west.

There was a 'red' social milieu and there was a confessional Catholic social milieu. Both were fully established at the end of the Kaiserreich and determined their "members'" lives in politics and many other aspects. The outlook of the other social and political milieus in Germany at that time was far less comprehensive and it showed in less stable political allegiance already before the rise of the NSADAP.

"The East" in the sense you use it makes little sense. The KPD was strongest mostly in industrialized areas of Central Germany (today: Eastern Germany) and cities like Berlin. The NSDAP was strong in rural and stagnant areas, its absolute stronghold were in areas that Germany had to cede after WWII.

Yes: While wokeWarriors will assume, that William II was a reactionary ruling with the help of prot. & cath. conservatives, the latter were realiter outSiders in politics (labelled like SPD as "Reich-enemies") and in public life generally. It was the era of a late liberal bourgeoisie, that became reconciled with Prussian-protestant conservatism due to the rise of socialism, but reactionary Catholicism was too far a stretch. As a result a catholic ghetto emerged, what caused, that the NSDAP performed among that cath. minority (1/3 of the german population) - as D.HÄNISCH, J.FALTER aso. have shown - best in the cities (Cologne, Munich,...), where the Church's grip was weakest. Whereas they did everywhere else best in small&medium-sized towns and marketPlaces - not only in protestant Germany, but also in catholic Austria (where there had not been that ghetto-situation). And those semi-urban areas - which were typical for the nation of Wittenberg, Weimar, Eisenach - fit also better to Nat.Soz. than cosmopolitan cities.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Are there enough proofs or the false flag is just an hyphothesis?

Most historians agree that van der Lubbe acted alone in setting the Reichstag on fire and that it was neither part of a larger communist conspiracy nor a Nazi false flag.

It really could be either way. It's not like a false flag by the Nazis is out of the question.

[Unpoisoned Chalice]

And what happened 90 years ago today?

Obviously burning of the Reichstag, which was a false flag operation by the nazis.

Are there enough proofs or the false flag is just an hyphothesis?

Most historians agree that van der Lubbe acted alone in setting the Reichstag on fire and that it was neither part of a larger communist conspiracy nor a Nazi false flag.

It really could be either way. It's not like a false flag by the Nazis is out of the question.

While that can't be ruled out with total certainty, the majority of evidence is not on the side of it being a false flag. If it were, the Nazi response would have been more prepared. Goebbels ignored the first phone call he received informing him of the fire.

[Middle-aged Europe]

It's pretty much consensus among historians that the Reichstag fire was started by a lone communist.

Of course it gave the Nazis a convenient excuse to consolidate their power.

One could make the case that setting fire to a central government building in a fascist dictatorship constitutes a legitimate form of resistance though.

One could also make the case that the Nazis would have found other excuses to further eliminate the remnants of the Weimar constitution, and that ultimately they didn't necessarily need the Reichstag fire for that.

[buritobr]

It's hard to reach a conclusion, since no independent investigation could be conducted before 1945, and after 12 years, evidences fade away.

But even if there was no false flag, nazis don't become more acceptable.

[Samof94]

Adolf Hitler was born in the catholic Austria, he received the catholic baptism, he started his political career in the catholic Bavaria, but his party did better in the most lutheran states.

Even before the Cold War divide of Germany, the KPD did better in the east. The NSDAP too. And today, Linke and AfD do better in the east than in the west.

A lot of the top Nazis were Protestant or even had tinges of Norse mythology(but screwed up).

[oldtimer]

didn't realize the nsdap was comparatively weak in bavaria

Although they were based at Munich and Nuremberg, Nazis where a Protestant-Atheist product.

19th century science and philosophy taken to the extreme, mixed with very loud Prussian traditions and weird occults, basically it functioned as a religion that replaced the weak protestant one.

So naturally people who where already religious non-protestants didn't subscribe to Nazis, and that's why they tried to ban them when in power.

[RINO Tom]

A reminder that there shouldn't be any cooperation with the far-right. The conservatives at the time helped to get him into power and thought they could control him, that he was in a sense their useful idiot. Turned out to be vise versa with horrible consequences.

This specific case is unambiguously about not trusting the far right.  However, I think it's an important lesson from history in general that is reinforced here, as well - when you create a situation where a lot of the population feels desperate and left behind, they will turn to radical and revolutionary figures who they feel are speaking to their agony and promising answers ... and if they're desperate enough, they won't care to hear a snobby explanation of why they're being rash and foolish, as they feel they have no alternative.  In 1930s Germany it gave us a far right murderous regime, but in 1917 Russia, it gave us a far left murderous regime.  I'd argue history is pretty clearly telling us the same thing, though - don't economically, culturally or otherwise leave a chunk of your population out to dry like they don't matter ... because they'll eventually get behind someone who promises them that they do.

didn't realize the nsdap was comparatively weak in bavaria

The association of "Nazi ideology" with Bavaria because some of its prominent figures were from there and the association with the City of Nuremberg has always been misguided, IMO.  We obviously must first remember that Nazism - in their own words - was fundamentally a "revolutionary" ideology that couldn't reasonably be totally connected back to preexisting political tradition in Germany.  However, and even though I very much disagree with this decision, there was a reason that Prussia was the state abolished after WWII rather than Bavaria.  While "Nazism" drew from several parts of German history/romanticism to form its ideologies, the militarism, early notion of racial superiority, specific disdain for Slavs and other things can arguably be drawn back most to Prussia - coincidentally where the Nazis received most of their support.

[lfromnj]

One thing people always forget is thst the communist party and the nazis formed a majority  of members in the parliament .The communists also refused to work with even the SPD because the SPD killed the communists in 1919 .

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

One thing people always forget is thst the communist party and the nazis formed a majority . The communists also refused to work with even the SPD because the SPD killed the communists in 1919 .

Yes, a "negative majority". Good luck forming a government...