Hitler loved Germany? (and the germans?)
- Thread starter XamuelReyes
- Start date
Deleted member 92195
The interesting thing about German psychology is if there were a character who was the complete opposite of him. And that individual was liberal, empathetic, patriotic, kind, charismatic, inspiring, forward-thinking, analytical and ultimately believed that war (and senseless death and violence) was unnecessary but also vital in breaking this cycle of constant war to improve humanity as a whole. Then I have no doubt in my mind that the Germans would have picked that individual over Hitler or they would have fully endorsed a coup against the Nazis after it occurred. It is a known fact that Germans really did not truly support Hitler as he wanted the German people to look at him as this type of Messiah. He only got one-third of the votes to be elected as chancellor in 1933 and those votes swayed a lot as is known from 1929-33. It was mainly through Nuremberg Law, propaganda, SA, SS and government officials that managed to infiltrate the state government and institutions which allowed Nazism to foster and grow.
A german coup ridding the Nazis would have been a sight to see.
A german coup ridding the Nazis would have been a sight to see.
Last edited by a moderator:
Respectfully I only wish what your saying was true. The German People were polarized, the kind of leader your envisioning would have been forced to belong to ether a centrist, or left wing party. The majority of Germans were right of center. They rejected the march of progressive ideas. Some historians of the Weimar Period called it a struggle between Civilization & Culture. Civilization represented the post Enlightenment Western ideas of democracy, individual liberty, women's equality, universal rights, free thought, and expression. Culture represented traditional German Values of discipline, loyalty to the State, traditional roles for women, patriarchal family structure, religious conformity, and conservative sexual values. Their Nationalist world view embraced conspiracy theories, involving the Jews, the Allies, Capitalism, Bolshevism, and the "Stabbed in the Back theory", and a national desire for revenge.
Most modern histories emphasize the economic factors in the rise of the Nazis, while giving short shrift to the cultural struggle. The right wing parties despised the liberal culture of Weimar, the avant-garde movies, plays, and artwork, the burlesque theater, criticism of religion, the army, and authority in general. The desire for a Fuhrer who would crush the forces of modern decadence, and restore the values that made Germany Great were very strong in the hearts of most Germans, for Hitler didn't capture the German Mind, he captured the German Heart. The 1932 presidential election didn't pit Hitler against a liberal, it was against the authoritarian Field Marshal Von Hindenburg.
When Hitler was appointed Chancellor he quickly set up concentration camps, began setting up a police state, crushed the left wing parties, tamed the labor unions, silenced the cultural critics, censored the press, and began the exclusion of the Jews from public, and economic life. All these moves received wide public support. After the Reichstag Fire the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act which allowed Hitler to rule by emergency decree. The Middle Class thought that Hitler had saved them from Left Wing Revolution, and the Industrialists came forward with money, for the coffers of the Nazi Party. Von Hindenburg, and the army supported "The Night of the Long Knives" that purged the SA Leadership. On the death of Von Hindenburg Hitler unconstitutionally combined the offices of Chancellor, and President, declaring himself the Fuhrer.
The Hail Hitler salute was made mandatory, and people just incorporated it into their daily lives. The anti Christian Propaganda just kept being stepped up, with little complaint. The intrusions of the Nazi Party into every aspect of German life went unchallenged. They gave their Sons to the Hitler Youth, and daughters to the League of German Girls. The Nazis took over the whole education system, imparting to the young the doctrines of race hatred, Social, and Biological Darwinism, and the glorification of war, and violence. The early conquests were cheered by the people, until the war started. Only the euthanasia program caused a public outcry. Only after the national disaster of ruin, and defeat did Hitler's popularity wane, only when the Holocaust was revealed post war did the German People admit Hitler was a criminal, and a monster. No I'm afraid Hitler was the leader the German People wanted in the 1930's.
Valkyrie is quite the movie if you get a chance to see it.
Even ignoring the fact that he despised some of Germany's most patriotic citizens due to his own warped ideology, Hitler's love for Germany and its people was... conditional, at best.
But his ideology was focused on pseudoscientific Aryan race, the Germans as a concept had been less important to him than the idea what the Aryan race is. Hitler rejected Nationalism as an ideology as he said in one of his public speeches. Lots of his supporters had been old fashioned German Nationalists bit the ideological leaders like Rosenberg thought in other spheres. Not every German was a pure Aryan in Nazis race hierarchy.
Last edited:
Deleted member 92195
I agree with everything you have said. On edit, I think the opposite person I am describing was present. I.e. Hitler. It cannot be denied that Hitler was charismatic but also sadistic, ultranationalistic, illogical, oddly inspiring in a sick and jingoistic way. On one hand, the only reason Hitler came to power was that Hindenburg's son had a degree of persuasion to give Hitler decree powers but on the other, Weimar's electoral system was screwed up and allowed multiple parties to get seats splitting the vote allowing the Nazis to breakthrough but not enough to get a majority. People always talk of this 'wave' of Far-right ideology in the 1920s-1930s which ultimately did elect Hitler in the 1930s but only through chance was he able to get the 'chancellorship'.
I don't think it would be possible to elect the type of person I am describing. It would have to be through a coup d'etat and that individual would require a major post in the German armed forces as a base of power with opportunities to grow. If that person can become a national icon by using military strategy (on par with Rommel or even greater) within the first couple of years of the war, then as Hitler descends into madness that individual would find himself in a very peculiar position. He sees Hitler's insanity and is within his inner circle but his power and popularity continuously grows to the point where it is evident to the Nazis that he is becoming a problem. (Because he has a power base and followers) The reason why the German military resistance could never pull it off and did it so late is that they simply did not have enough power and a central figure to coalesce around.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with a lot of what you said, but the main reason resistance failed is because while it was possible no one had the determination to just walk up to Hitler, and shot him. None of the resistance was willing to die in the attempt. If Von Stauffenberg had stayed in the room Hitler would have died, if he'd left the second bomb in the briefcase Hitler and everyone else in the room would have died. No coup could have succeeded if Hitler was still alive. Both the common soldiers, and the Officer Corps were loyal to Hitler till the end. They would have never followed anyone else while Hitler lived. No general, no matter how popular could have opposed the Fuhrer.
After killing Hitler they could never run the country, they themselves would be arrested as traitors. The people would despise them as traitors. For years after the war most Germans considered the July 20 plotters as traitors. Only generations later would they be considered patriots. Looking back at them, they were right wing, anti-democratic militarists, who had no intention of creating a pro Western Germany. Their opposition to Hitler was based on his being an incompetent supreme commander. His crimes against humanity, and liberty were secondary issues, that would be moderated in a new right wing authoritarian regime that they would run. Killing Hitler wouldn't have ended the War, only a totally defeated Germany could be cleansed of Nazism, and the forces that created it.
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
Your posts start really good, but then, sadly, gets worse. In the beginning, you make it clear that Germans (like any people ever) were a diverse bunch of people with different ideas of how to organize society and to rule the country. You rightly emphasize division and the conflict between modernity and conservatism. You rightly point out that it was this anti-democratic conservatism that helped National-Socialism rise to power. These are the bolded parts of your post.
However, then, suddenly, after you've called out the violent Nazi regime and described how it crushed any organized form of opposition, you switch to some collective responsibility thesis and blame the entire German people for Hitler's rule, even though you originally made clear that only a faction (albeit a large one) of Germans supported him. I've underlined those parts. Calling all Germans followers of Hitler completely ignores the strong German Social-Democratic tradition, the great numbers of Communist activists and voters and the importance of political Catholicism.
Thomas1195
Banned
The Weimar Republic lacked legitimacy because of the way it was created. Germany also lacked a strong democratic tradition like in America, and this made the majority of Germans to easily reject democracy when things became desperate. I mean, for many Germans, democracy was a totally foreign concept. The whole political right totally and absolutely rejected democracy, and not enough, on the left you have the communists as well. The series of elections in 1932-1933 clearly showed the anti-democratic forces as a whole (both right and left) won well above 50% of total national votes (Nazis + DNVP + KPD).
German National People's Party - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Thomas1195
Banned
@Belisarius II @Alcsentre Calanice if you look at the Enabling Act voting records, you can say that all non-socdems groups were ready to sell out democracy when push comes to shove. Both the Zentrums and the rump DDP/DVP voted for Hitler. Even Theodore Heuss voted for Hitler.
Last edited:
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
Saying that a majority of German voters wanted an alternative to parliamentary democracy is something very different from claiming that Hitler was the leader that Germany wanted. Which is precisely the proposition I'm fighting against.
kholieken
Banned
Why not ? What practical difference they have ?
If a person complaining about how bad Trump is, then he still vote Reps because he doesn't want Clinton, his vote still help Trump isn't it ?
As Belisarius and others pointed above, many who didn't vote for Nazi, is still supportive of Nazi program, of Hindenburg, of abandoning liberal democracy, of opposing Labor Union and Social Democracy.
In the end of day, Enabling Act and Hitler as Chancellor had majority support of German people and institutions.
At the end, Germany, AS SOCIETY , had reject Social-Democracy, Liberal-Democracy, and failed to stop Nazi ideology.
So I ask you respectfully what did they want? The alternative to parliamentary democracy was a Stalinist State, or National Socialism. The rest of the Right Wing Nationalists, big money interests, the army, and most of the middle class were willing to make common cause with the Nazis to save them from the Communists. When the Center fails the fanatics take over. The middle class made their bed, and they laid in it.
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
If you look at the presidential election of 1932, Hindenburg only received a majority because he was supported by the democratic forces, including the SPD and the Zentrum. If the reactionaries had been the only ones voting for him, Hitler would have won, as the anti-Hitler coalition would have been devided between Hindenburg, Thälmann and the Social-Democratic candidate.
If you really want to use that analogy, I would like to point out that most Americans wouldn't like to be called Trump-supporters and Republicans.
Still, that's what you sometimes hear over here in Europe: "The Americans are all crazy, they elected Trump."
No they had not. Despite the terror of early 1933, the NSDAP received only 40% of the votes in March 1933 (which isn't an absolute majority), and the Enabling Act wouldn't have passed if the Communist representatives would have been allowed to take part at the decisive session of the Diet.
As for the institutions, we have to differentiate (again; history just isn't simple and one-dimensional). I already mentioned parliament. If we're talking about the administration and the judiciary, then yes, it's a sad fact that most bureaucrats and judges were conservatives/reactionaries who agreed with the end of German democracy. If we're talking about other institutions, however, the picture is much different.
For all its conservatism, the Catholic Church was not a National-Socialist institution, and never became one. The Protestant Churches also became notoriously unruly after a couple of years. And the trade unions (as well as the leftist parties) had to be forcefully and illegally disbanded by state and party.
Well, nobody can deny that it failed to stop Hitler's rise to power, the war and the Jewish genocide.
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
Human beings are complicated, and societies comprised of human beings are even more complicated. You can't, for all the reasons I gave above, affirm that German society wanted National-Socialism, even though authoritarian tendencies are of course undeniable.
Well, that's a different question in 2020 than it was in 1933, right? Clearly, anyone who supported Hitler or failed to oppose him then was culpable, but I don't think it's quite as easy to say that they knew what they were voting for and getting themselves and the country into.
Deleted member 92195
If Hitler were killed in 1944, Himmler who is head of the SS is inline to succeed. If the coup succeeded I don’t think they would take over Germany because they don’t have any real power and a central leader who appeals to the military and the public. To put it bluntly, the German resistance was a bunch of outcasts and low ranking officers. They could have been apart of the Heer support towards a central figure but that’s it.
There is only one person who is a better figurehead than Hitler and that is the kaiser. I think demanding an oath to the German state with the Emperor as a certificate of authenticity would go down nicely. Again, if he were made emperor he would have no power at all.
Popularity will have to come into it. I can’t imagine how unpopular the participants of the 1944 coup would have been if they succeeded. You've got to have a candidate who the entire officer corps of the Wehrmacht think ‘he can win us the war’ and he has proven it on the 'big stage'. Hitler dragging the US into the war does not win Germany the war it’s expanding it. For example, when Rommel was captured after the 1944 plot he was given the option of suicide or public trial. He personally decided suicide because the Nazi’s threatened that they would execute his family. The reason behind this was that Rommel being embroiled in the plot itself and him contesting the Nazi’s accusation would have fractured German moral. The cause of that type of moral breakdown would be dependent on the size and type of his popularity among Germans soldiers and the public.
The ultimate catalyst is fivefold:
- Rommel type popularity is good because you have cause and effect on the national mood. However, popularity is useless beyond the initial cause and effect without power. Himmler, Goebbels and Goering got a form of this type of popularity, not like Rommel but they also had power to back it up.
- Power can be derived in different methods and circumstances. Take Himmler for example and the SS. He built an organisation based from his viewpoint, ethics, moral compass, philosophy, attitude etc. The only reason I can say that he would succeed Hitler is that he constructed an organisation from top to bottom on people like himself. The SS got it's own Panzer divisions which is absolute madness. This is what real power is. (What an upgrade from a police car.)
- Everyone in Germany post-1933 does support the Nazis. The only reason why Germans say they supported them is that if they don't they'd be sent to a concentration camp or shot. If a coup succeeded that two-thirds who didn't vote for the Nazi's in 1933 would easily come out saying: "No, no, no. We never supported the Nazis."
- The most important position in a post-Nazi government will be Supreme Commander-in-chief of the Wehrmacht because he’ll control the armed forces and the military-industrial complex. It’ll be like the Third OHL in WW2. The chancellor will not have any military experience and everything will be left to the generals who were much more competent than WW1.
- The military-industrial complex in Germany is something I have studied and I think it should be central to the rise of any person to overthrow the Nazi state.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is some truth to what your saying, but it misses the forest though the trees. Yes the Nazis actually got almost 44% of the vote in March 1933, but that was because there were still other parties on the ballot, and the Nazi vote increased from it's previous high in 1932.
Support for the Nazi Party was rising, and this was after people saw the lawless violence unleashed once they were in power. They saw what they did to the opposition, and labor unions. The Communists didn't get to vote on the Enabling Act because they were running for their lives. So in March 1933 you have almost 14% voting for Right of Center Catholic Parties, 18.25% for the left of center Social Democrats, 12.32% for the Communists, and 51.88 for Right wing Nationalist Parties. So 64.2% of the people wanted an end to Parliamentary Democracy, and the establishment of a lawless, radical regime. Democracy can't depend on 32% of the vote, especially with the Center Right Catholic Parties not wanting to support the Godless Socialists.
Once the army, and Von Hindenburg decided to form a coalition with Hitler, Huggenburg and the big money interests fell right in line. You say the average person wanted an anti-Democratic Regime, but not one as brutal as the Nazis, but what did they think the Nazis were going to do? Didn't they see the SA in the streets? Didn't they listen to what Hitler said he was going to do? Once in power did they object, by voting against the new Regime? How did they think Hitler was going to overthrow Versailles without war? The German People were deep into Magical Thinking, and gave enthusiastic support for most of what the Nazis did, and at best passive support for the war. Just where did they think the Jews went to? What did they think of Night & Fog? They wanted to crush the elements of society that they hated, and got just what they wanted. Were they really so shocked that the monster they created turned on them? So again they made their bed, and lay in it.