|
LeoMarr posted:Italy had a few concentration camps in Africa. And they used chemical weapons in Abyssinia prior to the outbreak of WWII proper.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I'll add to this since you talked mainly about Gamelin, there is also a the significant problem of Petain. A traditional conservative, Petain like many on the French right was contemptuous of his country's native fascists, viewing them rightly as knuckle-dragging goons unworthy of the glories of France, but viewed the left as the real existential threat (chiefly as he lumped them all in with the Bolsheviks). Funny because this was the issue in Germany as well. "Of course the Nazis are savages, but we can control those idiots, the real danger is those social democrats" *is lead to the country's worst disaster in history*
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Funny because this was the issue in Germany as well. "Of course the Nazis are savages, but we can control those idiots, the real danger is those social democrats" *is lead to the country's worst disaster in history* the old guard authoritarian Prussian militarists in weimar germany like Hindenburg basically agreed with Hitler on everything except his lack of discipline, decorum and respect for aristocratic tradition and honor. they thought he was demagogue, sure, but only because they didn't even want to go so far as to have the German common people agree to implement their desired policies. they still agreed with him on the final outcome. Hindenburg himself had plans drawn up to turn Eastern Europe into a German fiefdom with the inferior Slavs as slave labor or exterminated during WW1 after the Russian army collapsed, he basically invented the whole Lebensraum thing. these are the people who orchestrated the Freikorps and who had Luxembourg and Liebknecht murdered. after the war Hindenburg's testimony and memoirs were one of the biggest sources of legitimacy for the stab in the back myth. the leftists in government in the early 20s subpoenad him and interrogated him in parliament and he basically told them to gently caress themselves and walked out, was charged with contempt but nothing came of it because he was untouchable. the guy basically disowned his own mother because she wasn't of aristocratic blood for christs sake. to portray them as innocent right-liberals who were just tricked by the dastardly Nazis is insanely wrong. imperial germany was a vile, evil state run by vile, evil people, and it was responsible for the Nazis more than anything else icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:As such, it's hardly surprising that Petain wasn't exactly champing at the bit to fight the Bosche to the death once more when at the 11th hour the Third Republic called him back from Spain (where unsurprisingly he'd gotten on swimmingly with Franco, another old conservative who was willing to stomach fascism as an alternative to anything left of center). When Petain got called back to France he told Franco that "My country has been beaten and they are calling me back to make peace and sign an armistice...This is the work of 30 years of Marxism." Given the choice Petain and the rest of the Vichy goons would've chosen fascism over anything even slightly leftist. Of course after Barbarossa started french communists became the strongest and best organized part of the La Résistance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
HerraS posted:Please do not put the Bengalese famine caused by incompetence that the british (incompetently) tried to battle on the same list as the loving holocaust and holodomor why not
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:the old guard authoritarian Prussian militarists in weimar germany like Hindenburg basically agreed with Hitler on everything except his lack of discipline, decorum and respect for aristocratic tradition and honor. they thought he was demagogue, sure, but only because they didn't even want to go so far as to have the German common people agree to implement their desired policies. they still agreed with him on the final outcome. Hindenburg himself had plans drawn up to turn Eastern Europe into a German fiefdom with the inferior Slavs as slave labor or exterminated during WW1 after the Russian army collapsed, he basically invented the whole Lebensraum thing. I disagree with a great deal of this. Drang nach Osten and lebensraum in the East had been things for decades by the time the Great War and was a large part of why interest in overseas colonization was so comparatively lackluster in Imperial Germany: German expansionism already had a target, and it was Eastern Europe, not Africa (where von Trotha's behavior was much more the model for later Nazi policy* than anything they did in Eastern Europe during WWI) or the Pacific. When H n' L got the reigns during the Great War, their expansion plans were merely the extension of an existing movement within German society, and not a particularly innovative one at that. Similarly, while both did intend to set up puppet states under German control in occupied-not-yet-Poland, I've seen nothing to suggest they were going to go all Einsatzgruppen on their rear end or even mass enslavement, rather that they planned to extend Prussian Polenpolitik (which yes, would have sucked rear end but was worlds away from what happened next time around in the General Government) onto the non-Germanic peoples of the briefly-occupied East (interestingly, likely excluding the Jews in the Pale at least initially since, as Yiddish speakers, they were thought useful towards occupation policy). *Interesting sidenote: Göring's father was present in German Southwest during the Hierero-Nama genocide, and I can't image some of those ideas didn't work their way downward to li'l Hermann. quote:these are the people who orchestrated the Freikorps and who had Luxembourg and Liebknecht murdered. after the war Hindenburg's testimony and memoirs were one of the biggest sources of legitimacy for the stab in the back myth. the leftists in government in the early 20s subpoenad him and interrogated him in parliament and he basically told them to gently caress themselves and walked out, was charged with contempt but nothing came of it because he was untouchable. the guy basically disowned his own mother because she wasn't of aristocratic blood for christs sake. This, however, is nothing I can argue with, save that it is correct that the old right were idiots to think they could keep Hitler et al leashed and while they certainly weren't innocent or anything, none of them expected von Papen's deal to be as utterly disastrous as it turned out for their own control over the expected ruling coalition of 1933. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 04:50 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I disagree with a great deal of this. Drang nach Osten and lebensraum in the East had been things for decades by the time the Great War and was a large part of why interest in overseas colonization was so comparatively lackluster in Imperial Germany: German expansionism already had a target, and it was Eastern Europe, not Africa (where von Trotha's behavior was much more the model for later Nazi policy* than anything they did in Eastern Europe during WWI) or the Pacific. When H n' L got the reigns during the Great War, their expansion plans were merely the extension of an existing movement within German society, and not a particularly innovative one at that. Similarly, while both did intend to set up puppet states under German control in occupied-not-yet-Poland, I've seen nothing to suggest they were going to go all Einsatzgruppen on their rear end or even mass enslavement, rather that they planned to extend Prussian Polenpolitik onto the non-Germanic peoples of the briefly-occupied East (interestingly, likely excluding the Jews in the Pale at least initially since, as Yiddish speakers, they were thought useful towards occupation policy). i mean saying "actually it's
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:i mean saying "actually it's Man, the one edit I was slow on. I mean sure, it wouldn't have been at all pleasant for those in the occupied territories, but it is a serious overstatement of both intent and action to claim that Imperial German policy towards its briefly-held territories taken from Russia would have been nearly as bad as what Frick et al. got up to next time around. If anything, and yes this may claim the prize for "not saying all that much," Imperial German rule would have been less awful for the Poles than Russian rule had been.* I'm not trying to defend the Kaiserreich here at all, just don't like committing the sin of lazy history that casts the sins of one lovely regime with that of a much, much worse one. *rapidly spoken, low-voiced disclaimer: presumingforamomentthesovietswouldn'thavedoneanythingortriedtoclawtheterritorybackandtherestoftherussiancivilwarwouldhavepasseditbysomesideeffectsmayoccurconsultyourdoctorifvomitingpersistsmorethanthreeweeks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
I think the best defense that can be made for the Kaiserreich was that the British and French empires existed and at least the Germans weren't that bad. Britain was committing holocausts before Hitler was even born. But basically all the European great powers were stone cold evil and the US was not significantly better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:to portray them as innocent right-liberals who were just tricked by the dastardly Nazis is insanely wrong. imperial germany was a vile, evil state run by vile, evil people, and it was responsible for the Nazis more than anything else Oh yeah of course I wasn't implying that just because they weren't fascists themselves they weren't horrible, pointing out that German conservatives also preferred the fash to liberal democracy was an indictment of them, not an excuse for them. It's not like I think Petain was a good person either, it's pretty loving bad to be all "yay my country lost now I get to step on the democrats and queers and Jews" But what I mean about getting lead to their greatest defeat was they at least had a realistic view of Germany's strategic position to the point that they were probably purposely providing pessimistic plans of full-frontal assaults on Allied positions in France to dissuade him from attacking and were in pretty much constant discussions of how to overthrow Hitler (but too chickenshit to do it) as he kept expanding the war from Poland to Norway to France until the fall of France basically made Hitler's leadership unquestionable within Germany (at least until he started throwing away whole Armies to Russian encirclements out of hubris rather than ordering strategic retreats so Germany would have a defense left)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Hitler became untouchable when France and the UK decided to throw Czechoslovakia to the wolves. The army was way more pessimistic about fighting a war against the czechs in 1938 than fighting one against the Allies in 1940.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
HerraS posted:Hitler became untouchable when France and the UK decided to throw Czechoslovakia to the wolves. The army was way more pessimistic about fighting a war against the czechs in 1938 than fighting one against the Allies in 1940. It was politically and physically impossible for France and the UK to do anything to Germany at that point. Neville Chamberlain gets a lot of poo poo because of the whole appeasement thing, but he knew the UK wouldn't have been able to do anything effective at the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
The last people on the planet who thought waging a war in 1938 was a good idea were the German commanders. Hitler was all gung-ho about starting one and a last ditch effort by Mussolini resulting in Munich is what prevented it from happening. Going to war against the czechs would've been a complete disaster for the germans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
HerraS posted:Hitler became untouchable when France and the UK decided to throw Czechoslovakia to the wolves. The army was way more pessimistic about fighting a war against the czechs in 1938 than fighting one against the Allies in 1940. Well yes, in the sense that no one would actually go through with an assassination plot like they arguably might have had he decided to throw the German Army against the Czechoslovakian fortresses. But plenty of generals still bitched and moaned about how drawing in Norway and then attacking France would be a disaster and they should really do something about it but on the other hand he already pulled of a miracle at Munich so it would be unpopular to dolchstoß him now. I think the fall of France put the coup discussions to bed until after Stalingrad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 09:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I think the fall of France put the coup discussions to bed until after Stalingrad. This. The German commanders were mutinous over attacking Czechoslovakia, reluctant over attacking France, and totally won over when it came time to attack the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
HerraS posted:Hitler became untouchable when France and the UK decided to throw Czechoslovakia to the wolves. The army was way more pessimistic about fighting a war against the czechs in 1938 than fighting one against the Allies in 1940. Not to mention that letting Hitler take Czechoslovakia without a fight also meant that a whole shitload of high-quality heavy industry, arms and supplies fell neatly into the lap of the Germans which improved the capabilities of the Wehrmacht immensely. Not exactly the most astute strategic move, that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Not to mention that letting Hitler take Czechoslovakia without a fight also meant that a whole shitload of high-quality heavy industry, arms and supplies fell neatly into the lap of the Germans which improved the capabilities of the Wehrmacht immensely. Not exactly the most astute strategic move, that. While that was definitely a bonus, it should be pointed out that, as HerraS alludes, Hitler wasn't exactly thrilled with Munich despite getting the territorial concessions he'd been badgering on about. Hitler had been alarmed by a number of rookie screwups that had occurred during the Anschluss (at one point a not-insignificant tank formation got lost, ran low on fuel, and had to stop at a civilian gas station, to name only one instance) and wanted a small war to help shake the bugs out before he had to throw down with one of the bigger armies of Europe. The Czechs, while modern and well armed, were not, he judged, strong enough on their own to resist long without outside help (which he gambled wouldn't have the stomach for a fight, despite treaty obligations and other understandings). As such, he was more than a little miffed when Mussolini stuck his nose in to mediate, and while he was happy to accept the domestic acclaim back home for having won such a diplomatic victory, privately he determined not to let anyone derail his next planned conquest in the same fashion. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
HerraS posted:The last people on the planet who thought waging a war in 1938 was a good idea were the German commanders. Hitler was all gung-ho about starting one and a last ditch effort by Mussolini resulting in Munich is what prevented it from happening. Going to war against the czechs would've been a complete disaster for the germans. So a war in 1938 would have actually been a good idea, to see the Third Reich crash into a wall like a flying spitball.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:While that was definitely a bonus, it should be pointed out that, as HerraS alludes, Hitler wasn't exactly thrilled with Munich despite getting the territorial concessions he'd been badgering on about. Hitler had been alarmed by a number of rookie screwups that had occurred during the Anschluss (at one point a rather tank formation got lost, ran low on fuel, and had to stop at a civilian gas station, to name only one instance) and wanted a small war to help shake the bugs out before he had to throw down with one of the bigger armies of Europe. The Czechs, while modern and well armed, were not, he judged, strong enough on their own to resist long without outside help (which he gambled wouldn't have the stomach for a fight, despite treaty obligations and other understandings). As such, he was more than a little miffed when Mussolini stuck his nose in to mediate, and while he was happy to accept the domestic acclaim back home for having won such a diplomatic victory, privately he determined not to let anyone derail his next planned conquest in the same fashion. This is true as well, even though the Munich agreement was objectively better for the German military situation than a war would have been. But then again, I don't think anybody ITT has accused Hitler of being a good strategist. The Czechoslovak situation is actually a really good example of how Hitler repeatedly achieved huge strategic gains due to the incompetence of his opponents as well as a good helping of sheer luck more than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
HerraS posted:Hitler became untouchable when France and the UK decided to throw Czechoslovakia to the wolves. The army was way more pessimistic about fighting a war against the czechs in 1938 than fighting one against the Allies in 1940. Meh, yes, but it also had to do with the failure of the French to enforce the de-militarization of the Rhineland. When Hitler marched in there in 1936, he actually expected the French to counter and troops were told if they met resistance to fall back. quote:The Rhineland coup is often seen as the moment when Hitler could have been stopped with very little effort. The American journalist William L. Shirer wrote if the French had marched into the Rhineland,
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:So a war in 1938 would have actually been a good idea, to see the Third Reich crash into a wall like a flying spitball. Rather, and this is admittedly counterfactual as balls, had the West declared war in '38 it might, might have been enough for the generals to get around to that coup they claimed, after the war, that they'd been planning all along but never seemed to quite get around to. Frankly, knowing what I know about how Manstein, Brauchitsch et al rewrote the history of both the regular army and their own role within the Reich after the fact, as well as how enthusiastically a lot (though certainly not all) of the brass embraced National Socialism, I've my doubts that the generals' plot was much more than idle HQ musings. Valkyrie, before anyone brings it up, was after all plotted by a handful of men who were either lower-ranking or out of favor, and occurred so late in the war I find the sincerity of their anti-Nazism questionable. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Czechoslovakia was a major manufacturer of machine guns, tanks, and artillery, most of which were assembled in the Škoda factory and had a modern army of 35 divisions. Many of these factories continued to produce Czech designs until factories were converted for German designs. Czechoslovakia also had other major manufacturing companies. Entire steel and chemical factories were moved from Czechoslovakia and reassembled in Linz, Austria which incidentally remains a heavily industrialized sector of the country. In a speech delivered in Reichstag, Hitler stressed out also the military importance of occupation, noting that by occupying Czechoslovakia, Germany gained 2,175 field canons, 469 tanks, 500 anti-aircraft artillery pieces, 43,000 machine guns, 1,090,000 military rifles, 114,000 pistols, about a billion rounds of ammunition and three millions of anti-aircraft grenades. This amount of weaponry would be sufficient to arm about half of the then Wehrmacht.[6] Czechoslovak weaponry later played major part in the German conquest of Poland and France, the countries that pressured the country's surrender to Germany in 1938.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Czechoslovakia was a major manufacturer of machine guns, tanks, and artillery, most of which were assembled in the Škoda factory and had a modern army of 35 divisions. Many of these factories continued to produce Czech designs until factories were converted for German designs. Czechoslovakia also had other major manufacturing companies. Entire steel and chemical factories were moved from Czechoslovakia and reassembled in Linz, Austria which incidentally remains a heavily industrialized sector of the country. In a speech delivered in Reichstag, Hitler stressed out also the military importance of occupation, noting that by occupying Czechoslovakia, Germany gained 2,175 field canons, 469 tanks, 500 anti-aircraft artillery pieces, 43,000 machine guns, 1,090,000 military rifles, 114,000 pistols, about a billion rounds of ammunition and three millions of anti-aircraft grenades. This amount of weaponry would be sufficient to arm about half of the then Wehrmacht.[6] Czechoslovak weaponry later played major part in the German conquest of Poland and France, the countries that pressured the country's surrender to Germany in 1938. Any particular reason you lifted that passage from wikipedia's entry on the German occupation of Czechoslovakia?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Any particular reason you lifted that passage from wikipedia's entry on the German occupation of Czechoslovakia? Because it's an important fact in the rest of the war. Germany probably would have been crushed by France, aswell as the Invasion of poland would have been much bloodier had they not eaten Czechoslovakia in '38.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Because it's an important fact in the rest of the war. Germany probably would have been crushed by France, aswell as the Invasion of poland would have been much bloodier had they not eaten Czechoslovakia in '38. I think his point is: Quote it. You didn't write it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
"Captain_Maclaine" posted:Valkyrie, before anyone brings it up, was after all plotted by a handful of men who were either lower-ranking or out of favor, and occurred so late in the war I find the sincerity of their anti-Nazism questionable. There is really no reason to doubt their sincerity, if they failed it was suicide and they knew it, and they did it anyway. The German resistance had a lot of problems from a practical point of view, but plenty of them hated the gently caress out of Hitler for reals.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I think his point is: Quote it. You didn't write it. That's what I was trying to suggest, in case he'd just forgotten to tag it correctly or something. Outside of threads featuring Jrod, I try not to jump straight to calling someone a plagiarist without at least asking about it first. sean10mm posted:There is really no reason to doubt their sincerity, if they failed it was suicide and they knew it, and they did it anyway. Yeah, but their hatred for Hitler came from him losing the war, not for starting it or doing any of the horrible things his regime did. "Oh gently caress, we're about to get our poo poo pushed in by the Russians for burning and raping the hell out of their country for the past three years, better get rid of Hitler and his clique now while we have a chance of pretending we weren't totally complicit in all that!" strikes me as more pragmatic rear end-covering than anything else, not to take away from their very real personal bravery in choosing to turn on the regime, however late they chose so to do. To put it another way: If Barbarossa had somehow worked, I very much doubt we'd have heard much out of Beck and company no matter how many mass graves they knew about. Captain_Maclaine fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:
when they started losing
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Mans posted:when they started losing In fairness, there were other resistance groups who opposed Nazism on principle and from much earlier on, like the White Rose and various communist groups. They of course were mostly all rounded up and sent to the camps and/or beheaded by the Gestapo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:In fairness, there were other resistance groups who opposed Nazism on principle and from much earlier on, like the White Rose and various communist groups. Also lot of the early coup plots against Hitler got derailed by sudden German victories throwing a monkey wrench into their plans at the last minute. Plus people plotting against Hitler early were widely accused of wanting to quit the war while Germany was ahead, so it's kind of a "Heads I win, tails you lose" thing at work here. You can accuse the plotters of being opportunistic no matter when they tried to do it, which makes it a worthless criticism really. The main problem was they were no good at it, even granting they had huge difficulties from the Gestapo, etc. to overcome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
As a side note, I have never heard/read a good explanation of how Hitler went from a glorified bum and all around lazy wierdo with no discernable talent in Vienna, to being a pretty good soldier with no friends who couldn't get promoted to NCO because he showed no leadership ability or even interest in it, to then leave the army in 1919 and promptly take over a political party and create a mass movement out of loving nowhere. The more I read about it the less sense it makes, if anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
To be fair the Italians generally get cred for taking out Mussolini even though the Allies were already in Italy and pushing on Rome. They didn't give a poo poo when he was murdering Ethiopians or dragging other countries into the war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As a side note, I have never heard/read a good explanation of how Hitler went from a glorified bum and all around lazy wierdo with no discernable talent in Vienna, to being a pretty good soldier with no friends who couldn't get promoted to NCO because he showed no leadership ability or even interest in it, to then leave the army in 1919 and promptly take over a political party and create a mass movement out of loving nowhere. It's not something that has an easy answer, admittedly, but the short version is that it took him that long to discover his one great talent: demagoguery. The man was a hell of a speaker and knew, almost instinctively, how to connect with an audience. Part of this may have come from his (frustrated, untrained) artistic inclinations from his years as a shiftless street painter in Vienna, as whenever he managed to scrounge up any spare money he'd usually blow it on Opera tickets and catch whatever was playing. Wagner if he was lucky, anyone else if he wasn't. Seriously, it's hard to overstress just how much the dude was into Opera and how much he took away from it in how stagecraft and overwrought drama can sell a message (have I mentioned Frederick Spotts Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics lately? Seriously, everyone go read that right now, it's amazing). Of course, all of that would have come to nothing if he hadn't dropped, at just the right moment, under just the right social conditions, into the mass of disaffected, angry reactionary jerks who made up such a large, or at least loud, proportion of the German population after the Great War. sean10mm posted:Also lot of the early coup plots against Hitler got derailed by sudden German victories throwing a monkey wrench into their plans at the last minute. It's just I take exception to how much the July plotters in particular tend to get whitewashed, particularly after that movie came out. Sure, von Tresko had made a couple of runs at Hitler previously and good on him for that, but as I mentioned before of all the resistance-ish groups out there, the military conservatives strike me as the batch who's main issue was just that they were losing, now. quote:The main problem was they were no good at it, even granting they had huge difficulties from the Gestapo, etc. to overcome. There's that too, admittedly. Particularly when a common tactic of the communist groups in the 30s was to just put up posters/street paintings declaring "we still exist, and resist Nazism!" which more or less gave the Gestapo a place to start looking for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As a side note, I have never heard/read a good explanation of how Hitler went from a glorified bum and all around lazy wierdo with no discernable talent in Vienna, to being a pretty good soldier with no friends who couldn't get promoted to NCO because he showed no leadership ability or even interest in it, to then leave the army in 1919 and promptly take over a political party and create a mass movement out of loving nowhere. It didn't really come out of nowhere. The Nazis didn't become a mass movement overnight, they did so at the end of a decade and a half of building their movement and then happening to be in the right place, right time, to benefit from the collapse of the Weimar state. Throughout the 20s the Nazis were a tiny fringe party that got like 2% of the vote in elections, but their core was highly disciplined and organized, primarily (I would argue) due to the influx of former Freikorps members into the Nazi party, who wanted to carry out a militarization of daily life and so regimented the Nazi Party in a military fashion, with ranks and districts and hierarchies and also paramilitary groups that would get in street fights with Communists. Individual high-ranking Nazis were also good organizers, including some who had come directly from the Freikorps to the Nazis like Gregor Strasser, for example. The Nazi Party during this time, besides its political activities, was also heavily involved in social activities like hosting dances and film nights and speaking events for German youth across the country in order to increase their visibility, though for a while it seemed like this strategy was ineffectual because Germans would attend these social events but wouldn't necessarily make the connection between enjoying the events and supporting the political party that hosted them. It's worth mentioning at this point that the Nazis also benefited heavily from the conservatives in charge of the Weimar state and its institutions (guys like Hindenburg). Remember that Hitler and the Nazis literally tried to stage a coup and overthrow the Weimar government in the early 20s and were caught and convicted and sent to prison ... for about a year before they were pardoned and set free. Meanwhile, Communists would be extrajudicially murdered and the police and Weimar justice system basically didn't care. Weimar Germany's citizens may not have been overwhelmingly conservative or right wing at the time, but their institutions were in many ways just remnants of the imperial German state and absolutely loathed the left, which led to an at times grudging and at times openly welcoming tolerance of the extreme right. But I would argue that, overwhelmingly, the biggest factor in the rise of the Nazis to a mass movement was the Depression. Germany's economy cratered just as hard as America's did, putting millions out of work. The moderate Weimar politicians' answer to this should sound familiar today, because it was just successive rounds of massive, crippling austerity, over and over again. Every six months Hindenburg would appoint a new chancellor, that chancellor would slash the budget and be unpopular, and would fail to win elections or command a majority in the Reichstag. Hindenburg and the various chancellors were basically ruling by decree and bypassing the Reichstag, which meant bypassing the actual elected German representatives. Because of this, the moderate Weimar politicians were completely discredited and German voters overwhelmingly flocked to the extreme left and extreme right, the Communists and the Nazis, because they were the two groups that were actually promising to fix Germany's economic problems instead of continuing austerity. That was where the mass Nazi movement came from. It wasn't fervent Nazi supporters who tattooed swastikas on their foreheads and signed up to join the SA, it was unemployed Germans who grew to hate their moderate politicians and turned to whoever was available that was offering an alternative. And Hindenburg was an arch-conservative so of course he would turn to Hitler and the extreme right rather than Ernst Thalmann and the Communists when trying to co-opt an emerging political movement. There are a few things you should remember when discussing the nature of the Nazis as a mass movement up until 1933. First, mass support for the Nazis only emerged in the early 30s. Second, the most they ever got in a fair election was 37% of the vote in July 1932, followed by 32% in November 1932. Hitler was appointed chancellor in January 1933 and instituted severe repression on other political parties almost immediately, beating and executing Communists and Social Democrats on the street and at political meetings, and arresting thousands of leftist politicians and activists after the Reichstag Fire. The opposition parties were essentially not allowed to campaign and many of their leaders were either arrested, went into hiding, or fled the country. Voters were intimidated into staying home or voting for the Nazis by gangs of paramilitaries roaming the streets and hanging out at polling stations. And still, under these conditions, the Nazis only got 44% of the vote in March 1933. The birth of the Nazi party is a weird thing but it can be explained. The biggest explaining factors, for me, are a) the presence of disciplined and organized Freikorps members in the Nazi Party, especially at high levels of leadership; b) the institutional conservatism of the Weimar state that favoured the extreme right over the extreme left; and c) the collapse of the political centre under the conditions of the Great Depression. As for Hitler himself, well, as mentioned above, his greatest talent was as an orator and political demagogue. On his own that wouldn't have been enough, but in the particular environment of the Nazi Party and Weimar Germany it was enough to get him in power. vyelkin fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Hindsight also blinds us to the extent to which the Nazis were an outgrowth of older, broader groups and ideologies like the Volkisch movement, which were subsumed by the Nazis as they became popular.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As a side note, I have never heard/read a good explanation of how Hitler went from a glorified bum and all around lazy wierdo with no discernable talent in Vienna, to being a pretty good soldier with no friends who couldn't get promoted to NCO because he showed no leadership ability or even interest in it, to then leave the army in 1919 and promptly take over a political party and create a mass movement out of loving nowhere. He was a good demagogue in a period of anarchy. That's about it
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:As a side note, I have never heard/read a good explanation of how Hitler went from a glorified bum and all around lazy wierdo with no discernable talent in Vienna, to being a pretty good soldier with no friends who couldn't get promoted to NCO because he showed no leadership ability or even interest in it, to then leave the army in 1919 and promptly take over a political party and create a mass movement out of loving nowhere. He wasn't a very good soldier either. He had very good generals. That's about it. And even then, he killed/fired most of the good ones towards the end and overrode their recommendations and strategies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:He wasn't a very good soldier either. He had very good generals. That's about it. And even then, he killed/fired most of the good ones towards the end and overrode their recommendations and strategies. Well personally he wasn't half-bad as far as basic enlisted duties go; the man did win the Iron Cross first and second class after all. It's just, like so many other things, he considered himself a genius sent by providence to save Germany and as such was Always Right about everything (and contemptuous of the professional officer class as were many of his ilk like Röhm, for that matter). It's oddly similar to his earlier approach to art. He was entirely self-taught and not terrible (though not great either), but unwilling to undergo the sort of instruction that might've bumped him up enough to actually get into the Vienna Academy (and he came close as it was), convinced he already knew everything he needed to know and/or that artistic elites who ran the academies were all used-up fogies/degenerates/Jews/etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:He wasn't a very good soldier either. He had very good generals. That's about it. And even then, he killed/fired most of the good ones towards the end and overrode their recommendations and strategies. Captain_Maclaine posted:Well personally he wasn't half-bad as far as basic enlisted duties go; the man did win the Iron Cross first and second class after all. This is what I meant; by most accounts he did a good job as a private first class in the German Army. As a military leader in WWII he was mostly garbage. "Mass movement out of nowhere" was overstating it, but Hitler completely took over what became the Nazi party really fast and expanded it from what amounted to a small club of assholes really rapidly, in spite of showing little aptitude for much of anything in his life up to that point. That's the part I have trouble wrapping my head around given what we know about him before 1919 - the development of his political abilities from seemingly nothing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
sean10mm posted:This is what I meant; by most accounts he did a good job as a private first class in the German Army. As a military leader in WWII he was mostly garbage. That part you can probably attribute primarily to the demagoguery and oratory skills. He was one of the first members of what would become the Nazi Party and one of the big things that attracted people to them at all in the early days were his crazy speeches and ability to connect to a mass audience, so it's understandable that he would take on more and more important roles in the organization since most people who were joining were joining to follow him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:11
|
|