Hitler's methods remained constant while conditions changed in Germany, which helped Hitler gain the people's trust and rise to power. After World War I, Germany was not ready for a revolution. The Weimar government came to power directly after the war and made many new promises to improve overall life. But over time these promises were not fulfilled and the people grew restless. The Weimar government was failing, but even so, Germany was not ready for Hitler's regime. The Beer Hall Putch was Hitler's first attempt at revolution, but he was ignored and ridiculed. This proves that Germany was not ripe for revolution quite yet. The citizens were still willing to give democracy a chance. While democracy still thrived in Germany, Hitler could not promote fascism in the way that he wanted. Just as the people wished, the Weimar government pulled through. Gustuv Stressman, chancellor and foreign minister of Germany, introduced the Stressman Era, lasting from 1926-1929. This new era was a happier time for Germans. The economy expanded due to new changes such as the Dawes Plan, the Young Plan, the Locarno Treaties, and the Berlin Treaty. As these changes improved living situations and decreased unemployment, the German people benefited and supported the government. However, even throughout the prosporous period in Germany, Hitler stood firm in his methods and beliefs. He continuously denounced the Treaty of Versailles, declared Jews as the enemy of Germany, but still made no promises to the people. I think that his consistancy proved beneficial later in his campaign. Even when Germany prospered, Hitler still promoted a great sense of nationalism that he felt the Weimar Government disregarded.
This one instance proves that Hitler's methods were not held subject to Germany's conditions. Though the Stressman era built Germany's economy back up little by little, they also, in Hitler's eyes, accepted full responsibility for World War 1 and attempted to rebuild relations with former enemies. This was the opposite of the nationalism that Hitler supported. He wanted to rebuild Germany into the most powerful nation in the world, but Stressman and the Weimar Government looked to rebuild relations and regain the world's respect.
The Great Depression hit Germany hard. Just as the improvements being made in Germany began to boost the economy, America, who was funding the German economy, crashed. As the economy worsened, the Weimar Government's approval rating dropped. Now Germany was ready for Nazi rule. Hitler kept the same methods to rise to power: he gave speeches, campaigned throughout the country, and promised the Germans better lives, but gave no details on how this would be accomplished. Therefore, he would break no commitments made, and the people listened.
Some historians may argue that Hitler's methods had a greater impact on his success. Some may say it was the conditions in Germany. However, the methods and conditions had an equal impact and carried Hitler to power. He only had to wait until his methods complied with the conditions of the country. When Germany prospered under another rule, the Nazi party had no impact. But Hitler's preservence prove beneficial in the long run. Because contitions worsened, due to the Great Depression, Hitler and the Nazi party were able to seize power and rule German.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Neely, I think your post is explicit and to the point. I can tell that you understood the demands of the question, and you clearly met them. You used good pieces of evidence and explained how these conditions and methods helped Hitler rise to power (although I feel you could have given a little more background on you evidence). Overall, your analysis was pretty good! You also did well in mentioning other possible interpretations. You could even go further and explain how these other interpreations came about. You showed a good understanding of Hitler's rise to power in this post! I would give it a 13.
ReplyDeleteI would give this paper a 15. I think neely had a good opening paragraph with a clear conclusion. She provided good evidence to help answer her thesis. I feel that she also gave a good analysis of the evidence provided. Good use of other interpretations.
ReplyDelete