Consolidation and maintenance of power, Nazi Germany
Page 1: Hitler’s Appointment as Chancellor
Date of Appointment: January 30, 1933
Context:
Hitler's appointment came after the November 1932 election, where Nazis lost votes for the first time since 1929.
Indicated a possible internal crisis within the Nazi Party.
Continuing violence between Nazis and communists raised fears of civil war.
Previous governments were failing and conservative elites needed Nazi support to govern.
Political Maneuvering:
An impasse existed; elites persuaded President Hindenburg to appoint Hitler while surrounding him with conservative ministers.
This led to a deal granting Hitler the power he wanted.
Establishment vs. Consolidation:
Unclear when the “establishment phase” ended and the “consolidation phase” began.
Summer 1933 considered the starting point of consolidation (no opposition parties left, coordinated civil society).
Discussion can include events as far back as January 1933 and as far forward as July/August 1934.
Notable examples of consolidation:
Night of the Long Knives (June 30, 1934): Elimination of opposition.
Outlawing of opposition parties (July 1933).
Appointment of Chancellor marked the beginning of consolidation.
Page 2: Use of Force and Treatment of Opposition
Initial Use of Force:
Force played a significant role in the early consolidation of power.
Political Violence: Large-scale violence by the SA in early 1933 set the groundwork for the regime's control.
Use of violence decreased until the war began.
Concentration Camps:
Established in 1933; targeted political opponents.
Estimated 100,000 imprisoned in total that year.
Over time, also included the unemployed, long-time criminals, mentally ill.
SS and Gestapo:
Acts as informants, fostering an atmosphere of fear.
Violence propagated as propaganda to reinforce the regime's image.
Fear of violence and torture remained a tool against opposition.
Key Events:
Night of Long Knives:
Targeted leaders seen as rivals (e.g., SA leadership).
Illustrated extrajudicial killings accepted by society and later approved by courts.
Strengthened Hitler's position and reduced threats.
Page 3: Long-Term Use of Force
Myth of the Gestapo:
While portrayed as omnipresent, the Gestapo had limited numbers and relied on citizen denunciations.
Use of Force in WWII:
Increased use of force during WWII; stricter laws and executions rose significantly.
Arguments Against Force:
From mid-1933 onwards, political violence against opponents diminished.
Many individuals conformed or cooperated due to ideology, peer pressure, or belonging.
Historical Debate:
Robert Gellately: Nazi Germany as a 'dictatorship by consent' with minimal use of force until WWII.
Richard Evans: Emphasizes terror and intimidation as critical to the regime, preventing organized opposition.
Page 4: Legal Methods
Significance of Legal Methods:
Key in both consolidation and maintenance of power.
Created a façade of legality in establishing a one-party state.
Critical Legal Events:
February 22, 1933: SA enrolled as auxiliary police.
February 28, 1933: Reichstag Fire Decree suspended civil rights and imprisoned opponents.
March 23, 1933: Enabling Act allowed Hitler to govern without Reichstag oversight.
Gleichschaltung (Coordination):
Enforcement of Nazi ideologies through legal frameworks, including banning of unions and political parties.
Purged civil service of political opponents and Jews.
Page 5: Continued Legal Repression
Further Legal Measures:
April 1933: Laws purging political adversaries from the civil service enacted.
July 1933: Political parties banned.
Legal Instruments:
Ordinary laws used to deter opposition, including laws enforcing harsh penalties for dissent.
Special courts created to handle political cases, judges loyal to Hitler.
Richard Evans Perspective:
Argued that the Nazi regime's terror mechanism was primarily legal rather than through camps, showcasing misuse of the legal system to establish repression.
Page 6: Integration of Force and Law
Overlap of Legal and Extralegal Means:
Legal methods were employed in conjunction with the threat of force.
Reichstag Fire Decree and subsequent laws emerged in contexts of intimidation and violence.
Fear as a Tool:
The implementation of legal measures often capitalized on fear, ensuring compliance and deterring opposition.