How Hitler Came to Power - Kaj la nazioj prenis la potencon

 

Key figures in Hitler's rise to power, Left to right, Dietrich Klagges, Alfred Hugenberg, Paul von Hindenburg and Franz von Papen

A translation of Johann Chapoutot's article for Le Monde Diplomatique

 

Contrary to the popular belief, Adolph Hitler was not empowered by a popular vote. Instead, his rise was thanks to frequent parliamentary crisis and moral panics exploited by a press controlled by a far right magnate and the willing support of key industrialists and bankers. They all shared a desire to break the electoral momentum of the left and kill the social state.

 The installation of the Nazis on the 30th of January 1933 was the gravest trauma to the conscience of every democrat. In the West Germany was a nation of high culture, science, research and technology, full of music, literature and philosophical glory and Nobel Prizes. It was also proudly the country with the oldest and most well-organised left wing movement in the world. With large Social Democratic and Communist Trade Unions and parties to match, who through their activism in the case of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) or the mere fact of its existence in regard to the Communist Party (KPD) managed to establish an advanced social democratic system by 1918-1919. But by 1920 the "Weimar Coalition" established by the SPD, German Democratic Party (DPP) and the Catholic Centre Party (DZP) had weakened electorally and was quickly replaced by moderate or right wing majorities, who strived to undo the progressive measure and social gains. In addition, the Social Democratic President Friedrich Ebert died in the middle of his mandate and was replaced in 1925 by the living fossil, the General Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg, although in accordance with the law he swore loyalty to the Constitution and kept that oath.

The Treaty of Versailles and the contempt it inspired in many nations and costly economic reparations did not create an auspicious international situation. Despite that background, the German Democratic, Liberal and Parliamentary Republic worked to develop a democratic culture through regular balloting at the national level, within the federal states and through interparty dialogue. In fact, it was a coalition of the right and left headed by Gustav Stresemann (DVP, right wing) which in the Autumn of 1923 confronted the Occupation of the Ruhr, hyperinflation and the collapse of the German currency. This same coalition also faced several insurrections (Rhineland separatists tried to copy the Bolshevik revolution, and a failed putsch by Nazis in Bavaria). Once again since the 28th of June 1928 another grand coalition of parties helmed by Herman Muller (SPD) ran the German government. The great economic crisis (Wall Street crash) struck Germany in the Autumn of 1929. Its intensity destroyed the government when the right wing parties pushed for budget austerity while the left pushed for increasing unemployment benefits.

When no party could succeed in building a parliamentary majority, a small circle of advisers to the President, military officers, large landowners, industrialists and bankers, moved to alter normal constitutional practice and carried out a sort of permanent coup supported by the personal prestige and importance of Hindenburg.  The right ruled through Presidential cabinets, often ignoring the Reichstag. Indeed, Article 48.2[1] of the 1919 Constitution permitted the head of state to enact laws by decree, even though this practice undermined democratic customs. It was supposed to be used only in periods of extreme danger, Ebert had used it often between 1919-23 to confront Communist and right wing insurrections. Now it was being used to push through budgetary measures that were extremely anti-social, cutting assistance for the unemployed and other welfare programs, and sector wide cuts to minimum wages.

Rebuilding the Army

In the opinion of the circle around the President, Brüning had made serious by continuing with austerity, his policy of transferring vast tracts of uncultivated lands in Germany's east as much of that land belonged to Germany's major landowners. Hindenburg was one of them: the majority of his social circle consisted of Junkers the landed nobility of Prussia and members of the army. In addition, there were tactical disagreements on how to handle the National Socialist Workers Party (NSDAP), after a failed attempt to negotiate with the Nazis Brüning decided to outlaw them by a decree passed in April 1932, this decree targetted the Nazis paramilitary groups the Storm troopers (SA) and the SS. General Kurt von Schleicher a high ranking military officer with influence in the Hindenburg clique disagreed with this policy, he considered the Nazi armed forces essential to defeat the Communists in the streets and rebuild the German army. In the brownshirt wearing street fighters, he saw high quality "human material" for the new German army the military high command dreamed of.  That dream looked more realistic in 1932 after the reparation payments mandated by Versailles had ended and there was renewed hope that a relaxation of the cap on troop numbers of the Reichswehr (the new name of the German armed forces) that limited it to 100,000 men would soon follow. Secret intrigues, behind the scenes meetings, secret contacts and plots made behind the back of Brüning to weaken him and General Wilhelm Groener the Minister for Defence and the Internal Security, both were targetted due to their support for a ban on the Nazi paramilitary groups. In June 1932 these intrigues succeeded in toppling Brüning's Administration and nominating a new Chancellor Von Papan, as well as a new Cabinet in record time!

 Papen was almost a political unknown: A member of Zentrum, (the Centre party) he was a Landtag deputy for the Prussian state parliament, Prussia was the most important state within the German Federal system, but Papen was discreet in method. An Aristocrat, ex-officer and businessman, he also had contacts and influence, he was also a member of the Herrenklub, a private members club whose membership were powerful and well-connected right wing businessman, state functionaries and military officers. To Schleicher he seemed the perfect figurehead ("I do not want a head, but a hat" he once said regarding this question of governance) to carry out his work of collaboration with the Nazis. Papen fulfilled this task by making the SA and SS legal once again, though when the Nazis carried out a massacre in the Summer of 1932, murdering over a hundred left-wing activists and sympathisers and some passers-by using bullets and clubs Papen was forced to pass a special decree outlawing political violence which specifically carried an unappealable death sentence. Regarding economic and social policy he had his own ideas: he continued the dismantling of welfare policies and supported economic subsidies and tax cuts for major companies, he carried out these policies under another law by decree on the 5th of September 1932. Papen, together with his circle of conspirators which including one of the "Great theorists" of Conservative Revolution Edgard Jung and Carl Schmitt[2], considered ending the system of parilamentary democracy in Germany entirely. After the dissolution of the Reichstag and the election of the 31st of July 1933 this right wing clique expreienced severe opposition, the Nazis held 230 deputies around a hundred more seats than previously. Papen's government lost a confidence vote and his government fell by an overwhelming majority, elections were once again held in Germany.

The attempt to keep the Nazis under control

The next election which was held on the 6th of November showed the continuance of the decline of the liberal right, but just as important the Nazis lost 36 deputies to the DNVP (German National People's Party, an extreme conservative party). The DNVP was also a far right party whose leader Alfred Hugenberg was even more anti-worker than Hitler, just not as charismatic. He was also much older than Hitler and in every respect lived like the shameless bourgeois and held extreme reactionary views throughout his life. He was a racist, an antisemite and a German ultranationalist. A former President of the Krupp firm, he had been a vocal advocate of German territorial expansion and the colonisation of Polish lands before the First World War. After the War he became a mass media magnate, purchasing twelve newspapers including weeklies and monthlies, and a film studio (Deulig, renamed UFA) which produced a newsreel service to show in the cinemas before the films. By standardising the contents of his media mouthpieces (to reduce costs and sure up ideological coherence) Hugenberg succeeded in distressing the German population and stimulating a moral panic over "Cultural Bolshevism" the Herald of homosexuality, modern art, feminism, and the corruption of youth, and the spectre of "Judeo-Bolshevism" a greedy force set on the ceasing of private property and the destruction of Christianity. Hugenberg radicalised the right wing of Germany and legitimised the Nazi party. A defender of the unification of the Right, in 1929 he associated with NSDAP members as part of a campaign against the Young Plan (a plan to restructure the remaining reparations) by uniting the right wing parties in a campaign through a popular referendum. Later, he created the Harzburg Front, a short-lived political alliance which proved in October 1931 that the Nazis were now respectable enough to appear alongside the worthy representatives of the banks, industry, military and the traditional right.

In November 1932 the right was hesitating over choosing the best way forward to maintaining the existing social order and make Germany a military power again, while also confronting what was in their eyes the most serious danger: the growth of the Communist party's voting base. Which continued to grow in the Autumn of 1932 while Nazi support declined. 

By August 1932 in the aftermath of an election that was aa disaster for Papen's government the Hindenburg right were left with two choices. The first option was to bring the Nazis fully into the coalition of state administration, something which Brüning had already proposed at the start of 1932 and which Papen now offered again to Hitler. The Problem: Since the Nazi party was the largest in the Reichstag, a fact reinforced by the elections in November, Hitler demanded the position of Chancellor in the proposed new government, this was something that Hindenburg opposed on principle, Hitler was pushing for a cabinet filled exclusively with Nazi party appointments while Hindenburg desired a broad coalition of the German right. Hindenburg also personally disliked Hitler, too Austrian for his Prussian character, an upstart Corporal who lacked deference for his Field Marshal rank, too bombastic and Catholic for Hindenburg's restrained and Protestant nature etc. The second option was to once again dissolve parliament (the third time in less than six months!) and hold another undated call for elections in violation of article 25 of the Constitution which outlined a maximum period of 60 days to hold new elections[3]. Meanwhile the Government continued to carry out its policy by resorting exclusively to law by decree. In the event of strong extra-parliamentary opposition (strikes, street demonstrations, insurrections) a state of emergency would be declared with the army tasked with restoring order. But in December 1932 the Army declared that it was incapable of handling the threat posed by the Communists and Nazis if a foreign power chose to invade as well.

But, there was a third option. General Kurt von Schleicher, Chancellor since the 3rd of December 1932 proposed adopting a political programe that was social and nationalistic to convince Gregor Strasser the Nazi party number 2 to join the governing colation. Strasser had been disatisfied with his position within the party and the decline in support for the Nazis with voters and the Unions. He also returned to Brüning's old plan of using agrarian reform to combat unemployment, which angered Hindenburg and his closest advisers. Papen supported intrigues against Schleicher with the help of landowners, bankers and industrialists, who had been publicly advocating Hitler be given the Chancellorship since the 19th of November 1932. On the 4th of January 1933, a secret meeting was held by the banker Kurt von Schröder, the meeting decided upon organising a new goverment of the Right, Hitler as Chancellor, Papen as Vice Chancellor. The government would promote a "National politics" and oppose "Anti-national elements" and support private business interests. For over a year and a half Hitler had repeated meetings with important businessmen to reassure them that the Nazi party was not a social party and certainly not a socialist one, he was in fact the leader of political party that believed in re-armament, economic growth and the conquest of new markets in the East.

This was the chosen solution to the crisis. On noon on the 30th of January 1933 the new government took its oaths in front of Hindenburg who had been won over by the promise of Papen to keep Hitler under control and by the fact that since 1930 there were already three State goverments within Germany established through coalitions of the Nazis and the wider right[4]. On the 31st of January Hindenburg signed another decree for dissolution and call for what he hoped would be the last election. The democratic government of Article 48.2 would die and be replaced by a new openly Authoritarian government, one in which the traditional German Right, (Liberals and National Conservatives) and the Nazis unanimously desired. 

Johan Chapotout

 

 

 1: Art. 48. If a state fails to perform the duties imposed upon it by the federal constitution or by federal law, the President . . may enforce performance with the aid of the armed forces.
If public order and security are seriously disturbed or endangered within the Federation, the President . . may take all necessary steps for their restoration, intervening, if need be, with the aid of the armed forces. For the said purpose he may suspend for the time being, either wholly or in part, the fundamental rights described in Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153.

2: A lifelong advocate of authoritarianism and dictatorship, Schmitt became a leading and active supporter of the Nazi party and its legal system. After WWII, Schmitt refused to work with denazification policies and retained link's with Fascist Spain.

3: Art. 25. The President of the Federation may dissolve the Reichstag, but only once for any one cause.
The general election is held not later than on the sixtieth day after dissolution.

4: Five Federal states had Nazi governments before Hitler's rise to power nationally, I'm not sure which three are referenced here though I believe they would be the Free State of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, the Free State of Brunswick, and the Free State of Thuringia, it was also the governor of Brunswick Dietrich Klagges who suceeded in granting Hitler German citizenship clearing several constitutional barriers to his participation in German politics.

Lord Sugar

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher meeting key economic ally General Jaruzelski dictator of the People's Republic of Poland

 I saw one of those strange "Why I left the left" type posts on Twitter the other day, one of those that go "In my rebellious youth I used to be X, but now I'm older and wiser" type messages that go onto to establish that they probably never were X and its coin flip whether they were never really committed to it or just making it up as a cheap rhetorical device. In this particular case, it was a twitter stalinist explaining how they were once an anarchist and are now, thanks to Historical Materialism, ™ seen the sterile light of Marxism-Leninism-whateverism.

It got me thinking of my dear stepdad and his life. I knew him as a sweet and mild man with a doddy sense of humour, but in his youth in the 70s and early 80s he was a punk rocker with a bright blue Mohawk and went on demos and protests to ban the bomb and end unemployment. One day I asked what had changed and explained. It started with getting a regular job, nothing like the monotony of wage labour to eat a way at your vitality and free expression!

This job was with British Sugar, he worked at a depot loading freight and then unloading them. The job was not great, if you've done manual work in factories or in logistics you'll know, it's monotonous and tiring, but it was steady employment, and he cracked on, he always had a reputation for being a grafter. No, the reason this job lead to a complete change in outlook and attitude for him was because one day he noticed something odd, the sugar he was unloading was the same sugar he had been loading for hours on end. The sugar was untouched the only difference was that it was covered in customs marks from the Soviet Union, the USSR was an importer of British Beet sugar as trade between Western and Eastern Europe was extensive and grew throughout the period.

You might be wondering why this would be a source of epiphany, well for shipments in Tons to cross international borders and work in a cycle as regularly as it did had to be a corruption scheme. And what made it worse was for millions of Tons of goods to be used in this manner required the active participation of officials on both sides, at least that's how he saw it. Keep in mind this was the Cold War where people walked around with the threat of Nuclear annihilation, and yet both the Thatcher's Britain and the Soviet Union, supposedly irreconcilable enemies and totally alien societies were wasting hours of labour and millions of Pounds/Rubles lining the pockets of minor officials.

 In effect, he was given direct, first-hand proof that the world he lived in and believed was a con. And he wasn't wrong, it goes beyond sugar, contrary to popular myths that North American Neo-Stalinists and Regan mourners keep a live the powers that be were willing to make money out of the international working class (this part editorialising here, he never used this kind of language) and so all this talk of revolution was nothing but hot air.

I've chosen the image above for an important reason, that is Margaret Thatcher and General Jaruzelski, apart from a photo-op the connections ran so deep that in 1984-5 when Thatcher was fighting to destroy the Miners and then the wider British Workers Movement she turned to Apartheid South Africa and "Communist Poland" for help. Coal Mining was the backbone of the Polish economy for many years, and they could deliver.

“UK imports of Polish house coal have been running at almost double their usual rate since the beginning of the year.  If the strike had not taken place about 130,000 tonnes of Polish house coal would have been imported this year.  But traders say that   so far 100,000 tonnes have been landed, and the final total for the year to likely to be 200.000 tonnes.  Cawoods, part of the Redland Group, based at Cheltenham, confirmed yesterday that it had placed an order for 30,000 tonnes of domestic coal.  It had purchased individual cargoes of Polish coal previously but this is its first long term contract.” (17^th May 1984)
Financial Times, sourced from https://ukrainesolidaritycampaign.org/2015/04/12/how-stalinism-helped-defeat-the-great-miners-strike-in-1984-85/

 It couldn't be more clear, the Actual Existing Record of Actually Existing Socialism is one of scabbing on and international scale, during the Miners Strike the arch Cold Warrior Thatcher was vulnerable like never before, and yet the vanguard of world socialism just took advantage to double their pre-existing contracts. 

My step-dad held several jobs learning the trades before jacking it all in to become a self-employed Handyman, he ended his work life as a window cleaner enjoying the lack of a boss and the freedom to tell abusive customers where to stick it. Not a viable path to emancipation for the dispossessed but it was he own personal victory on a system that took him and the rest of us for a mug.

 

In the footsteps of Nestor -

 Link to the fundraiser.

UK supporters need to remove the space in the post code section to verify.

In the footsteps of Nestor

by 

Canal Marches

Together, let's participate in the making of a film about Nestor Makhno and his echo in a part of today's Ukrainian resistance.

Together let's make a film and follow in the footsteps of Nestor Makhno.

While Russian aggression against Ukraine is intensifying and the country is in difficulty, subjected to the violence and deprivations inflicted by the war, the Ukrainian resistance is holding firm in a form of civic, social, trade union, military and cultural self-organization without waiting for state support or Western aid, which is slow to materialize. This resolute commitment is reminiscent of that, just a century ago, of the anarchist peasant Nestor Makhno who, during the civil war following the October Revolution, raised an army of 100,000 fighters to fight against the Austro-German occupation, against the reactionary White Army and against the Red Army of Moscow. His project at the time: to allow the advent of a free, independent, social and democratic Ukraine. The current front line crosses the territories that saw the birth and development of the movement he inspired: the Makhnovtchina.

The film, which will take place mainly in Ukraine, will follow in the footsteps of Nestor, who today inspires part of the Ukrainian youth and fighters who resist Russian imperialism. We will strive to render the atmosphere of the war, showing the scars it leaves on women, men and landscapes, both rural and urban, highlighting the surges of solidarity and mutual aid that the situation engenders. We will pay close attention to the populations who suffer, fight, resist and hope, trying to render this particular and unexpected energy that irrigates the country.

The writing of the film began in March and resulted in a sequence of the film. An initial location scouting took place from June 10 to 25, which allowed several contacts to be made with activists and soldiers belonging to a network of several hundred fighters, bringing together anti-authoritarian left-wing activists, environmentalists, animal rights activists, feminists, LGBTIQ activists, libertarian communists, anarchists engaged on the front or in different forms of direct support for the front. This network is of course mainly made up of Ukrainians, but there are also people from various nationalities (including Belarusian, Russian, Kurdish, European and American). We were also able to make contact with trade unionists and political figures (MPs, ex-MPs, pro-Ukrainian Russian opponents, etc.). Filming in Ukraine will take place before the end of the year, as will probably be the case in France. Thus, editing of the film could begin in the first quarter of 2025.

Description of expenditure items

The production of the film will of course have a cost.

To begin with, here are the major expense items relating to filming:

Travel and on-site expenses for the June location survey (15 days) €1,000

Travel for the film crew €2,000

On-site costs for the film crew (3 weeks) €1,500

Accommodation costs for the film crew (3 weeks) €2,500

Fixer and interpreter on site €2,000

Materials and miscellaneous costs €1,000

TOTAL 10,000€

Final beneficiaries of the collection

Christophe Cordier and Pierre Chamechaude have known each other for over twenty years through their involvement in the social movement and regularly discuss their shared attraction to the figure of Makhno. The war in Ukraine has rekindled their desire to make a film, with an urgency increased tenfold by the ongoing drama. In this atrocious war, the question of an outcome that would free the Ukrainian people from the yoke of their neighbor's imperialism and ultra-liberalism, whose devastating effects we also know, is also at stake. What is at stake in this conflict is not only the military question of territorial control but also that of an attempt at real emancipation of the Ukrainian people from all oppression.

Christophe is the author and co-author of numerous documentaries of a social and historical nature. He pays particular attention to focusing on the men and women who resist at their level to different oppressions. We find this approach in his films "The Lost Dream of the River Men", "Class Brothers", "Los Vigilantes", "Counter-fire" or his latest film "On Strike". His camera has often been set in foreign territories: in Peru with "The Lost Dream", in Chiapas with "Los Vigilantes" or in Palestine with "Counter-fire".

Pierre is the author, under the name of Pierre Znamensky, of several works on the arts of propaganda in the Soviet totalitarian system: "Under the folds of the red flag" published by Rouergue, "Sovietart" published by Galilée. He is also the co-author, under the name of Pierre Chamechaude, of several books on the history of anarchism ("The Anarchists, their role, their choices" published by Alternative Libertaire), the social movement or Ukraine ("Ukraine in all letters" published by Syllepse). A member of the CGT, he has traveled to Ukraine three times as part of inter-union humanitarian convoys since the beginning of the war.

Project leaders

The film will be produced by Thélème Films, supported by the Canal Marches association.

Thélème Films has produced several documentary films that give voice to those who fight for their rights and highlight major battles. We can mention "Par la fenêtre ou par la porte", supported by the CNC and which benefited from a theatrical release, "La Marche aux mille voix", also supported by the CNC but also by Procirep-Angoa, "Les Garçons Ramponeau" supported by the CNC and co-produced with France 3 Ile-de-France or "Les Enfants de Denouval".

Canal Marches is an association created by audiovisual professionals, unemployed and precarious workers, and social movement activists. Its ambition is to contribute to the expression and visibility of the “voiceless” and their resistance, and more broadly of people from working-class backgrounds, through the appropriation of the video tool.

For more information:

www.canalmarches.org 

Project location

France