William Carr states ‘ A revolutionary situation did exist in 1918 as long as the people were no longer prepared to obey the old rulers’ This highlights the disruption amongst the people, an awareness that there was a shift of power but whether this new awareness constitutes a revolution can be questioned. The end of the Kaiser rule was significant as the lifelong belief the German people once had in their Kaiser and his Authoritarian rule was shattered; a significant change in mentality that allowed the possibility of a new democratic republic. This was such drastic change and for the first time meant Germans in theory
The reason why so many people joined these extremists was that in the Treaty of Versailles the Germans would have to accept ‘the War guilt clause’. Everyone found this an outrage as the Germans eventually signed the Treaty. The Govterment system that was put in through the Weimar was democracy. This new system was new to Germany and looked to be crumbling after the first few years. The country had a militaristic past as which had gave the President some concerns that the old elite may try and overturn the Weimar with much support.
The defeat to the Western Alliance in World War I would only strengthen Hitler’s German patriotism. In 1919, Adolf Hitler joined the German Worker’s
Furthermore, the intricate system of alliances spawned during this era meant diplomacy became an impossible task that only the most expert politicians could manoeuvre. Despite the factors that could contradict the popular belief that it was Germany and it's unification that caused the First World War, the contrast of Bismarck's expert leadership with Wilhelm II's youthful and naive approach is also a huge factor, incorporated with this school of thought is the idea that the growth of Militarism, especially in Germany, made the idea of war vogue. This study will attempt to provide an alternate view point on the issue. In 1871, Otto Von Bismarck amalgamated the German States through subtle diplomacy and a series of military victories. However, the nature of their victory incited bitter indignation from the French and unsettled the European balance of power.
Modern European History – David Welch Evidence of anti-Semitism being propagated by powerful interest groups before 1914, such as the Pan- German League, helps to substantiate the argument put forward by historians that stresses the role of traditional elites and the continuities in social structures and ideology linking imperial Germany with the Nazi era. Kaiser Wilhelm’s claim that G had become a world power on the basis of an imperial fleet that could challenge the Royal Navy was enthusiastically received. However, his successes in foreign policy were li8mt, and the price paid in the self-inflicted isolation of G and the forming of an alliance by its rivals- Britain, France and Russia. On the surface, France, which remained the sole republican state among the great powers of Europe, presented a picture of political instability. For many, general Boulanger provided the focus for a new sense of nationalism based on military glory, he advocated that Alsace- Lorraine (surrendered by France to German empire- 1871) should be returned to France.
The German leaders also had a weak devotion to democracy, and some were actively plotting to overthrow it. Hitler furthermore enjoyed an almost unbroken string of luck in coming to power. He benefited greatly from the Great Depression, the half-senility of the president, the incompetence of his opposition, and the appearance of an unnecessary backroom deal just as the Nazis were starting to lose popular appeal and votes. Critics of democracy often claim that Hitler was democratically elected to power. This is untrue.
Hitler used propaganda, elimination of the opposition, and a cult of personality to gain the support and trust of the German people in a time of economic crisis to his benefit and the rest of the world's loss. Single party states arise from a crisis, and Germany was suffering from a very large one at that time. The end of World War I in 1918 had left the economic state in shambles, and the loss struck the German people hard. Furthermore, the Treaty of Versailles the following year resulted in the demilitarisation and many cuts from German land and territory. Hitler criticized the carving up of Europe by the "Big Four" (the US, UK, France and Italy), stating that the Germans were the "master race".
To what extent was Germany a totalitarian state between 1933 and 1939? The Nazi state possessed elements of totalitarian power; however, it lacked dominance in Germany and was therefore not a totalitarian state. Totalitarianism refers to a system of government whose power is determined by terror and force over their state, and who controls all social, economic and political aspects of the state. Whilst the Nazi regime reflects some aspects of totalitarianism through its control over the media and the single party state, the Nazi state required the support of the German population to maintain its power. This highlights that the population was not terrorised into supporting the regime, but persuaded through manipulation by the Nazi government.
Moreover, as Britain was one of the major power of the WWI, the effects on both of their men and arms were not recovered from the WWI. This also led Chamberlain hesitant to take part for a large war at this time. Thus, making an appeasement with the Germans was the best solution for them to be recovered and prepared later in the future because rather than fighting a big war against advanced army with unprepared-no men army, they would fight a war with recovered army even if the opponents might grow more. ! Back again to 1919, the Treaty of Versailles made conclusions to the German’s territorial, armed forces, colonies, preparations and indemnity, and the war guilt issues.
The peace treaty did not satisfy France as it was not harsh enough in the eyes of France. After suffered badly from WWI with umpteen casualties, France was determined to cripple Germany completely as a form of revenge as well as an assurance against future German revival. Some provisions of the treaty did meet French demands, such as the return of Alsace-Lorraine from Germany; the German disarmament which set a maximum strength of 100000 soldiers together with the dissolution of the air force and the reduction of navy to 6 batttleships; and a whopping reparation of 132 billion gold marks to be paid over 42 years. These clauses would severely weaken Germany economically and militarily which certainly catered to French aim. However, French felt these punishments were not harsh enough to eliminate the chance of future German revival.