Of course the big depresion the country was under and the poor econamy and the fact that the country was poor and people still mad about the Treaty of Verseis (excuse my spelling ) and he promesed them to take them out of this and make them great again.
Henk
Excuse my 2 cents. Yup, Germany was in the depression, as most of the world at that time. Hitler came in and promissed Germans what every dictator does-the World. Germans liked the Hitler’s idea that Germany is better than the rest of the World (“Deutchland, Deutchland, uber alles”, right???) and, therefore, they DESERVE more “living room” (entitlement-remember it was a Social Democrat party). I believe the intimidation, and open hostility toward other German parties came mostly after the election. BTW, my in-laws were friends with a German lady who came from Germany, and was a Social Democrat before WWII. Until her death last year she openly proclaimed that Hitler was the best leader Germany ever had. And she was NOT a member of the Nazi party. This gives you an idea, that Germany went to war because majority of people in Germany believed that they deserve to rule the rest of us (and I hear that some people in Germany STILL belive that today).
Yes, he did promised them a lot but he also provided on some of them. Hitler did take Germany out of the depresion they had after WW1 and they all thus got jobs and also thus believed that they were the best in the world.
Henk
I seem to remember reading that the Germans were pioneers in political polling during the era when the Nazis came to power. By analyzing the polling data, Hitler would have been better able to gauge the political mood of the country. This would also have given him an edge in determining the desires and concerns of the German people. Maybe this would partly explain why the German people were so mesmerized by him. Perhaps that shrewd politician and skilled orator was able to utilize that information greatly to his advantage and promise the German nation what he already knew they wanted to hear.
Having studied History at uni in the 80’s and 90’s I’d like to add a little newer insights, based on primary source documents. Most of which I found quite a surprise.
It WAS German foreign policy, sorry guys. Against Russia / with Austria / against the Balkans. And, against France and England. They developed the U-boat for the war, not during it.
They set out on a lightning fast mobiliation for an aggressive war on BOTH fronts. So they could WIN, and EARLY.
No-one else can be said to have comparably similar plans, in extent, quality or precision.
They had included their Reserve AND Landwehr unit’s staffs (at minimum) in all aggressive plans especially entraining exercises and plans. And marching tests. Extra weight in the punch
(Bethmann Hollwegg does NOT come out all that well when the original documents pre and up to August 14 are covered).
Germany’s naval race (maybe Willhelm11’s!?) with the RN was unwinnable and destabilising.
Viz. The shift of Britain towards France, and France toward Russia. Came in response to German policy and moves.
Little Belgium etc. When I did matric’n history -late 60’s - the conventional belief was that Allied propaganda severely exaggerated German atrocities.
well now…
Used them I’d say, and if we add the Belgian border units whose issued hats were rather like civilian bowlers, reprisals were GOING to happen.
Why? Because ‘frightfulness’ (I forget the precise Tcherman word) was written down AND promulgated, and trained for - as POLICY. Especially in Belgium and France. Frighten the civilians so they’ll become refugees and clog France’s approach lines.
They burnt down entire cities. in August 1914.
My family have felt the need to volunteer TWICE to take the SMLE.303 to Germany’s army, and I for one will NOT forget it.
Germany started it, and restarted it.
And, Japan started the Pacific War, and were damned lucky they didn’t get Russia on their tails until too late.
In amelioration of my apparent harshness - which I see as mere bluntness - I would add that I do understand why Germany mistrusted France for so long.
It’s called national memory, I think it was Boney Fuller who said, ‘No nation has had a worse neighbour than Germany has had, in France’ - IMO from the 1500’s on, but especially the thirty yrs war, AND LouisXIV and XV.
;-)!
Mind how you go!
Timbo
Having studied History at uni in the 80’s and 90’s I’d like to add a little newer insights, based on primary source documents. Most of which I found quite a surprise.
It WAS German foreign policy, sorry guys. Against Russia / with Austria / against the Balkans. And, against France and England. They developed the U-boat for the war, not during it.
They set out on a lightning fast mobiliation for an aggressive war on BOTH fronts. So they could WIN, and EARLY.
No-one else can be said to have comparably similar plans, in extent, quality or precision.
They had included their Reserve AND Landwehr unit’s staffs (at minimum) in all aggressive plans especially entraining exercises and plans. And marching tests. Extra weight in the punch
(Bethmann Hollwegg does NOT come out all that well when the original documents pre and up to August 14 are covered).
Germany’s naval race (maybe Willhelm11’s!?) with the RN was unwinnable and destabilising.
Viz. The shift of Britain towards France, and France toward Russia. Came in response to German policy and moves.
Little Belgium etc. When I did matric’n history -late 60’s - the conventional belief was that Allied propaganda severely exaggerated German atrocities.
well now…
Used them I’d say, and if we add the Belgian border units whose issued hats were rather like civilian bowlers, reprisals were GOING to happen.
Why? Because ‘frightfulness’ (I forget the precise Tcherman word) was written down AND promulgated, and trained for - as POLICY. Especially in Belgium and France. Frighten the civilians so they’ll become refugees and clog France’s approach lines.
They burnt down entire cities. in August 1914.
My family have felt the need to volunteer TWICE to take the SMLE.303 to Germany’s army, and I for one will NOT forget it.
Germany started it, and restarted it.
And, Japan started the Pacific War, and were damned lucky they didn’t get Russia on their tails until too late.
In amelioration of my apparent harshness - which I see as mere bluntness - I would add that I do understand why Germany mistrusted France for so long.
It’s called national memory, I think it was Boney Fuller who said, ‘No nation has had a worse neighbour than Germany has had, in France’ - IMO from the 1500’s on, but especially the thirty yrs war, AND LouisXIV and XV.
;-)!
Mind how you go!
Timbo
I agree with the animosity between the UK and Germany being caused by the Germans and more particularly by the Kaisers desire to directly challenge the UK with the construction of a High Seas Fleet. It was actually a North Sea Fleet and its only rationale was to challenge the UK at sea. Britain being a sea based Empire could not afford to let this challenge go unchecked and was forced into making an Alliance with France and Russia, its 2 most traditional enemies.
Before the Germans started to build this fleet relations between the 2 powers were generally good.
A very good book to read on this subject is ‘Dreadnought’ by Robert K Massey ISBN 1844135284 it covers a period roughly from Trafalgar until July 1914.