Here's a copy and paste from the 1933 article:

Rise in Stocks Reflects Confidence He Will Not Disrupt Nation's Affairs

Berlin is settling down to pass judgment on political developments. Politicians, economists and bankers declare there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power.

Consequently, it is not believed that Hitler will accomplish a change in the constitution or that [Reich Minister of Economics Alfred] Hugenberg will bring about a general reduction of interest rates. The government wants to obtain an adjournment of the Reichstag for several months, but it is questionable whether the Centre [Party] will approve of such action.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

Those damned Marxists refusing to sit down, shut up, and back the liberal party

Well, they quite literally could have prevented Hitler's rise to power, but Stalin decided it was more beneficial to the USSR for the Communists to support the Nazis against the Liberals. Why? Hmmmm... Guess we'll never know?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well, they quite literally could have prevented Hitler’s rise to power

    By all voting for Hindeburg, the guy who ordered the police to assassinate Rosa Luxembourg?

    Stalin decided it was more beneficial to the USSR for the Communists to support the Nazis

    Hindenburg thought it was more beneficial for the Conservatives to support the Nazis.

    Stalin was the Boogeyman Hindenburg used to justify a fascist government. Purging the Nazis in 1933 was as important to him as it was in 1919.

    Twice, Hindenburg sided with fascists to demolish any kind of civil socialist reform in his country. Twice "evil Russians" got the blame for a domestic slaughter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    The communists literally sided with the fascists to also prevent any kind of socialist/social-democratic/"liberal" reform in the country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The communists literally sided with the fascists

    The fascists were barely sided with themselves, given all the backstabbing. It took the conservative party to elevate the Nazis to the Chancellorship.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, but the communists STILL sided with the fascists against the socialists/socdems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    against the socialists/socdems

    The SDP purged its ranks of Communists to appease Hindenburg's State Police. You can't side with a party that's trying to rat you out to the cops and get you killed.

    Which, again, brings us to the conservatives who held power by playing sides off each other until they misplayed their hands.

    The path to fascism was paved back in 1919, when the original Communists were rounded up and executed by the conservatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Again, the Communists could have chosen NOT to side with the Fascists, but they did anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    the Communists could have chosen NOT to side with the Fascists

    Why do you keep deflecting blame from the Weimer president and head of the military police? I almost question whether you have a problem with the Fascists at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Because you are actually the one deflecting blame.

    Why did the communists side with the fascists against the liberals?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments