The Role of Education in the Weimar Republic Election of 1933

In the 1933 German elections, Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party enjoyed a resounding victory. The combined impact of Paul von Hindenburg's victory in the presidential election and the Nazis gaining control of the government ensured Hitler's continued service as Chancellor. With Hitler’s virtual dictatorial power solidified, the gears were set in motion for complete Nazi takeover and rule of Germany. The most horrific and deadly global conflagration in history, World War II, was now inevitable.

Research Question

The basic research question of the current study is: how did Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party win the Weimar Republic election of 1933?

Significance

The Nazi election victory in 1933 and subsequent takeover of Germany led to the unspeakable atrocities of World War II and decades, thereafter, of continued suffering and global/international repercussions, lasting even to this day. By answering the basic research question, it becomes possible to better understand and acknowledge how a democratic society like Germany was manipulated, terrorized, and overrun by a corrupt and brutal Nazi regime, seemingly overnight. Further, with the insights and understandings gained from the current inquiry, the potential and key significance of the research question avails itself. Specifically, a fulsome answer to the research question can help policymakers ensure the world that a similarly disastrous election event, and all its dubious consequences, will never happen again.

Answer/Resolution

Traditional answers and explanations to the basic research question fall along the lines of mass society theory and class theory. Mass society theory enables a macro-level analysis of German society which, in short, frames the answer to the basic research question as a matter of Nazi institutionalization and the consequential atrophying of traditional social structure and relations. Class theory, on the other hand, enables a Marxist conflict analysis that frames the answer to the basic research question as a function of class (socio-economic and political) strife and dissension. There is, however, more to the story of the Nazi victory in the 1933 election. In fact, the rest of the answer is about the systematic education of Nazi youth in the years preceding the election of 1933. By the time of the 1933 election, many inculcated Nazi youth were 18 years of age and older; they were grown adults of diverse socio-economic and political classes; and, most importantly, they were eager voters molded by popular opinion and ready to help the Nazi Party pull off the monumental victory at the polls in the Weimar Republic election of 1933.

Background Story: The 1933 Weimar Republic Election

While the raw voting numbers and data from the 1933 German election do not, by themselves, attest to the resounding Nazi election victory, a closer analysis of the numbers and election outcomes illuminates the actual depth and formidability of the Nazi electoral triumph that day. Adolf Hitler and the Nazis garnered, collectively, not quite 44 percent of the popular vote in Germany – far from a majority or full societal endorsement. Yet, the second closest political party in the election (i.e., the Social Democrats) mustered only 18.3 of the popular vote while the Communist Party attracted just 12.3 percent (Evans 340). Even more importantly, the Nazis and their allies gained significant numbers of seats in the German Parliament (Reichstag) such that majority rule and control of the government was all but assured. In fact, respectively, the Nazis won 288 seats while another 52 seats remained in the hands of conservatives to give the united faction majority control – i.e., 340 total seats of the 647 member Reichstag (Meier). Less than three weeks after the election, the majority members of the Reichstag began passing legislation that would ultimately give Hitler and his Nazi minions unchecked political power and control of the nation. On March 23, 1933, most notably, the so-called Enabling Act was passed by members of the Reichstag. In effect, this piece of legislation gave Hitler the power to mandate his own policies and laws, even without the involvement and/or voting approval of the Reichstag itself (Evans 350-351). With the death of President Hindenburg in August 1934, Adolf Hitler seized the opportunity to institutionalize his total and absolute control of Germany. In fact, in a ruthless and systematic fashion, Hitler and his Nazi Party began enforcing the dictator's Gleichschaltung policy - a propagandized term calling for the supposed coordination and unified cooperation of all German institutions. Yet, what Hitler really intended with Gleichschaltung was the uncontested subordination of all German institutions under the death grips of his growing unilateral/dictatorial power (Meier). As history tells, Europe and the rest of the world would soon come face to face with arguably the most brutal, genocidal regime of the 20th century, not to mention all human history itself. Thus, the actual depth and formidability of the Nazi Party triumph on Election Day, March 5, 1933, becomes obvious as the implications of the election continue to reverberate, even to this day.

Mass Society Theory and the Weimar Republic Election of 1933

The following section of the current study discusses mass society theory in terms of its shortcomings and utility in explaining how Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party won the Weimar Republic Election of 1933.

The Shortcomings of Mass Society Theory

Mass society theory is a blanket type model that can be used to analyze high order changes in a society. In applying the model to Germany at the time of the 1933 Weimar Republic election, some researchers, at least traditionally, have focused on the breakdown of values in German society (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 953). In this respect, the traditional argument amounts to the claim that scores of German people backed Hitler and the Nazis in the 1933 election because society had become disenfranchised from its value system. Obviously, there was a breakdown in values in Germany during the 1930s and, thereafter, through World War II. After all, Hitler and the Nazis systematically committed genocide against the Jews and other groups of people they hated. But this does not explain how Hitler and the Nazi Party won the election of 1933. German citizens, in other words, did not run to the voting polls to elect Hitler and the Nazi Party merely because they, the people, had lost their values. They had become broken-spirited, frustrated, and angry having been beaten down for years for diverse reasons across social, economic, and political dimensions. The logical error induced by application of mass society theory, stated more directly, is a matter of using values as the organizing principle of analysis; yet this does not enable an understanding of the “relations of the parts of the society to each other” (Bell 197; Lang and Lang 1005). The limitations of mass society theory are, thereby noted.

The Utility of Mass Society Theory

Although the model falls short as described above, it does yield some useful insights about how Hitler and the Nazis won the Weimar Republic election of 1933. As a macro-level analysis tool, mass society theory helps focus research on social and economic conditions. As a case in point, since the end of World War I the people of Germany had lived under tremendous duress. In fact, throughout the 1920s while much of the Western world was recovering economically from the First World War, German citizens were suffering through very difficult and challenging times. The economy was not growing; people of all walks of life were struggling to make ends meet; and even further, the most unfortunate were living near bear subsistence with despair becoming more and more widespread each day. When signs of the Great Depression hit Germany as early as 1927, conditions in the country got even worse, unbearably so for literally millions (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 957). The German government was virtually powerless in trying to right the proverbial ship. By 1933, with the ruling class having apparently failed the German people, the masses turned to the most vocal political alternative - namely, the charismatic Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime. All told, by focusing the analysis on macro-level issues, mass society theory helps illuminate the fact that social and economic conditions were part of the reason Hitler and the Nazis won the Weimar Republic election of 1933.

Class Theory and the Weimar Republic Election of 1933

The following section of the current study discusses class theory in terms of its shortcomings and utility in explaining how Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party won the Weimar Republic Election of 1933.

The Shortcomings of Class Theory

Like mass society theory, class theory has also been used as a traditional framework for explaining Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party victory in the Weimar Republic 1933 elections. Yet, it comes up short in being able to explain the mitigating role of institutions in preventing many German people from voting for the Nazi Party. As the expression implies, class theory attempts to explain Hitler’s victory according to class distinctions. It would predict, in other words, that Hitler and the Nazis attracted disenfranchised middle-class voters who were tired of gross social, political, and economic injustices. It would, therefore, further predict that lower-middle-class citizens would also flock to the polls to support Hitler and the Nazi Party. Critics of class theory point out, however, that this is not what happened in the Weimar Republic elections of 1933. In fact, only a minority of the lower-middle-class German citizenry supported Hitler and the Nazi Party in the election (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 954). In this respect, some scholars suggest that class theory ignores the role and importance of institutions such as the many and various churches in lower-middle-class neighborhoods - i.e., the Catholic Church, Protestant Church, and others (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 954). With these facts in mind, the limitations of class theory become evident in terms of its inability to predict and explain the mitigating role of institutions in preventing people from voting for the Nazi Party in the Weimar Republic election of 1933.

The Utility of Class Theory

Despite its shortcomings, class theory enables a Marxist conflict analysis that frames the answer to the basic research question as a function of class (i.e., socio-economic and political) strife, dissension, and even radicalization. Further, “class theory holds that a different democratic and extremist form of political expression forms for each social group” (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 954). Uniquely, class theory would, therefore, explain Hitler’s victory in the Weimar Republic election of 1933 as a result of the fact that the Weimar Republic itself was a bastion of political factions. In the election, as accurately observed, there were nothing short of six major political factions representing the Social Democratic Party of Germany; German State Party; Communist Party of Germany; German Centre Party; Bavarian Party and the Black-White-Red Struggle Front (Evans 340). Class theory further suggests that people tend to gravitate to a political faction or group that most closely represents their viewpoints and attitudes. It must be kept in mind that the Weimar Republic during the late 1920s and early 1930s was becoming more and more radicalized - that is, characterized by increasingly “extremist expression” (King, Rose, Tanner and Wagner 954). As such, the Nazis were able to win the Weimar Republic election of 1933, at least in part, by drawing the growing radicalized voter segment of German society to the polls.

Education Influence of the Weimar Republic Election of 1933

Even though mass society theory and class theory have provided the traditional explanations of Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party victory in the Weimar Republic Election of 1933, the previous discussion has made it quite evident that these frameworks, at best, offer only a partial answer to the basic research question of the current study. The rest of the answer is about the systematic education of Nazi youth in the years preceding the election. In fact, by the time of the Weimar Republic election of 1933, many inculcated Nazi youth were 18 years of age and older; they were grown adults of diverse socio-economic and political classes, and most importantly; they were eager voters ready to help the Nazi Party pull off the monumental victory at the polls. With these facts in mind, the following section of the current study provides an analysis of the education of Nazi Youth in the years preceding Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party victory in the Weimar Republic election of 1933.

The Real Story Begins in 1922

The real story of Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party victory in the Weimar Republic election of 1933 begins more than a decade prior. In fact, in 1922, Hitler and his young political ally, Gustav Adolf Lenk, were already planning and implementing their self-conceived social re-engineering program. Hitler and Lenk shared the common vision of an ideologically unified Germany. Hitler’s genius, if any can be attributed to him, was in realizing that the achievement of his vision would require a profound change in the thinking of German citizens. He wanted them, more exactly, to embrace the misconstrued myth of Aryan supremacy and his vital role as the would-be Fuhrer. But this, as Hitler well knew, was something that would require time and patience. As such, Hitler and Lenk focused their devices on the education or, perhaps more accurately, on the indoctrination of German youth. In 1922, Hitler and Lenk would, therefore, establish the Jugendbund - the first Nazi Youth League (Cmarada n.p.). Together, they would take significant steps in developing and implementing the tactics and means for indoctrinating German youth over the next decade.

Nazi Youth Education Gains Momentum

As history tells, Hitler himself would be ushered off to prison for political subversion in 1923, but the Nazi Youth Movement had already made its ideological mark in the minds of thousands of German youth. Upon his release from prison in 1926, Hitler emerged with renewed fervor for reorganizing his Nazi youth education system. In fact, within weeks of his freedom, Hitler immediately announced that “he would re-found the Nazi Party, as well as the Youth League” and give control of the youth league to Kurt Gruber (Cmarada n.d.). Gruber was very much a man of Hitler’s likeness in the sense that his personal passion was all about enrapturing the minds of impressionable young German boys and girls. In a symbol of things to come, Gruber and his Nazi associates designed “the first Hitler Youth style uniforms featuring a brown shirt and black shorts and a [red] armband with a [black] Nazi swastika” (Cmarada n.p.). Over the next several years, enrollment in the Hitler Jugend, Bund der Deutschen Arbeiterjugend (a.k.a., Hitler Youth) blossomed into tens of thousands. As Hitler Youth members reached the age of 18, the Nazi indoctrination process further intensified. In fact, by 1927 all Nazi Youth, upon reaching 18 years of age, were required to join the Nazi Party and become storm troopers (Cmarada n.p.). Scores of these indoctrinated Nazi Youth who were now entering young adulthood and would soon become the ground workers, so to speak, for Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party victory in the Weimar Republic election of 1933.

The Breadth and Scope of Hitler’s Nazi Youth Education Program

The growth of Hitler’s Nazi Youth Education program was nothing short of phenomenal. In fact, the numbers speak for themselves in terms of how Hitler was able to establish a willing and enthusiastic force of supporters and voters for the 1933 election. By 1929, for example, the Hitler Youth had expanded “from 80 branches with 700 members in 1926 to some 450 branches with 13000 members” (Cmarada n.p.). Hitler would not, however, stop there. Over the next three years, the future dictator of Germany would intensify the growth of his Nazi Youth education program through aggressive institutionalization. Adolf Hitler, in effect, mandated policies requiring unrelenting indoctrination of Nazi Youth regarding ideas like the superiority of the German race, the evilness of the Jews and the Communists, and the German peoples’ collective right to reclaim European dominance. Beginning in 1931, efforts further intensified with the establishment of the Young Workers’ School in Berlin. This institution and others like it helped spread the ideals of Nazism across the nation with rapidity and zeal. As a result, by the time of the 1933 Weimar Republic election, the Hitler Youth education program had helped the Nazi Party become the largest political entity in Germany; victory in the Weimar Republic election of 1933 was virtually assured for Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party (Cmarada n.d.).

Conclusion

In the final analysis, the current study has addressed the research question: how did Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party win the Weimar Republic election of 1933? Findings of the current study indicate that mass society theory and class theory provide, at least, partial answers to the research question. Mass society theory accurately tells, for example, that after years of social and economic suffering, the German masses turned to the most vocal political alternative - namely, the charismatic Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime. Similarly, class theory reveals that the Nazis were able to win the Weimar Republic election of 1933, at least in part, by drawing the growing radicalized voter segment of German society to the polls. A more complete treatment of the basic research question requires, however, an accounting of the role of education in the Weimar Republic election of 1933. In this respect, the current study has shown that for more than ten years prior to the 1933 elections, the steady growth of the Hitler Youth program helped Adolf Hitler and the Nazis effectively capture the minds, imaginations, and souls of tens of thousands of German boys and girls. Hitler Youth were taught with growing fervency and obsession about the mythical superiority of the German race, the evilness of the Jews and the Communists, and the German peoples’ collective right to reclaim European dominance. Hitler, in effect, was able to reshape the prevailing ideology and norms of German society itself through his Hitler Youth education program. By the day of the Weimar Republic election on March 5, 1933, many former Hitler Youth had grown into zealous adult supporters of the Nazi Party. Even further, literally thousands of Hitler Youth filled the streets on the day of election enthusiastically rallying voters and supporting Nazi candidates. The Hitler Youth education program had helped make the Nazi Party the largest political party in Germany. Victory for Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party in the Weimar Republic election of 1933 was virtually guaranteed. Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime would, thereafter, march Germany and the entire world towards the most horrific and deadly global conflagration in history. Tragically enough, all could have been prevented if world leaders and policymakers of the day had simply read the proverbial writing on the wall – writing, more exactly, that was fully visible during the nearly two decades that the Hitler Youth program brainwashed entire generations and prepared a nation for unrepentant and ill-fated assault on the free world.

Works Cited

Bell, Daniel. "The Theory of Mass Society." Commentary 22.1: 193-198. July 1956. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. <http://www.cos.edu/Faculty/JohnD/Documents/PS%20MASS%20SOCIETY%20DANIEL%20>BELL.pdf>

Cmarada, Jake. The Nazification of German Society, Ithaca University. n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. <http://www.ithaca.edu/history/journal/papers/fa03Nazification.htm>

Evans, Richard J. The Coming of the Third Reich, Penguin Books: New York. 2004. Print.

King, Gary, Ori Rose, Martin Tanner, and Alexander F. Wagner. “Ordinary Economic Voting Behavior in the Extraordinary Election of Adolf Hitler,” The Journal of Economic History 68.4. December 2008. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/naziVp_0.pdf

Lang, Kurt and Gladys Engel Lang. Mass Society, Mass Culture, and Mass Communication: The Meaning of Mass, International Journal of Communication 3, 2009: 998-1024. <http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/597/407>

Meier, David A. Adolf Hitler's Rise to Power. 2000. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. http://www2.dsu.nodak.edu/users/dmeier/Holocaust/hitler.html