• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    Hitler didn’t win. He was appointed Chancellor by the big parties as a compromise and abused that power.

    • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Hitler was appointed by Hindenburg, who was pressured by conservatives and capitalists, also the NSDAP was the strongest political party in both elections of 1932.

      Without the substantial support for the NSDAP initially, there would have been no reason to appoint Hitler. The idea was that Hitler and his NSDAP could create a strong and lasting conservative government, a plan that would not have been suggested without their electoral success. Therefore, the support for the NSDAP in 1932 was the key reason Hitler became Chancellor. Paul von Hindenburg distrusted and despised Adolf Hitler as an unqualified upstart but felt compelled to appoint him as Chancellor due to political pressure and the unstable situation.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Then it’s still not analogous because the Democrats and Republicans routinely go 50/50 in the US.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Specifically, he was appointed chancellor by the guy the SDP backed. How anyone can look at that and blame the KPD for running the only anti-Hitler candidate is baffling.

    • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Hitler did not have a 50% majority but the NSDAP was the strongest party, giving them a lot of leverage. If his opposition had been more unified, he wouldn’t have had a chance at becoming chancellor.