Key facts and dates

The period of 1931-1932 was a critical juncture in German history, marked by economic collapse, political instability, and the rise of extremist parties. This timeline captures the key events that deepened the crisis of the Weimar Republic and paved the way for significant political change.

Timeline of key events

• 1931-1932 – Brüning's austerity policies worsen economic hardship during the Great Depression.
• March-April 1932 – Presidential election sees Hindenburg re-elected with Hitler gaining 37% in the second round.
• May 1932 – Chancellor Brüning dismissed by Hindenburg.
• June 1932 – Franz von Papen appointed as chancellor.
• July 1932 – Reichstag election results in NSDAP as largest party with 37.3% of votes.
• November 1932 – Reichstag election shows Nazi vote decline to 33.1%, KPD rises to 16.9%.
• December 1932 – Kurt von Schleicher becomes chancellor.

Brüning's austerity policies and the deepening economic crisis

During 1931-1932, Germany was gripped by the effects of the Great Depression, which severely impacted the Weimar Republic's stability. Chancellor Heinrich Brüning, in office since 1930, implemented harsh economic measures in an attempt to stabilise the country, but these policies often exacerbated the crisis.

Nature and impact of austerity measures

• Cuts to public spending - Brüning reduced government expenditure, including welfare benefits and public sector wages, to balance the budget and meet reparations payments under the Treaty of Versailles.
• Tax increases - Higher taxes were imposed on an already struggling population, further reducing disposable income and deepening public discontent.
• Economic consequences - These measures led to skyrocketing unemployment, reaching over 6 million by 1932, as businesses collapsed and living standards plummeted.
• Political fallout - The widespread suffering alienated large sections of the population from the Weimar government, driving support towards extremist parties promising radical solutions.

The presidential election of March-April 1932

The presidential election of 1932 was a pivotal moment, reflecting the deep divisions within German society. President Paul von Hindenburg, a conservative figurehead, sought re-election against challengers including Adolf Hitler of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), often referred to as the Nazis.

Key developments in the election

• First round (March 1932) - No candidate secured an absolute majority, with Hindenburg leading but facing strong competition from Hitler, who capitalised on economic despair and nationalist sentiment.
• Second round (April 1932) - Hindenburg was re-elected with 53% of the vote, supported by moderates and social democrats fearing a Nazi victory. Hitler, however, gained a significant 37%, showcasing the growing appeal of the NSDAP.
• Significance - Hitler's strong performance, despite the loss, demonstrated the Nazis' rising influence and shifted political momentum towards extremism, alarming democratic forces.

The Reichstag elections of July and November 1932

The two Reichstag elections in 1932 reflected the volatile political landscape, with shifting voter support and the increasing dominance of extremist parties. These elections highlighted the fragmentation of traditional political blocs and the rise of radical ideologies.

Results and implications of the elections

Analysis of political shifts

• July 1932 election - The NSDAP emerged as the largest party with 37.3% of the vote, capitalising on economic misery and disillusionment with democracy. The Communist Party (KPD) also gained ground, while the Social Democratic Party (SPD) lost support, reflecting a polarised electorate.
• November 1932 election - The Nazi vote declined to 33.1%, possibly indicating a peak in their momentum, while the KPD increased to 16.9%, showing growing support for communism among the working class.
• Fragmentation - Neither election produced a workable parliamentary majority, as moderate parties like the SPD and Centre Party could not counterbalance the extremists, deepening the political deadlock.

The rapid succession of chancellors and increasing ungovernability

The political instability of 1932 was starkly illustrated by the rapid turnover of chancellors, reflecting Hindenburg's struggle to find a stable government amid parliamentary chaos. This revolving door of leadership further eroded confidence in the Weimar system.

Sequence of chancellors in 1932

• Heinrich Brüning (until May 1932) - Dismissed by Hindenburg due to unpopularity over austerity and failure to curb economic decline, despite earlier reliance on emergency decrees.
• Franz von Papen (June to November 1932) - Appointed as a conservative alternative, von Papen lacked parliamentary support and governed through presidential decrees, alienating many with his authoritarian style.
• Kurt von Schleicher (December 1932) - A military figure appointed in a last-ditch effort to stabilise the government, Schleicher also failed to build a coalition and lasted only weeks before his downfall.

Challenges to governance

• No parliamentary majority - The fragmented Reichstag made forming a stable coalition impossible, as extremist parties refused to cooperate with moderates.
• Erosion of democratic norms - The reliance on short-term chancellors and bypassing parliament highlighted the breakdown of democratic governance, pushing Germany towards authoritarian solutions.

The role of presidential decrees and rising political violence

With the Reichstag paralysed, presidential decrees became a critical tool for governance under Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution. At the same time, political violence escalated on the streets, reflecting the intense ideological battles of the time.

Presidential decrees under Article 48

• Governance through emergency powers - Hindenburg increasingly used emergency powers to pass laws without parliamentary approval, a practice started under Brüning and continued by von Papen and Schleicher. This allowed temporary stability but undermined democratic principles.
• Limits of decrees - While they kept the government functioning, decrees could not address underlying economic or social crises, nor could they reconcile the deep political divisions.

Escalation of street violence

• Clashes between paramilitaries - The Nazi Sturmabteilung (SA), Communist paramilitary groups, and the Reichsbanner (a pro-democracy militia linked to the SPD) engaged in frequent violent confrontations, turning streets into battlegrounds.
• Impact on society - This violence created a climate of fear and instability, further polarising the population and making ordinary governance nearly impossible. It also emboldened extremist groups, particularly the Nazis, who thrived on chaos.

Evaluation of whether democracy could have survived

The crisis of 1931-1932 raises critical questions about the viability of the Weimar Republic and whether different circumstances or actions could have preserved democracy. This period serves as a case study in the fragility of democratic systems under extreme stress.

Factors affecting democracy's survival

• Impact of the Great Depression - The economic collapse was a primary driver of political instability. Had the Depression ended sooner, mass unemployment and despair might have been alleviated, reducing support for extremist parties like the NSDAP and KPD.
• Role of political elites - Decisions by Hindenburg and other leaders, such as the dismissal of Brüning and reliance on decrees, weakened democratic institutions. A more unified stance among moderate parties to resist extremists, or greater compromise, might have stabilised the government.
• Missed opportunities - The failure to form coalitions between centrist and moderate leftist parties (like the SPD and Centre Party) against the Nazis and Communists left democracy vulnerable. Stronger leadership or international economic support could have altered the trajectory.
• Conclusion of potential survival - While an economic recovery or more astute political manoeuvring might have delayed the collapse, deep-seated issues like the legacy of Versailles, social polarisation, and the allure of authoritarian promises made democracy's survival highly uncertain by 1932.