Paul von Hindenberg's Role in Aiding Hitler's Rise to Power - Research Paper Example

PAUL VON HINDENBERG: HISTORIOGRAPHY INTRODUCTION Much of the facts that one knows about the events leading to and during the second world war have been through several works and recorded recollections that have depicted the enormous contributions made by several historians over a long period of time. Within the context of WWII, the most common name that comes to mind is that of Adolf Hitler and the people within his leadership. One of the most well known personalities in this regard, who has played a major role in paving the way for Hitler to take control of Germany, is Paul Von Hindenberg. Several historians have recorded and discussed the events and details of the life of Paul Von Hindenberg and his role in aiding Hitler’s rise to power has been the topic of constant debate over the years. The current paper is an attempt towards highlighting some of the arguments that have been made over the years in the form of several works and publications that are believed to be helpful in bringing in a sense of clarity into the topic. Prior to providing a historiographic overview of Paul von Hindenberg, it is deemed important to provide a brief overview of Hindenberg and gain an insight into the chronological events surrounding his life. Hindenberg’s earliest rise to power came during the First World War when he was one of the senior most military figures in the German aggression. Born in 1847 in the then state of Prussia, Hindenberg had served in the Austro-Prussian War in 1866 as well as the Franco-Prussian war during 1870. Having retired in 1911, he was recalled to contribute during the First World War owing to his reputation as an effective military strategist. The war saw an immense rise in his popularity that eventually allowed him to shadow the reigning Kaiser Wilhelm II (John Wheeler Wheeler-Bennett, 1936). Despite Germany’s defeat in the war, Hindenberg was highly regarded as a war hero, which helped him become the president of Germany. The great depression and the corresponding civil unrest fuelled by the Nazis led people to view him as a sort of protection against Nazi brutality. However, many within his inner circle are known to harbor support for the Nazis as a useful group that could be accommodated. Despite the fall of two successive governments and constant pressure from Hitler to become chancellor, Hindenberg is known to have resisted it from occurring. This led Hitler to seek an alternative route to get him placed in the seats of power, which further allowed him to garner tremendous political power through manipulation and terror tactics. On the public aspect, Hitler was always respectful of Hindenberg and continued to be so until the latter passed away in August, 1934 (Henry Ashby Turner, 1997). However, despite the fact that Hitler was doing everything he could to seize power and the Reich, there have been several arguments over whether Hindenburg was passive towards Hitler’s advances and whether he did indeed remain unopposed to the thrust of the Nazi party. The discussions are often aligned against Hindenburg’s popularity, which continued to allow him to be remaining in power and thus prevent Hitler from overthrowing the constitutional government until Hindenburg’s death in 1934. As such, the coming section will discuss the opinions and observations of several historians, who have documented the events revolving around Hindenberg and the conditions that influenced him to take decisions that helped him remain popular with the public. ANALYSIS Historians have been able to carefully analyze the life of Hindenberg has been through a variety of sources. Some of these sources happen to be letters and books written by Hindenberg to several people during his lifetime. Several other interpretations are secondary in nature and have their foundations in records from other people who lived during that time and explained the events and they perceived them to be. As such, these secondary sources are understood to contain information that is increasingly based on opinion and belief apart from absolute observation of events and conditions as they had occurred or existed. During his letter to the imperial chancellor in 1916, Hindenberg highlights the importance of providing appropriate food to the people involved in the war. In this letter, he emphasizes the need to provide sufficient nutrition to not only the people fighting along the frontlines, but also to the people who were working tirelessly in the background in the munitions factories that were producing the weapons required to wage a successful war. This clearly highlights the intellectual and strategic genius of the man in that he certainly recognized a war as a collective effort and believed that it did not rest solely on soldiers fighting in the battlefield (Russell A. Berman, 1987). As such, Hindenberg is thought to have believed that it was essential for the state to lead all men from all parties and backgrounds as leaders of the army if a decisive battle was to be fought in a favorable manner. this belief in collective action and ensuring that everyone in the society derived the benefits is also one of the prime reasons, which allowed him to stay as a popular president and prevented the Nazi party from seizing power as long as he was alive. In his own autobiography titled ‘Out of my life’, Hindenberg displays his acumen that makes one think that he was certainly more than a military general. as part of his reflection over the First World War, Hindenberg cites the way in which the power of moral strength was much more than anything else in winning a war decisively by describing the manner in which the English had used armored tanks for inflicting defeat on the Germans. Hindenberg had all along believed that the German defeat at the war had been the result of the degradation of moral strength as fallout of comparative invulnerability, which he believed was far more imminent than the mere physical destruction inflicted by the British. As he quotes-‘The infantryman felt that he was practically nothing against the armored sides of the tank’ (Robert B. Asprey, 2005). This tremendous moral courage is also seen to be a major contributing factor that helped Hindenberg motivate people, especially during the time of the depression, where civil unrest combined with interference from the Nazis was causing havoc in the German society. Hindenberg has all along known to be a staunch nationalist and the viewed the German defeat as more than a victory for the allies. He constantly believed the English to be an enemy and always looked at the allies as adversaries. This is particularly evident in his analysis of the development efforts undertaken by the allies in the following years of the war and his thoughts on how Germany could overcome and emerge to become a military and economic giant. Apart from advocating the use of U-boats, which Nazi Germany would use extensively later to inflict heavy initial damages on the English, Hindenberg also believed that it was important to become self sufficient in all respects thereby enhancing the efforts to reduce imports in all sectors (Louis Leo Snyder, 1982). Gustav Streseman, who served as foreign minister under the Weimar republic noted that the successful and determining element in the political scenario during that time (1920s and early 1930s) was characterized predominantly by the element of personality (on the part of Hindenberg) and that any other factor stood minimized in front of this driving force. He further notes that Hindenberg’s opponents were aware of this significance and pursued every avenue to discredit him, but could not achieve anything that would undermine the progress of Hindenberg to the chancellorship of Germany. Several historians have further noted concerns over the ageing burden and the ill health of Hindenberg, which were eclipsed by the mention and popularity of the great name that had its own effect on the elections each time (Charles Messenger, 2006). They further note that Hindenberg was successful in helping a major voter turnout during the elections, which go on to substantiate the populist nature of his government. Thus, the defeat in the First World War had not done anything to undermine the reputation of the Great commander, who had overseen many successful battles in the past. However, despite immense popularity on the political stage, Hindenberg’s decisions, especially during the later years were heavily influenced by members in the coalition and did not go well. His replacing of the German chancellor, Bruning, was openly criticized as an objective destruction of German democracy. Further, future chancellors such as Papen found their way to the chancellery through influence and flattery and the years 1932-33 would witness infighting within the democratic government. In mid 1932, the Reichstag was dissolved at the behest of Schleicher, which helped the Nazis emerge victorious. Despite Hitler’s firm demands to be made chancellor, Hindenberg is known to have remained opposed to it all along. He further humiliated Hitler by making the proceedings of the meeting public, which widened the rift between the two (Robert B. Asprey, 2005). The subsequent elections could not prevent the Nazis from becoming the largest party in the Reichstag is known to have led Hindenberg to feel fear and pressure as he believed it would enable the establishment of absolute dictatorship and believed that a Germany under Nazism would seek an extreme aggravation for all conflicts. However, the constant pressure from several political aides finally forced Hindenberg to appoint Hitler as the new Chancellor of Germany. CONCLUSION The events in the political life of Paul Von Hindenberg discussed above highlight the fact that for most part of his life, Hindenberg was a strong and popular nationalist, who believed in popular politics and took decisions in the interest of the state. It is also clear that while his aim for developing Germany militarily was aimed at empowering the state, he clearly understood the danger that awaited if the Nazis came to power and resisted them as long as he could. However, Old health and constant pressure from several political friends including his own son eventually compelled him to take the drastic steps of appointing Hitler as chancellor, the outcome of which is even talked to this day as the Second World War. REFERENCES 1. John Wheeler Wheeler-Bennett (1936), Wooden Titan: Hindenburg in Twenty Years of German History, 1914-1934. London: W.Morrow & Co. 2. Henry Ashby Turner (1997), Hitler's thirty days to power: January 1933. New York: Perseus. 3. Russell A. Berman (1987), Paul Von Hindenburg. London: Chelsea House. 4. Robert B. Asprey (2005), The German High Command at War: Hindenburg and Ludendorff Conduct World War I. London: W.Morrow & Co. 5. Louis Leo Snyder (1982), Hitler's Third Reich: a documentary history. University of Michigan. 6. Charles Messenger (2006), The Great War. London: Greenhill. Read More