It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hitler never gained a majority! History IS interesting

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 12:45 PM
There is a widely-held belief that Hitler came to power via legitimate means. The reality is a story of intimidation, violence and an audacious false-flag operation:

How Hitler became a dictator

Here's the key passage:

On January 30, 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler chancellor of Germany. Although the National Socialists never captured more than 37 percent of the national vote, and even though they still held a minority of cabinet posts and fewer than 50 percent of the seats in the Reichstag, Hitler and the Nazis set out to to consolidate their power. With Hitler as chancellor, that proved to be a fairly easy task.

The Reichstag fire

On February 27, Hitler was enjoying supper at the Goebbels home when the telephone rang with an emergency message: “The Reichstag is on fire!” Hitler and Goebbels rushed to the fire, where they encountered Hermann Goering, who would later become Hitler’s air minister. Goering was shouting at the top of his lungs,

This is the beginning of the Communist revolution! We must not wait a minute. We will show no mercy. Every Communist official must be shot, where he is found. Every Communist deputy must this very day be strung up.
The day after the fire, the Prussian government announced that it had found communist publications stating,

Government buildings, museums, mansions and essential plants were to be burned down... . Women and children were to be sent in front of terrorist groups.... The burning of the Reichstag was to be the signal for a bloody insurrection and civil war.... It has been ascertained that today was to have seen throughout Germany terrorist acts against individual persons, against private property, and against the life and limb of the peaceful population, and also the beginning of general civil war.

So how was Goering so certain that the fire had been set by communist terrorists? Arrested on the spot was a Dutch communist named Marinus van der Lubbe. Most historians now believe that van der Lubbe was actually duped by the Nazis into setting the fire and probably was even assisted by them, without his realizing it.

Why would Hitler and his associates turn a blind eye to an impending terrorist attack on their national congressional building or actually assist with such a horrific deed? Because they knew what government officials have known throughout history — that during extreme national emergencies, people are most scared and thus much more willing to surrender their liberties in return for “security.” And that’s exactly what happened during the Reichstag terrorist crisis.

Suspending civil liberties

The day after the fire, Hitler persuaded President Hindenburg to issue a decree entitled, “For the Protection of the People and the State.” Justified as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state,” the decree suspended the constitutional guarantees pertaining to civil liberties:

Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications; and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

Two weeks after the Reichstag fire, Hitler requested the Reichstag to temporarily delegate its powers to him so that he could adequately deal with the crisis. Denouncing opponents to his request, Hitler shouted, “Germany will be free, but not through you!” When the vote was taken, the result was 441 for and 84 against, giving Hitler the two-thirds majority he needed to suspend the German constitution. On March 23, 1933, what has gone down in German history as the “Enabling Act” made Hitler dictator of Germany, freed of all legislative and constitutional constraints.

The full article is well worth a read.

Makes you think, doesn't it?..

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:19 PM
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Good stuff friend!

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:21 PM
this method as been very popular throughout history its not even suprising anymore

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by pause4thought
Good OP
I hope it catches the attention of others. There's also a widely held myth that Hitler was a loser...a failure, a crap soldier and a failed artist etc. The horrendous crimes against humanity have overwhelmed most people's perception of Hitler.

From post-Great War anonymity he contrived and schemed his way to power and moved Germany away from the financial poverty of the Weimar Republic. Historians regard the turnaround as one of the greatest economic recoveries of the 20th Century. His charisma and intelligence as a leader is evident at the early Nuremberg Rallies. How fitting that many of his inner circle met their ends at the Nuremberg Trials.

I often wonder how Nature repeatedly creates these anomalous characters that have such an impact on the course of history. The Khans, Napoleons, Alexanders and Caesars are like boulders thrown into a pool. They make a huge splash and the ripples are felt everywhere. It's about time one of these 'anomalies' arose as a force that was beneficial to humanity instead of representing war. Imagine what Hitler could have accomplished if he had turned his freaky ass attention to being a force for good instead of debasing humanity?

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:42 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky

I firmly bilieve that nobody who is "making big splash",by your definition, can - even if he wants to - do more good things then bad things. Wars,conquests and revolutions are splashes that kill and destroy much more then they help to.
Person X helping person Y however works, and this is how it should be done. Guys like X or like Y should know that helping each other is cool/sexy/good/positive. The only thing guys at the top should do is to help this simple idea go through. Not force their view down the throats.
So please, no enforced master plans for common good by charismatic leaders. It will end up bad.

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:49 PM
Thanks to all who've indicated the importance of this topic.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

I understand your very legitimate concerns. The reality is that the Ghandis of this world are few & far between. Occasionally they do arise, but they are the exception, because their commitment to the common good invariably involves self-sacrifice. As opposed to the sacrifice of other people's sons and daughters, for example, which is a more common ploy...

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Kandinsky

It's about time one of these 'anomalies' arose as a force that was beneficial to humanity instead of representing war. Imagine what Hitler could have accomplished if he had turned his freaky ass attention to being a force for good instead of debasing humanity?

Do you think characters like Jesus are examples of this?

And do you think that higher powers "act" though certain people? In effect are these people possessed by extremes of Ying,Yang dualistic forces so reality can be "played" out like in the movie mentioned by the OP?

Its true that Hindenburg basically had no choice however Hitler and the National Socialists were popular.

What is also interesting to note that the totality of the regieme when emplaced was perhaps overexaggerated. For example I used to assume that Germans at the time would stop in their tracks for one of Hitlers speeches being broadcast and so on. When in fact most accounts indicate that people basically ignored a lot of stuff like that and went about their everyday lives.

This has numerous implications, for me it suggests we might well have been propaganda victims ourselves. Almost as a forced comparison, making us think that dictatorships only come in one overt form.

Cool thread.

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by pause4thought
There is a widely-held belief that Hitler came to power via legitimate means.

Sad isn't it?

There are so many misconceptions about WW2, and yet it only ended 64 years ago. I find it utterly amazing that time and time again on ATS - and on other sites I visit - that so much ignorance on the subject matter is displayed. The lack of proper factual education on it is shocking.

Still, its good to see some ignorance being denied
Thank you

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:55 PM
I remember this from history class. We had a discussion on whether or not "luppe" was handicapped or something.
I thought everyone knew this.
Go canadian school system!!!

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:59 PM
It is not surprising that Hitler did not have a majority. There were more than two parties running for office. Not sure how many, but probably six. It is similar to other European countries, Italy comes to mind... At 37%, he held the highest number of supporters. I have heard Hitler won by 1 vote. I usually hear rumors like that around election time, so I go out and vote.

During of times of economic stress, like now, it is important to be even more careful in gathering information about those running for office. ATS is a great place to be right now, don't you think? You get to see rational thinkers analyze pretty much anything that comes across the table, from Jesus to UFOs.

[edit on 20-6-2009 by Jim Scott]

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 02:12 PM
reply to post by Jim Scott

Hi. You are right that European proportional representation systems open the door to small parties gaining undue influence (notably via coalitions).

...But in this case it was sheer manipulation driven by a determination to undermine the existing system:

In the presidential election held on March 13, 1932, there were four candidates: the incumbent, Field Marshall Paul von Hindenburg, Hitler, and two minor candidates, Ernst Thaelmann and Theodore Duesterberg. The results were:

Hindenburg 49.6 percent
Hitler 30.1 percent
Thaelmann 13.2 percent
Duesterberg 6.8 percent

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, almost 70 percent of the German people voted against Hitler, causing his supporter Joseph Goebbels, who would later become Hitler’s minister of propaganda, to lament in his journal, “We’re beaten; terrible outlook. Party circles badly depressed and dejected.”

Since Hindenberg had not received a majority of the vote, however, a runoff election had to be held among the top three vote-getters. On April 19, 1932, the runoff results were:

Hindenburg 53.0 percent
Hitler 36.8 percent
Thaelmann 10.2 percent

Thus, even though Hitler’s vote total had risen, he still had been decisively rejected by the German people.

Source: OP article

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 02:42 PM
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

So please, no enforced master plans for common good by charismatic leaders. It will end up bad.

'Enforced master plan' is your choice of words, not mine. Human history is driven by leaders whether we want it to be or not. Mandela and Gandhi are examples of the best traits of humanity being recognised by their deeds. Seems the only areas of life that don't have leaders are microscopic organisms, (some) insects and the plant kingdom

We're stuck with leaders and it's reasonable to hope that one day we get one that isn't a self-serving ***** (insert preferred term here).

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 08:42 PM
Thanks Pause for posting this article and showing me something new.

Interesting how Hitler just bullied his way to power.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 12:05 AM
I'm not making a point to say that I accept what Hitler did, but you also have to take into account from what mind set he came from.
It was recession, things were bad, especially for the working class, from which Hitler himself was from.
He had come home from his tour in the 1st world war only to experience what he probably felt like a lack of gratitude towards the ones who had "secured" the victory.
Unemployment, depression, "new comers" taking work from the "good German". Those are excellent tools in the hands of a reform politician, and Hitler certainly knew how to use them.

After they started taking seats in the government, they began abandoning votes on legislations they thought was inappropiate for the people and simply walked out. When they had enough seats, eventually it became impossible for the governement to do any real changes, and when people don't see any changes they turn to the one man who had a loud enough voice and a promise of better times: Hitler.

It was probably inavoidable that he would assume power. Too bad that someone with such karisma would turn his ideals into something so cruel.

[edit on 21/6/09 by flice]

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:47 AM
S and F,

Just gos to show people can not learn sometimes as I think in alot of ways I can see history repeating itself in the USA and here in the UK as more and more we are stripped of our freedoms.

Very intersting read, I was aware of some of it but was afew new tit bits.

I wish I had the capicity to learn all this so I could recite it and try enlighten people in my own way.

Lets us all work towards make our lives better four our neighbours and hopefully they will do the same for us in turn. You never know there could be peace.

We have the capacity for compassion just as much as we do for selfishness so lets at least try turn this planet around so that situations like Nazi germany can never happen again.

top topics


log in