Free Sample Essays > European History
Weimar Germany 1924 – 1929.‘How far were successive Weimar Governments able to bring stability to Germany’s foreign relations, economic and political positions in the period 1924 to 1929?”
was an ominous development from the point of view of supporters of the Republic. He was a monarchist and an honorary chairman of the Stahlhelm. He has been backed by 14 million Germans and was now in a position to undermine Weimar from within. In fact Hindenburg, until at least 1930, conducted himself in public in a generally restrained and non partisan way. There were occasions however, that he made clear his anti-Weimar sympathies. In 1926 he openly opposed a KDP-SDP proposal to nationalise property belonging to Germany’s former royal families. Later in that year he issued a decree saying Germany’s embassies abroad should fly a black-red-white flag, the colours of the pre-1918 empire, alongside the flag with the colours of the Weimar republic. This leads to doubt as to whether the republic was safe in Hindenburg's hands.
c) Political Violence; there were no positive major attempts to seize power by force in this period.
However, there were new forms of political violence formed, this was when the Nazi’s took the lead, and on his release from prison in December 1924, Hitler committed the NSDAP to the so-called policy of ‘legality’. It involved contesting elections, and the object was to build a new power base in the Reichstag while also using the SA to destabilise the republic by street violence. Between 1924 and 1929, Nazi's were killed in street fighting with the KPD and hundreds injured. Berlin was the scene of the worst clashes. One brutal clash between the KPD and the authorities in Berlin in May 1929 left 30 dead and 200 injured. The sentence, “paramilitary violence was to intensify in the early 1930’s,” shows that things did not get any better after 1929. The weapons that were associated with this political violence were the club, knuckle-duster, a broken bottle and a revolver.
‘Golden Years’ or Not??
White argues that any conclusion about this period as ‘Golden Years’ depends on the perspective from which they are viewed. He does this by writing, “whether of not the years between 1924 and 1929 can be reasonably described as “golden” depends in the end on the perspective from which they are viewed. If they are compared with what preceded them within Germany and with what followed them they are golden. If, alternatively, Germany in these years is compared to other democratic states, ‘golden years’ scarcely seems appropriate.”
I think that the phrase “relative stability” is in general more realistic than the phrase “a golden period”, as the period was not necessarily ‘golden’ in every way. There were some seen faults with this period, however there were some points at this time that were a huge progress or change, and therefore the period was relatively stable. In conclusion I agree with the “relative stability” phrase more than the “a golden period” phrase as a manner of describing Weimar Germany from 1924 – 1929.