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

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        7 months ago

        So you admit that the problem is a moderate party half-assing elections because they think they can coast on not being “other guy”. Democrats help trump because they’d rather have fascism than threaten the bottom line of their rich donors. How do you think it got this bad in the first place? Did you think democrats were the bastion of progress?

        • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          The Democratic Party is largely conservative and reactionary. There are some progressive elements because progressives have nowhere else to go. The US election system is fucked and undemocratic. It needs to change.

          Still, not voting for Democrats achieves absolutely nothing but costing them a vote they need against the literal fascists of the Republican Party.

        • Godric@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yeah, the problem is a moderate party half-assing elections because they think they can coast on not being “other guy”. The SDP help Hitler because they’d rather have fascism than threaten the bottom line of their rich donors. How do you think it got this bad in the first place? Did you think the SDP were the bastion of progress?

          The old saying about not learning and being doomed to repeat history really is depressing when you see it happen in real time.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            What lesson? That the rich and powerful will eventually make every society circle the drain and fighting it off just delays the inevitable?

            Or is your intellectual take giving a free pass to the most powerful in society and saddling those with the least amount of power with the bulk of the responsibility?