Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:08:50.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The German Presidental Election of 1932*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Harwood L. Childs
Harwood L. Childs
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The second regular presidential election held in Germany since the adoption of the present constitution was completed on April 10, following the failure of each of the five candidates to poll a majority of the popular votes at the first election on March 13. As a result of the election, President Paul von Hindenburg was reflected for another term of seven years beginning May 5. This election was important, first, because the Weimar constitutional system was threatened, and secondly, because the threatening force, Hitlerism, if victorious, not only presaged a profound change in the existing form of government in Germany, but might have been the prelude to internal strife, affecting the financial stake of the world in Germany, and possibly endangering international peace.

Type
Foreign Governments and Politics
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , June 1932 , pp. 486 - 496
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1932

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Presidential nominations may be made in one of two ways: by petitions signed by 20,000 eligible voters, or by a group or party proposal signed by only 20 voters, if such group or party has a representative in the Beichstag and received at least 500,000 votes at the last Reichstag election. Gesetz über die Wahl des Reichspräsidenten, March 6, 1924, par. 2.

2 For a good discussion of the nature of modern political parties in Germany, see ProfessorNeumann, S., “Die Deutschen Parteien”, Junker und Dünnhaupt, 1932Google Scholar.

3 As disclosed in an article by Müller, Johannes, Protestant pastor in Leipzig, entitled, “Die Evangelischen und der Staat”, Frankfurter Zeitung, April 8, 1932Google Scholar.

4 Unemployment figures for March 31, 1932, were 6,031,000, of which 1,579,000 received regular unemployment insurance, 1,744,000 emergency aid. Others were supported by private or local aid.

5 Dr.Kaisenberg, Georg, Die Wahl des Beichspräsidenten (Carl Heymanns, 1932), supp. chap., p. 4Google Scholar.

6 Handbuch für das Deutsche Reich (1931), pp. 6–8Google Scholar.

7 Jahrbuch der Berufsverbände im Deutschen Reiche (1930), p. 43Google Scholar.

8 Organisationsbudh des Reichs-Landbundes (1930), p. 10Google Scholar.

9 Jahrbuch der Berufsverbände im Deutschen Reiche (1930), p. 58Google Scholar.

10 Geschäftsbericht des Deutschen Beamtenbundes (1930), p. 324Google Scholar.

11 Among the more important non-party organizations officially supporting Hindenburg were: the Arbeitsgemeinschaft vereinigten Vertreter der katholischen Verbände, claiming over 2,000,000 qualified voters; the three workers' federations mentioned above, with a total membership of more than 6,500,000; the Reichsbanner, the Deutsche Offiziersbund, and a large number of the member organizations of the Deutscher Beamtenbund. The Reichslandbund came out for Hitler in the second election. The Stahlhelm, which supported Duesterberg in the first election, took no official stand in the second. The business organizations, such as the Reichsverband der Deutschen Industrie, took no official position in either election.

12 Hitler became a German citizen shortly before the election by becoming an official of the government of the state of Braunschweig, one of the seventeen German Länder. It is not necessary for the president of Germany to be a native-born citizen.

13 There are at present in Germany ten broadcasting companies, with sixteen substations. All of these companies are now members of a central organization really under the control of the Post Office Department, which holds 51 per cent of the stock of the central organization, which in turn controls 55.1 per cent of the capital of the member companies.

14 According to the financial report of the Allgemeiner Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund for the year 1930, the total income of all the affiliated trade unions amounted to 29,795,653.97 marks, of which 20,739,629.41 marks were derived from dues. These figures do not, of course, have anything directly to do with campaign finances, but merely suggest the financial strength of one of the largest trade union federations in Germany, which in 1932 actively supported the Social Democratic party and the cause of Hindenburg.

15 The total income of the Social Democratic party for 1930 was 4,140,004 marks, of which at least 2,000,000 marks were spent for general agitation. Jahrbuch der Deutschen Sozialdemocratie (1930), p. 303Google Scholar.

16 See Lewinsohn, Richard, “Das Geld in der Politik” (S. Fischer, 1931), pp. 52–121Google Scholar.

17 Frankfurter Zeitung, April 12, 1932, p. 2Google Scholar.

18 The Hindenburg parties were: the German People's party, Agricultural party, German Hannoverian party, People's party, Christian Socialists, Center party, Bavarian People's party, Farmers' League, Economic, Democratic, and Social Democratic parties. “Die Ergebnisse der Reichspräsidentenwahlen am 13. März, 1932,” report published by the minister of the Department of the Interior.

19 The exact quotation is “Also geht hin und werbt für Hindenburg. Und tut ihr es nicht aus Liebe, so tut es aus Hass.” Leading editorial, “Von Ebert—zu Hitler?” in the principal organ of the Social Democratic party, Vorwärts, February 28, 1932.

20 Fear of communism seems to have been one of the reasons why the government tolerated the Hitler “army” for so long. With this fear removed after the results of the election were known, belief in Hitler's promise gave way to distrust and a desire to cripple the movement. On April 13, 1932, President von Hindenburg issued a special decree abolishing these National Socialist organizations.

21 A political classification of German newspapers in 1930 gives the following results: German Nationalists, 373 (Hugenburg); Central party, 308; Bavarian People's party, 126; Social Democratic party, 149; National Socialists (1931), 44; German People's party, 42; Economic party, 26; Democratic party, 72. For a complete list, see Handbuch der Weltpresse (Carl Duncker, 1931)Google Scholar.

22 It may be of interest to cite some of the slogans, taken from a collection of about 100 different posters. “Unsere letzte Hoffnung ist Adolf Hitler”; “Das letzte Stück Brot raubt ihnen der Kapitalismus, wählt Thälmann”; “Schluss jetzt mit Hitlers Volksverhetzung, wählt Hindenburg”; “Entscheidet die Zukunft eurer Kinder”; “Haltet ein mit der Deutschen Selbstzerfleischung, wahlt Hindenburg”; “Ein Mann gegen Parteikadaver und Interessenhaufen—Hitler” (forbidden); “Landvolk in Not. Wer hilft? Hitler”; “Mit ihm—Hindenburg”; “Wir nehmen das Schicksal der Nation in die Hande—Hitler wird Reichspräsident”; “Frontsoldaten deutsche Männer und Frauen—Gebt die Antwort”; “Er hält zu Euch, haltet ihm die Treue.”

23 This conclusion is well elaborated in an article by Zehrer, Hans, “Die Frühjahrs offensive”, in Die Tat, April, 1932, pp. 1–14Google Scholar.

24 On April 5, 1932, Hitler published his “program,” the section headings of which were: 1. Citizens and workers must become Germans; 2. The authority of leadership must take the place of the parliamentary system; 3. Saving the farmer means saving the German nation; 4. Down with Bolshevism; 5. Business must serve the people; 6. Protect the workingman; 7. The family is the bed-rock of the state; 8. State morality is the basis of public welfare. Völlcischer Beobachter, April 5, 1932, p. 2Google Scholar.

25 How impossible it is to determine exactly how the votes lost to the Communists, German Nationalists, and Winter were really distributed is shown clearly in an article “Die Stimmen-Verschiebung” in Das Tagebuch, April 16, 1932Google Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.