'The failure of the Weimar Republic in 1933 was due to the weakness of the Constitution.' Evaluate the validity of this point of view. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In some respects I agree with this statement because the inclusion of Articles 25 and 48 in the Constitution undermined the Reichstag by facilitating the emergence of a dictatorship after the rise of Hitler. The fundamental instability of the Weimar coalition system of government resulted in concentrated dissolutions of the Reichstag that also contributed to its ultimate capitulation. However, constitutional flaws were not solely responsible for Weimar's failure. Weimar was made vulnerable by economic factors including: the French invasion of the Ruhr, the hyperinflation crisis and the Great Depression; political factors such as the Ebert-Groener pact, Dolcstrosslegende, Germany's entrenched military culture, the background intrigues between Hitler and Papen, and Hindenburg's personal fear of a Bolshevik uprising; social factors such as the attractiveness of the policies and propaganda of the NSDAP on both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie and the radicalization of the German population following the worsening of poverty in Germany. Therefore, this statement is valid because the Constitution validly contributes to the failure of Weimar, but is not exclusively to blame. Article 25 of the Constitution allowed Hindenburg to dissolve the Reichstag and call new elections whenever he deemed it necessary. One interpretation might be that, since Hindenburg had called two federal elections in 1932 alone (in July and again in November), their close concentration highlighted the inability of the Weimar coalitions to cooperate effectively. This forced Hindenburg to seek an alternative to holding another election in 1933, which contributed to his decision to make Hitler chancellor. Revisionist historian Stephen J. Lee also suggested that the frequency of close elections had depleted funds for the Nazi campaign, which made Hitler more willing to negotiate with Papen in January 1933. A traditionalist historian might dispute this view because the attempt Schleicher's plan to split the Nazi Party by negotiating with Hitler's close associate, Gregor Strasser, in December 1932 disrupted Hitler's sense of security and made him more likely to collaborate. However, I disagree because Strasser's "betrayal" of Hitler triggered his negotiations with Papen, but underlying factors such as the depletion of NSDAP funds and the loss of 34 parliamentary seats in the November elections were more significant. Therefore, the "background intrigues" would not have seen Hitler's rise to the Chancellery without the presence of Article 25 in the Constitution and the concentrated election campaigns that followed, meaning that the claim can, in some respects, be justified. Article 48 facilitated the gradual progression from democracy to government by presidential decree. Hindenburg took advantage of the gap in the Constitution that failed to define a “national emergency” – Article 48 – to exclude the Reichstag from passing laws. This is evidenced by the decline from 98 laws passed by the Reichstag in 1930, to only 5 laws democratically passed in 1932. A revisionist historian might attribute this to the weakness of proportional representation as a system of government because the parties were so small that it was not possible to form a majority government. Coalition governments were a weak system of government because of the conflicting policies of the cooperating partiesthey meant that decisions were contested and took a long time to establish. This contributed to the failure of the Weimar Republic because after March 1930, with the formation of the Grad Coalition, which did not have the support of the majority in the Reichstag, democracy deteriorated. It facilitated Hitler's accession because he did not have to dismantle the government system to achieve an autocracy. It could be argued that there were positive aspects to the Weimar Constitution, for example the Bill of Rights which guaranteed freedom of speech and religion and equal voting rights for men and women. Proportional representation was also the most advanced European democratic system as it exactly represented the values ​​of the German voting population; however, the random assignment of Reichstag members to electoral districts alienated German citizens from their representative. The Constitution's flaws outweighed its strengths because Article 48 was a loophole that undermined the rights and political authority it granted to its citizens because presidential decree could be used to revoke those rights. Therefore the statement is valid because the Constitution contributed to the failure of Weimar by allowing an authoritarian style of government. Alternatively, it could be argued that the NSDAP would not have been able to take advantage of constitutional weaknesses without the breadth of support it amassed. Nazi ideology appealed to people because the SA presented an image of strength, discipline and unity that appealed to the unemployed and former army veterans, and Hitler's support for aggressive nationalism appealed to those who had lost their identity as German citizens due to the territory. losses confirmed by the Treaty of Versailles (which Hitler's policy of Lebensraum was committed to recovering). Unlike the KPD, the Nazi Party was aimed at the wealthy minority of German society and the working classes. Hitler achieved this by moderating his argument depending on the audience he was addressing: for example, when speaking in the industrial areas of Munich in the early 1930s, Hitler appealed to his audience by promising radical "National Socialist" changes such as confiscation of lands with large properties. and the war profits of large corporations. Hitler made clandestine deals with wealthy industrialists like Thyssen to promise that a Nazi government would not threaten their enterprise. By gaining support from both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the Nazis obtained more funding than the KPD and were able to carry out their campaign with more propaganda. Hitler's public speaking skills and advantageous commandeering of publicity (e.g. his court speech following the failed Beer Hall Putsch in 1923) meant that he was more adept at gaining the support of large groups of listeners, the who increased his political power by getting more votes in federal elections. elections. Therefore it could be argued that the claim is invalid because the Nazis could not have taken advantage of the defects of the Constitution without the collective support of the electorate. Traditionalist historians might argue that the Weimar economic crisis generated public resentment towards the Republic that contributed to its establishment. unpopularity and failure. For example, the hyperinflation crisis of 1922-23 saw the Deutsche Mark surpass four trillion US dollars in November 1923: many people's savings were wiped out, causing widespread distress and poverty. The French invasion of the Ruhr in 1923 also aroused resentment because the government appeared weak because it was unable to defend its natural resources, the 132 workers killed in clashes between workers and with French soldiers and.