Social Revolution in Nazi Germany
To what extent was there a social revolution in Nazi Germany?
Was Hitler’s rule reactionary or revolutionary? According to Marx’s definition, a revolution is when a change takes place, referring to the population’s social status, when the worker’s class is able to take part in the political decisions of the country. Although we think that Hitler did cause a revolution in Germany, no real changes were made. Therefore, we have to compare the Nazi Germany’s social policies and changes with the previous regimes in Germany, including the 2nd Reich and the Weimar Republic, so that we are able to analyse thoroughly if Hitler’s rule was reactionary of revolutionary.
The 2nd Reich was in theory a constitutional monarchy, however, it was in reality a authoritarian regime, with only one person in power, the Kaiser. He controlled the foreign policies and the chancellor and government. There was a limited democratic involvement of the middle and lower class, social mobility was extremely limited. In 1918, the Wilhemine Republic had collapsed due to consequences of the 2nd World War and by 1919 the Weimar Republic had already taken over Germany. The Weimar Republic was a revolutionary government; it introduced a democratic system, which involved a liberal constitution and culture. It gave the population free speech, free assembly and free press and survived many attempted revolutions from reactionary movements. One of the reactionary movements was the Nationalist Worker’s Party, with Adolf Hitler as their leader. Hitler came to power in 1933, with aims to transform Germany in many different ways.
Hitler wanted to make Germany become a classless society a “Volksgemeinschaft, however, no changes would be made with his reactionary policies, especially regarding the Workers. As soon as he came to power, Hitler abolished the trade unions, replacing it by the German Labour Front (DAF) where the workers had strict regulated wages and conditions. The DAF was structured and
Was Hitler’s rule reactionary or revolutionary? According to Marx’s definition, a revolution is when a change takes place, referring to the population’s social status, when the worker’s class is able to take part in the political decisions of the country. Although we think that Hitler did cause a revolution in Germany, no real changes were made. Therefore, we have to compare the Nazi Germany’s social policies and changes with the previous regimes in Germany, including the 2nd Reich and the Weimar Republic, so that we are able to analyse thoroughly if Hitler’s rule was reactionary of revolutionary.
The 2nd Reich was in theory a constitutional monarchy, however, it was in reality a authoritarian regime, with only one person in power, the Kaiser. He controlled the foreign policies and the chancellor and government. There was a limited democratic involvement of the middle and lower class, social mobility was extremely limited. In 1918, the Wilhemine Republic had collapsed due to consequences of the 2nd World War and by 1919 the Weimar Republic had already taken over Germany. The Weimar Republic was a revolutionary government; it introduced a democratic system, which involved a liberal constitution and culture. It gave the population free speech, free assembly and free press and survived many attempted revolutions from reactionary movements. One of the reactionary movements was the Nationalist Worker’s Party, with Adolf Hitler as their leader. Hitler came to power in 1933, with aims to transform Germany in many different ways.
Hitler wanted to make Germany become a classless society a “Volksgemeinschaft, however, no changes would be made with his reactionary policies, especially regarding the Workers. As soon as he came to power, Hitler abolished the trade unions, replacing it by the German Labour Front (DAF) where the workers had strict regulated wages and conditions. The DAF was structured and