b) During the period 1933-1934, Hitler as Chancellor began a series of actions to consolidate his power. He had realised much earlier that this could not be achieved by means of violence, but alternatively, through law and order.
Source A, an extract from the Enabling Act, March 1933, is the ‘legal’ basis for Hitler to act arbitrarily and dictationally against the Weimar Constitution. Source B, C and D refers to a semi-legal event during that period, the Night of the Long Knives. However, there was an immediate legalisation after the purge, though not shown in the sources.
On 28 Feb 1933, one day after the Reichstag Fire, President Hindenburg signed an Emergency Decree giving the central government power to imprison enemies of the state without trial. This legalised and strengthened Hitler’s actions against the communists (whose actions were exploited by the Nazis in this plot against them). More than 20000 people were arrested, who were then lawfully banned from voting against the Nazi on the 5 March election or the forthcoming Enabling Act on 23 March. Even though the Nazi did not gain a 2/3 majority in the election, the NSDAP still became the biggest party in the Constitution.
The events that next happened were much in Hitler’s favour. He successfully persuaded the nationalists and Catholics to vote for the Enabling Bill. Article 1 of the Enabling Act states that the Reich cabinet—or, Hitler—held power to enact any law. Furthermore, ‘The laws enacted by the Reich cabinet may deviate from the Constitution…’ (Article 2) and ‘…shall be prepared by the Chancellor’ (Article 3). In other words, the Weimar Constitution was legally deprived of any right to oppose the dictatorship of Hitler. Hitler’s following ban of the SPD (22 June), Catholic Central Party (5 July) and all other parties (14 July) were to be legal. Moreover, in Jan 1934, all regional parliaments were abolished by the central government. Thus ended Germany’s federal system, and Hitler had finally secured his power.
However, force and violence seemed inevitable in this process towards dictatorship. Hitler chose to go through the legal system, but unlawful means accompanied his actions. His exploitation of the Reichstag Fire and the blame on the communists had little evidence, the Social Democrats he arrested along the communists were not necessarily ‘enemies of the state’, and he had to use the SA to stop SPD MDs from getting into the Constitution to vote against him; even when they did go in, SA men outside the building shouted and intimidated the electorates. However the most significant event is the Night of the Long Knives. There was no trial, no ‘resort to the regular courts of justice’, as Hitler had admitted in Source C himself. In a state of ‘law and order’, such an unsettling and upsetting revolutionary as Rohm was not acceptable. As said in Source D, two modern Historian’s view on the Night of the Long Knives, ‘The traditional institution had accepted his actions. Most of the people accepted the view that as their Leader he would act only for the good of the nation’, people were fooled and lead to be ignorant to the fact that what their Leader did was unlawful.
Overall, legality was an important factor in Hitler’s consolidation of power, if not the most important. It is indeed the only sure way to succeed, and was well used by Hitler. Thus, lawful means outweighed unlawful means in Hitler’s consolidation of power during the period 1933—1934.
