Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
The election of Field Marshal von Hindenburg to the presidency in succession to Ebert in 1925 was at first interpreted by Republicans in Germany, and by many foreign observers, as a distinct political blunder. He was pictured as the very embodiment of pre-war Germany with its ultra-nationalistic and militaristic ideals. It was freely prophesied that all the labors of Marx and Stresemann, MacDonald and Herriot, which had held out the promise that Germany might soon be restored to good standing in the family of nations, would come to naught because of this new manifestation of German incorrigibility. These prophecies, however, have certainly not been fulfilled. Hindenburg has thus far encouraged rather than opposed the efforts of Stresemann to reëstablish an understanding with the Allies, and has undoubtedly gained the approval of millions of Germans who fought bitterly against him during the presidential campaign.
57 For an accountof this presidential election see the writer's article in the Review for August, 1925.
58 Vorwarts, April 9, 1925; Germania, April 15, 1925; London Times (weekly ed.), April 16 and 30, 1925. It should be stated, however, that soon after Hindenburg's election the London Times and other papers struck a more optimistic note about the effects of the election upon foreign affairs, and that a considerable number of English and American bankers and business men interpreted the election to mean, not a return to monarchy and renewed belligerency, but a return to sound principles of economics and law and order.
59 See article in Berliner Tageblatt October 2, 1925 (the seventy-eighth birthday of Hindenburg), in which the president's loyalty to the republic is highly commended.
60 See the writer's article in this Review, May, 1925, p. 362Google Scholar.
61 The strength of the various groups from right to left is as follows: Extreme Nationalist, 14; Nationalist, 110; People's party, 50; Center, 68; Bavarian People's party, 19; Democrat, 32; Socialist, 130; Communist, 45; other small groups, 25. Total, 493. Berliner Tageblatt, December 11, 1924.
62 See Berliner Tageblatt, January 1–15, 1925.
63 Ibid., December 5, 1925.
64 Ibid., December 14, 1925.
65 For Dr.Koch's, program see Berliner Tageblatt, December 16 and 17, 1925Google Scholar. Among the Socialist demands were the following: higher salaries for state officials; resistance to the Hohenzollern demands for compensation; and additional unemployment relief.
66 Berliner Tageblatt, January 19, 1926.
67 Ibid., January, 20, 1926; also London Times (weekly ed.), January 21, 1926.
68 Berliner Tageblalt, May 13, 1926.
69 London Times (weekly ed.), May 20, 1926.
70 Minister in the last ten cabinets.
71 London Times (weekly ed.), December 23, 1926.
72 Vossische Zeitung, January 29, 1927. On May 17 the law for the protection of the republic was extended for a two-year period by a Reichstag vote of 323 to 41. Ibid., May 18, 1927.
73 Vossische Zeitung, January 29, 1927.
74 Ibid., February 5, 1927.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.