Paid Advertisement
Historynet/feed historynet feedback facebook link World History Group RSS feed World History Group Subscriptions Historynet Home page

What If Hitler Had Not Come to Power?

By Mark Grimsley 
Originally published on Published Online: August 10, 2012 
Print Friendly
3 comments FONT +  FONT -

In January 1933 the German Weimar Republic and the Nazi Party are both in trouble. The republic, aptly characterized as a "democracy without democrats," has been dysfunctional for at least three years. Its constitution provides for proportional representation in the Reichstag, the German parliament, and political parties range from the Communists on the extreme left to the Nazis on the extreme right. Each controls at least a few seats in the Reichstag. No party comes close to commanding a majority. As a result, the government is based upon fragile coalitions whose brief lifespans repeatedly force new elections—there were two in 1932 alone—and the appointment of a new chancellor, as Germany calls its head of government, on a revolving-door basis. The republic's stability is provided mainly by its president and head of state, former field marshal Paul von Hindenburg, a revered but aging hero of the Great War.

The Nazi Party, which reached its peak of 37 percent of the vote in July 1932, has lost ground. In the next election, four months later, the Nazis experienced their first electoral decline, to 33 percent. The party still has enough strength to get important cabinet posts in any coalition government, but its leader, Adolf Hitler, refuses to accept any post save that of chancellor. Given the discouraging trend of election outcomes, a chancellorship for Hitler seems increasingly unrealistic, particularly since Hindenburg detests Hitler and has twice refused to consider him for the post.

Along comes former chancellor Baron Franz von Papen, who, while in office, did all he could to tilt the government rightward, including lifting a ban on the Sturmabteilung, or SA—the Nazi Party's paramilitary wing. Papen has Hinden-burg's ear, giving him an unusual degree of personal influence. Papen also detests the current chancellor, former general Kurt von Schleicher, who succeeded him on January 2, 1932. Seeking to ruin Schleicher, in early January 1933 Papen suggests he and Hitler meet. The two hatch a plan to make Hitler chancellor. Hitler sees the chancellorship as a major step toward his goal of complete power over Germany. Papen foolishly believes that Hitler will look to him as a guide, thus expanding his own political influence.

The plot's success depends on removing Schleicher as chancellor. Schleicher has sought in vain to create a successful coalition government and has alienated Hindenburg, who now disapproves of Schleicher both personally and for failing to stabilize the government. Hindenburg listens with favor when Papen brings news of a new coalition allying Hitler's Nazi Party and the German National People's Party, led by industrialist Alfred Hugenberg. Papen proposes to install Hitler as chancellor, with himself as vice chancellor. But Hindenburg, despite misgivings about Schleicher, continues to view Hitler as unacceptable. The old field marshal adheres to his view that Hitler at best might deserve a cabinet position as the minister of posts. As for Papen, Hindenburg resents what he regards as a transparent attempt at manipulation. For a third time, Hindenburg rebuffs Hitler's bid to become chancellor, leaving Schleicher in office.

The above scenario is historically accurate in several respects. Thanks to its unwieldy constitution and a weak commitment to self-preservation, the Weimar Republic was an unworkable entity that invited political intrigue. The Nazis' portion of the vote did drop in four short months from 37 to 33 percent, with auguries of further decline. And Papen did approach Hitler with a plan to achieve power together.

The chief departure from history is Hindenburg's rejection of Papen's proposal. Historically, Hindenburg accepted the arrangement, so that on January 30, 1933, Hitler became chancellor. Papen became vice chancellor, with Hugenberg serving as the minister of economy. Hindenburg brought Hitler to power in the belief that a coalition between two conservative parties—the charismatic Nazi Party and the respectable German National People's Party—could give Germany some much-needed stability and hold at bay the left-leaning Social Democratic and Communist Parties, with Papen poised to check Hitler's extremist tendencies. Schleicher knew his chancellorship was doomed. Fearing that his rival Papen might somehow succeed him, he, too, endorsed Hitler as the next chancellor.

Hitler then lavishly used emergency powers, intimidation, and violence to secure a degree of control his predecessors had never come close to achieving. And upon Hindenburg's death in August 1934, he assumed the presidency, thereby making himself the führer who would place Germany on the road to world war. What would have happened if Kurt von Schleicher had remained chancellor? In Hitler's Thirty Days to Power, distinguished historian Henry Ashby Turner Jr. speculates that given the demonstrated impossibility of conservatives achieving stability in any other way, Schleicher—who had already urged Hindenburg to permit a military dictatorship—most likely would have created a military regime. Turner says a military government would have assiduously avoided another two-front war and done nothing to alienate the French or the British.

Such a regime would have confined its territorial ambitions to the recovery of the Polish Corridor, which separated East Prussia from the rest of Germany. The result would have been a limited German-Polish conflict, not a general European war. And, in any event, Adolf Hitler would have become a mere footnote in history.

Turner leaves it at that. But what would Hitler's specific fate have been? It is not difficult to frame a likely outcome. Prominent Nazis would have looked askance at Hitler's all-or-nothing stance on the chancellorship. The party leadership would have divided sharply, with Hitler loyalists arrayed against a growing number of dissidents. Even-tually it would have become obvious, even to Hitler, that he would never achieve the chancellorship, and that his party was fragmenting into factions. His dreams of ultimate power exploded, Hitler would most likely have made good on a nihilistic vow. "If the party falls apart," he had told Joseph Goebbels, his future propaganda minister, in December 1942 "I'll finish myself off with a pistol within three minutes."

3 Responses to “What If Hitler Had Not Come to Power?”

  1. 1
    Philip Holcombe says:

    That was a very interesting expose and ending theoretical world political what if.
    It failed however to consider the Soviet Union as a player on this stage.
    Would the same expansionism that ensued in Europe following the Second World War have still occurred? If so, when?
    Assuming that the US still went at it with The Japanese Empire, the Pacific war would have taken less time for us to win. But I am sure that Stalin would have had aspirations in eastern Asia as well.
    It seems to me that much more of the world would have ended up in Soviet hands than what we saw if there had not been a Nazi Germany controlled by Adolf Hitler.
    War with Nazi Germany kept the Allies occupied to the point that the majority of war fighting resources went into the European Theater. For the USSR, that meant all resources. For the USA, most of our resources went to fight Hitler, and the left overs were used to fight Japan.
    Now, take away Nazi Germany. Then assume that Germany did go and occupy Poland for the reasons cited in the essay. One of several scenarios could have occurred: (Atom bomb not invented)
    1)US and USSR stay isolated from each other. US fights war w/ Japan. Its available resources allow it to eventually beat Hirohito.
    USSR expands into Eastern Europe. It will not threaten US occupied Japan or China.
    2) USSR allied with US against Japan. Victory over Japan results in Communist North and Capitalist South. USSR exploits alliance to influence other Nations in East Asia and Southeast Asia. Expansionism includes Alliance with Mao Tse Tung and dissolution of alliance with US. ALL of Asia is a powder keg w/ a lit fuse.
    Threat of expansionism into Europe by USSR forces alliance of US, Britain, France, Italy, various west and east European powers, Germany.Europe becomes a fortified camp.
    3)USSR influence in both east and western Europe, most of Asia because of expansionism into eastern Asia to help Mao Tse Tung beat Chang Kai Chek and to flush out Japanese troops occupying China. Large Soviet troop presence allows Communist rebellions in various Asian and Southeast Asian countries to oust Western European imperial colonials such as France, England and Germany.

    The possibilities are endless

  2. 2
    Owen Lewis says:

    I too think it highly likely that much of Europe would have ended up under Soviet control.
    It is no secret that Stalin was engaged in massive armament manufacturing throughout the '30s and by 1941 had a colossal land army lined up along the Eastern border of the USSR, poised to launch an offensive in the summer of that year, to further the expansion of global communism.
    It's my opinion that this huge military presence was the reason Hitler proceeded with operation Barbarossa.
    With no Hitler in the frame it is possible that ww2 may have been a much smaller conflict between Western Europe and the soviets.

  3. 3
    Robert Hickson says:

    No Hitler, but a sensible military dictator.

    No Holocaust, Anschluss or Sudetenland. A gradual military buildup and better relations with France & England.

    No A – Bomb, 'Buzz Bombs, V-2s or large Kriegsmarine.

    Border resolution over 'Polish Corridor' via negotiations either before or after the Soviet Union invades Eastern Europe in 1941.

    Resulting invasion leads to Germany, Poland, France and England becoming allies and pre NATO formed.

    No counter invasion of USSR, except to 'liberate' the Ukraine, keep the Baltic states and Finland free.

    Possibility of Soviet/Japan alliance, with Japan taking Hong Kong, IndoChina and Singapore.

    US role dubious, without a 'Pearl Harbor', America stays neutral.

    Italy would become to the 'Franco Spain', post WW 2.

    Post this WW 2 scenario would have far fewer casualties and destruction.

Leave a Reply

Human Verification: In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Related Articles

History Net Images Spacer
Paid Advertisement
Paid Advertisement
History Net Daily Activities
History net Spacer
History net Spacer
Historynet Spacer

Which of these wars resulted in the most surprising underdog upset?

  • American Revolution (42%, 19,372 Votes)
  • Vietnam War (22%, 10,307 Votes)
  • Six Day War (16%, 7,427 Votes)
  • Texas Revolution (12%, 5,459 Votes)
  • French Indochina War (8%, 3,411 Votes)

Total Voters: 45,981

Loading ... Loading ...
History net Spacer
RSS Feed Daily Email Update
History net Spacer
Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement
What is HistoryNet? is brought to you by World History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

From Our Magazines
World History Group

World History Group Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Achtung Panzer!
Today in History | Ask Mr. History | Picture of the Day | Daily History Quiz | Contact Us

Copyright © 2015 World History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Advertise With Us | Subscription Help | Privacy Policy