Eliza Parr - History
To what extent did the Nazi Consolidation of Power during
1933-1934 Constitute a Legal Revolution?
Introduction
Following the failure of the Munich Putsch in 1923, Hitler changed his tactic of using
violence to gain power to using legal means and the ballot box. In less than two years
after he was appointed Chancellor in January 1933, following the death of President
Hindenburg on 2 August 1934 Hitler was also appointed President and combined both
offices to become the Supreme Leader (Führer) of Germany. During this short period,
in the absence of coup d’état, 1 the system of democratic rule in Germany was
effectively dismantled, despite the Nazi party failing to achieve a majority in the
Reichstag election of 5 March 1933. It was achieved through a number of measures,
in particular by the Enabling Act of 23 March 1933, but also by others, which over-
rode the Weimar Constitution and fundamentally undermined the German legal
system. The concept of a “legal revolution” is not a well–defined term, despite having
been used by some commentators such as DG Williamson. 2 It is therefore necessary
to consider its meaning before going on to assess the extent to which Hitler’s actions
in consolidating power constituted a revolution which was legal because it took place
within the existing legal framework of the Weimar Constitution, or whether,
notwithstanding Hitler’s attempts to preserve a “veneer of legality,” 3 the principles of
legality were so fundamentally undermined that the outcome cannot reasonably be
described as a “legal” revolution. Assessing whether Hitler’s consolidation of power
constituted a legal revolution is important in understanding how a civilised
democratic country such as Germany in the mid 20 th Century could, apparently
through legal and democratic means, become a dictatorship characterised by the
complete breakdown of individual rights and basic political freedoms and ultimately
lead to the Holocaust.
Definition of a Legal Revolution
A “revolution” can be defined as “the overthrow or repudiation of a regime or
political system by the governed.” 4 An alternative definition emphasises the speed of
these events: “a sudden, tumultuous, and radical transformation of an entire system of
government, including its legal and political components.” 5 HJ Berman has defined a
“total revolution” as involving not only “the creation of new forms of government but
also…new structures of law, as well as new visions of the community…and new sets
of universal values and beliefs.” 6 He also refers to the use of “illegal force exerted by
individuals and groups against established authority.” 7 Therefore, in considering
whether Hitler’s consolidation of power during 1933-1934 constituted a legal
1
Burleigh, M., 2000. The Third Reich, A New History. 2 nd ed. London: Pan Macmillan, p. 23
Williamson, D.G., 1982. The Third Reich. 15 th ed. Essex: Longman, p.16
3 Miller, R.L., 1995. Nazi Justiz, Law of the Holocaust. Westport, USA: Praeger, p. 47
4
Anon, 1979. The Collins English Dictionary. London: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd., p. 1249
5
Farlax Inc. (2013). Definition of a Revolution. [online] Available at: http://legal-
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Revoloution [accessed 14 September 2013 at 14.55].
6
Berman, H.J., 1983. Law and Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 20
7
ibid
2
190
4