IB Prized Writing Sevenoaks School IB Prized Writing 2014 | Page 193

Eliza Parr - History acquire  the  weapons  of  democracy  from  its  arsenal….We’ll  take  any  legal  means  to   revolutionise the existing situation.” 16 This strategy was adopted by Hitler who, after having been appointed Chancellor on 30 January 1933, exploited the Reichstag Fire on 27 February 1933 by persuading President Hindenburg that the threat of a communist revolution constituted a state of emergency. 17 Consequently, Hindenburg used Article 48 to pass the Decree for the Protection of the People and State, which “suspended civil liberties” 18 as well as increasing the power of the state by enabling the Cabinet to take any necessary measures. 19 Following the Reichstag election on 5 March 1933, in which the Nazis won 44% of the vote and joined with the National Conservative  German  People’s  Party  in order to obtain a majority by democratic means, 20 Hitler further consolidated his power legally by using President Hindenburg's state of emergency to convince the Reichstag to pass The Enabling Act on 23 March 1933. The Enabling Act allowed  Hitler  to  “pass  budgets  and  promulgate   laws, including those altering the constitution, for four years without parliamentary approval.” 21 Similarly, the Act “made  Hitler’s  cabinet decrees the supreme law of the land” 22 and  so  “removed  any  doubts  the  civil  service  or  the  judiciary  had  as  to  the   legality of the Nazi take-over.” 23 The appointment of Hitler as Führer following the death of President Hindenburg on 2 August 1934 meant that Germany became a dictatorship, the Weimar Constitution had been fundamentally undermined, and the Reichstag had lost all its democratic power. As Michael Burleigh states:  “The   Reichstag no longer debated anything, since the only speaker was Hitler; the uniformed  delegates  were  there  to  assent  with  enthusiasm.” 24 The passing of the Enabling Act was therefore one of the key legal means by which Hitler consolidated power and is central to the argument that the Nazi consolidation of power constituted a legal revolution. Views of Commentators Against this background, it is arguable that the Nazi consolidation of power was obtained by legal means. For example, A.J.P Taylor has argued that Hitler “destroy[ed] legality in Germany by legal means,” 25 which is consistent with the views of positivist legal theorist H.L.A Hart that “The  existence  of  law  is  one  thing;;   its  merit  or  demerit  another.” 26 When applying this principle to the Nazi legal system, Hart suggests that the legal system was valid despite the immoral nature of its laws and that no purpose is served by refusing to “recognise evil laws as valid for any purpose.” 27 The views of these two commentators suggest that the legal means used 16 American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. (2013). Joseph Goebbels. [online] Available at: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbels.html [accessed 16 September 2014 at 10.52]. 17 Layton, G., 2005. Germany: The Third Reich 1933-45. 3 rd ed. London: Hodder Education, p. 11 18 Evans, R. J., 2006. The Third Reich in Power. London: Penguin Books, p. 11 19 Evans, R. J., 2006. The Third Reich in Power. London: Penguin Books, p. 11-12 20 Evans, R. J., 2006. The Third Reich in Power. London: Penguin Books, p. 12 21 Burleigh, M., 2000. The Third Reich, A New History. 2 nd ed. London: Pan Macmillan, p. 154 22 Miller, R.L., 1995. Nazi Justiz, Law of the Holocaust. Westport, USA: Praeger, p. 45 23 Williamson, D.G., 1982. The Third Reich. 15 th ed. Essex: Longman, p. 11 24 ibid 25 Taylor, A.J.P., 1967. Europe, Grandeur and Decline. 4 th ed. London: Penguin Books, p. 218 26 Hart, H.L.A., 2012. The Concept of Law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 207 27 ibid 192 6