Search results

This is why I referenced the Anne Frank Foundation, which describes the election as legal. Why I have used the word dangerous is because describing the Nazi's establishment of a government in early 1933 as democratic risks simultaneously legitimising Nazism and demonising the German electorate...

Firstly, if you think the SS and the SA were only concerned with the Red Front, then you must be wilfully ignoring their attacks on Jews, trade unionists, gays, social democrats...I could go on, but I hope you get the point. Secondly, the existence of the Red Front and other militant anti-Nazi...

Wow just wow! If you think you can run a genuinely democratic election with 50,000 SS and SA armed paramilitaries operating in the Prussian part of Germany alone, then I will leave you to your dangerous (but perhaps not lazy) imaginings. Oh and less of the young, I'll be 61 next birthday...

My only point was to challenge the oft repeated but dangerously lazy story that the German people democratically elected the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler. We need to be clear on how regressive, anti-social, far right politics has gained power in the past if we are to avoid "enjoying' our own...

Firstly, you talked about a democratic election. Do you really think that is an accurate description of a process (following the Reichstag fire and its aftermath) that involved the deployment of 50,000 Nazi stormtroopers and SS members in Prussia alone...really? Secondly, the Nazi party did not...

In March 1933 the Nazi party, after a huge campaign of mass intimidation, violence and propoganda (mobilising tens of thousands of SA and SS members), polled 43.9% of votes cast and and had to form a coalition government with the German National People's Party. It would seem that the word...

I presume you mean employers. You do know he is a freelance and not a BBC employee. Cheers - Louis MacNeice

What do you think being asked to shut up or step back means? He has been suspended. Cheers - Louis MacNeice