The Beer Hall Putsch
"The Beer Hall Putsch, also known as the Munich Putsch...was a failed coup d'état by Nazi Party...leader Adolf Hitler...Approximately two thousand Nazis marched on the Feldherrnhalle, in the city centre, but were confronted by a police cordon, which resulted in the deaths of 16 Nazis, four police officers, and one bystander.
Hitler escaped immediate arrest and was spirited off to safety in the countryside. After two days, he was arrested and charged with treason.
The putsch brought Hitler to the attention of the German nation for the first time and generated front-page headlines in newspapers around the world. His arrest was followed by a 24-day trial, which was widely publicised and gave him a platform to express his nationalist sentiments to the nation."
Was Hitler's prosecution and subsequent imprisonment politically motivated?
Comments (30)
I will say again though I'm prolly just wasting energy here.
If Trump wanted to try a miltary coup by armed forces (no one is that dump in a western society, but for the case of argument) it would look nothing like J6.
2000 well trained ones in full army riot gear in the first row, correct (on J6 there was none)
but he would also had spread the word beforehand and made sure
most of the military and poilice would not take action. Would be over in 8 minutes the whole thing.
So what happened on January 6th was not an attempt at all. Don't lie Jac.
Don't compare apples and oranges or rather
a playmobile toy to an Abrams M1.
But I noticed it's very in to campare Trump to Hitler, or Putin to him as well.
It's as far from the truth as can be.
I will say again though I'm prolly just wasting energy here.
If Trump wanted to try a miltary coup by armed forces (no one is that dump in a western society, but for the case of argument) it would look nothing like J6.
2000 well trained ones in full army riot gear in the first row, correct (on J6 there was none)
but he would also had spread the word beforehand and made sure
most of the military and poilice would not take action. Would be over in 8 minutes the whole thing.
So what happened on January 6th was not an attempt at all. Don't lie Jac.
Don't compare apples and oranges or rather
a playmobile toy to an Abrams M1.
But I noticed it's very in to campare Trump to Hitler, or Putin to him as well.
It's as far from the truth as can be.
You made the comparison.
I will say again though I'm prolly just wasting energy here.
If Trump wanted to try a miltary coup by armed forces (no one is that dump in a western society, but for the case of argument) it would look nothing like J6.
2000 well trained ones in full army riot gear in the first row, correct (on J6 there was none)
but he would also had spread the word beforehand and made sure
most of the military and poilice would not take action. Would be over in 8 minutes the whole thing.
So what happened on January 6th was not an attempt at all. Don't lie Jac.
Don't compare apples and oranges or rather
a playmobile toy to an Abrams M1.
But I noticed it's very in to campare Trump to Hitler, or Putin to him as well.
It's as far from the truth as can be.
My answer would be no, he was thought to have been a traitor and arrested for that crime.
Would the understanding that a group tried to take over government by force automatically mean that the group couldn't be prosecuted because they was political motivation to do so?
Should the leaders at the time have welcomed the competition as legitimate?
Would the understanding that a group tried to take over government by force automatically mean that the group couldn't be prosecuted because they was political motivation to do so?
Should the leaders at the time have welcomed the competition as legitimate?
What Hitler did was actually an Armed Uprising against the established Authority.
I know you'd love to draw parallels to the events on Jan. 6th '20 at the Capitol in DC!
As Wallenstein said:"Ja,ich kenne meine Pappenheimer"!
Of course the two situations are not identical, but clearly there is some level of recognition between the Wiki excerpt and the current events in the US, otherwise you and Ozzie wouldn't have jumped on it. To say there are no parallels at all is an attempt at self- and other-deception.
Of course none of us were there during the putsch to compare first hand experience, but there is some value in that: we can view the putsch without all the background noise of being in the thick of it. We have the 20/20 vision of hindsight with respect to Hitler gaining power through (semi-) legitimate means after the failed coup. Lest we forget.
When I want to see something from a different perspective, I like to superimpose, or swap situations. For example, if we imagine a marriage ceremony that obliged men to obey their wives we may see inequaity and patriarchy through a different lens.
On the other hand, opponents of Trump are saying that there is no political motivation in prosecuting, or disqualifying Trump, but that it's about abiding by the constitution and the law.
The Supreme Court came under some heavy criticism after Thursday's landmark arguments with respect to 14/3, specifically that there was little mention of Trump qualifying as an insurrectionist. I interpret that being how it should be: if the Supreme Court is focussing on the semantics of 14/3, they're not challenging whether Trump was a part of an insurrection, but accepting the original ruling by the lower court, as did the appellate court. The original judge, Sarah Wallace heard the evidence and witnessed the witnesses, so it's usual that her judgement should be accepted for that aspect of the case.
That Trump's behaviour was civilly found to be insurrectionist and being able to recognise the similarities between Trump's behavioural pattern and Hitler's with respect to the Beer Hall putsch, how do we view political motivation versus objectively applying the law?
In retrospect, it would be difficult to argue that it's a crying shame that Hitler didn't manage to overthrow the government and get on with the task of genocide in a more timely manner. It's more likely that we think Hilter tried to gain power illegally, it was absolutely justified to prosecute him and had his sentence been harsher, maybe things would have turned out a bit better.
However, it would also be difficult to argue that there was no political motivation to quash the Beer Hall putsch, nor hold those involved to account. Why would a democratically elected government wish to ignore, assist, or capitulate to an undemocratic coup?
What I'm trying to say is that we're asking the wrong question: it's not whether there is a political motivation to prosecute, or disqualify Trump, but what level of political motivation is acceptable?
Although his attempt to overthrow the government was unsuccessful, his trial and subsequent time behind bars was decisive.He realized that he could only come to power and implement his crazy ideas through legal means.
And Hitler's public trial was a means to hone the oratorical skills that did help him to win the German chancellorship nine years later. Looks a bit familiar..yes..
But you are mistaken if comparing Hitler with Trump... yes, there is a slight eventual historical similarity, but not a human ones. It’s a pity that you are not aware of the life of big Russia and its president. You would definitely understand that Hitler and Putin are “twin brothers”
Although his attempt to overthrow the government was unsuccessful, his trial and subsequent time behind bars was decisive.He realized that he could only come to power and implement his crazy ideas through legal means.
And Hitler's public trial was a means to hone the oratorical skills that did help him to win the German chancellorship nine years later. Looks a bit familiar..yes..
But you are mistaken if comparing Hitler with Trump... yes, there is a slight eventual historical similarity, but not a human ones. It’s a pity that you are not aware of the life of big Russia and its president. You would definitely understand that Hitler and Putin are “twin brothers”
(I'm not the first to issue you with threats of violence I see, but I've yet to offer execution as a means of resolving a difference of opinon. Just sayin'.)
So, any takers on the question of what is an acceptable level of political motivation?
I'm gonna come over there and tslap the backs of your knees if you don't start behaving yourself, Snow.
(I'm not the first to issue you with threats of violence I see, but I've yet to offer execution as a means of resolving a difference of opinon. Just sayin'.)
So, any takers on the question of what is an acceptable level of political motivation?
"There's Jac the Sew again, isn't it?" they say.
I think I've just ruined my reputation.
"There's Jac the Sew again, isn't it?" they say.
Greeting everyone you pass unnerves Cardiffians, however.
Political motivation thoughts...?
Greeting everyone you pass unnerves Cardiffians, however.
Political motivation thoughts...?
I find it fascinating despite the existential threat.
Maybe I'll try to answer my own question:
If no political motivation to confront taking power by force in a democratic system is no resistance and full political motivation is lawlessly eliminating the opposition/competition, then surely the acceptable amount of political motivation is to confront an attack on the democratic system via an objective application of the legislation that has been democratically passed?
By Jove, isn't that just exactly what the Americans are trying to do?
I find it fascinating despite the existential threat.
Maybe I'll try to answer my own question:
If no political motivation to confront taking power by force in a democratic system is no resistance and full political motivation is lawlessly eliminating the opposition/competition, then surely the acceptable amount of political motivation is to confront an attack on the democratic system via an objective application of the legislation that has been democratically passed?
By Jove, isn't that just exactly what the Americans are trying to do?
Do you remember that guy who wrote a book around 1995 called 'the end of history', saying that basically everywhere was heading for stability now?.....oh boy was he wrong!
If Trump had been in power for the last four years Putin would probably be all over eastern Europe now. (in fairness Gal you see Putin for what he is, I'll give you that)
If Trump had been in power for the last four years Putin would probably be all over eastern Europe now. (in fairness Gal you see Putin for what he is, I'll give you that)
Oh, I believe there wasn't any new Wars that the USA was involved in during Mr. Trumps first term as President.
Do you remember that guy who wrote a book around 1995 called 'the end of history', saying that basically everywhere was heading for stability now?.....oh boy was he wrong!
Fukuyama postures that ascending liberal democracy is the end point of our ideological evoluton (because it's fundementally a better system than all the others) regardless of whether totalitarianism rises again.
In other words, we're still heading for stability just as soon as we stop being utter muppets.
Maybe, given the palpable environmental, racial, gender and other paradigm shifts we are experiencing, the rise of totalitarian tantrums is nothing more than the death throes of the pea-brained carnivorous dinosaurs.
Take heart dear chap, all is not lost.
It's also one I've already answered and I'm not writing everything out again for you.
In fact everything you're whining about has been answered by your own country in some form, or another.
"He definitely won, but even if he didn't definitely win, he definitely didn't try to win illegally after he didn't win."
It doesn't matter how much you try to imitate my writing style (justified or not) you still sound just like you.
It's also one I've already answered and I'm not writing everything out again for you.
In fact everything you're whining about has been answered by your own country in some form, or another.
"He definitely won, but even if he didn't definitely win, he definitely didn't try to win illegally after he didn't win."
It doesn't matter how much you try to imitate my writing style (justified or not) you still sound just like you.