[JohnDClare]

I was poorly all last night, and in the long time laying awake I had an idea for the start of my lesson on Weimar German today.


Isn't the Weimar Germany situation similar to Iraq today?

1. Pre-1919 Germany was destroyed by a war - a war fought specifically to destroy and drive out its government.

2. The Kaiser's government was a military autocracy, and not at all of the model preferred by 'western' nations.

3. In the end Germany was reduced to economic and administrative chaos by the war, and there were riots against and hatred of the government, and the country collapsed.

4. When the war was lost, the leader of Germany fled. Admittedly he went to the Netherlands, not a hidey-hole, but the Punch cartoon did comment "Gone to a 'better 'ole'"!

4. The victorious countries imposed their settlement plans upon the defeated Germany, which was required merely to agree.

5. The western nations took the opportunity to impose a 'western' liberal parliamentary democracy, giving the vote to all men and women over the age of 20, and giving the Germans a Bill of Rights.

6. The western nations did not for a moment think that the Germans might not WANT the good government they were giving them.

7. They occupied the Ruhr but were surprised by the ferocity of hatred this aroused amongst the Germans.

8. The good intentions of the victorious nations aroused elemenst in the German people 100 times worse than the Kaiser's government they had been so keen to get rid of.

9. The new Weimar government was utterly impotent to control these forces.

10. The western nations got caught 'propping up' the new regime - pumping in millions of dollars of aid, knowing that tom pull out was to allow the extremist elements to take over; but to stay required massive, ongoing support.


It's when you see these things happening in Iraq today that you realise just what an achievement it was to get the Weimar republic off the ground at all - never mind for it to be a success.

I used this as a starter with my GCSE group today - although I had first to give those pupils who knew about Iraq time to explain to their colleagues what Iraq was and what has been happening.

Perhaps readers might be able to think of other Iraq-Weimar parallels?
Alternatively, I know that JS hates this kind of analogy, and I am happy for readers to pooh-pooh it all.

[Andrew Field]

Whislt there are certainly parallels aren't the two situations actually entirely different? Can we really say that World War I was fought "specifically to destroy and drive out its government"?

I'd also question the key aspect of the nature of both 'regimes'. I guess a further connection you could make (if you were so inclined) would be the creation of Germany in 1871 and the creation of Iraq in 1921. But then again there is difference - Bismarck created Germany by building it up around Prussia where as Britain, using Gertrude Bell, created Iraq eventually establishing control via an LON mandate. I guess though there are connections as you could say Germany was created through the Franco-Prussian war and Iraq was created from World War I. Yet then I feel we are seriously 'clutching at connections'.

If I were to teach this I think I would waste so much time explaining the potential parallels that I would confuse the issue too much and end up making the whole thing far more complicated and difficult for students to understand. However, I obviously bow your your skills of explanation...

[M.Richardson]

I agree that the parallels between Weimar and Iraq are useful to make in the classroom and I have certainly done so. I find it helps GCSE pupils understand how difficult it must have been for the Weimar politicians to try and set up a workable democratic government in a defeated country, in economic chaos with armed uprisings against it.

Also, I draw parallels between the extra powers taken on by Hitler folowing the Reichstag Fire to "protect" the German democracy from the Communists and those taken on by the governments of Britain and the US against suspected terrosists - detention without trial for example. While not suggesting that the motives of Blair and Hitler are in any way comparable, it does help pupils to see that when the public feels threatened it is easier (neccessary?) for governments to justify such actions.

Incidentally, the Blair/Hitler parallel also cropped this very week. I was explaining how one of the reaons for Hitler's appeal to the German electorate was his repetition of short, simple messages which in many ways made him a very modern politician. "Education, Education, Education" remember that?

[JohnDClare]

andy_walker, on Jan 5 2005, 08:29 PM, said:

You may be interested in THIS EXERCISE

Brilliant!

[davemcgill04]

JohnDClare, on Jan 5 2005, 07:40 PM, said:

I was poorly all last night, and in the long time laying awake I had an idea for the start of my lesson on Weimar German today.


Isn't the Weimar Germany situation similar to Iraq today?

1. Pre-1919 Germany was destroyed by a war - a war fought specifically to destroy and drive out its government.

2. The Kaiser's government was a military autocracy, and not at all of the model preferred by 'western' nations.

3. In the end Germany was reduced to economic and administrative chaos by the war, and there were riots against and hatred of the government, and the country collapsed.

4. When the war was lost, the leader of Germany fled. Admittedly he went to the Netherlands, not a hidey-hole, but the Punch cartoon did comment "Gone to a 'better 'ole'"!

4. The victorious countries imposed their settlement plans upon the defeated Germany, which was required merely to agree.

5. The western nations took the opportunity to impose a 'western' liberal parliamentary democracy, giving the vote to all men and women over the age of 20, and giving the Germans a Bill of Rights.

6. The western nations did not for a moment think that the Germans might not WANT the good government they were giving them.

7. They occupied the Ruhr but were surprised by the ferocity of hatred this aroused amongst the Germans.

8. The good intentions of the victorious nations aroused elemenst in the German people 100 times worse than the Kaiser's government they had been so keen to get rid of.

9. The new Weimar government was utterly impotent to control these forces.

10. The western nations got caught 'propping up' the new regime - pumping in millions of dollars of aid, knowing that tom pull out was to allow the extremist elements to take over; but to stay required massive, ongoing support.


It's when you see these things happening in Iraq today that you realise just what an achievement it was to get the Weimar republic off the ground at all - never mind for it to be a success.

I used this as a starter with my GCSE group today - although I had first to give those pupils who knew about Iraq time to explain to their colleagues what Iraq was and what has been happening.

Perhaps readers might be able to think of other Iraq-Weimar parallels?
Alternatively, I know that JS hates this kind of analogy, and I am happy for readers to pooh-pooh it all.

I liked the idea but disagree with some aspects of the comparison:
1. The Allies did not invade Germany and impose a new system of government; Germany was defeated and the Weimar Constitution was an internal affair they drew up themselves.
2. The Kaiser (for all his faults) was not comparable to Saddam Hussein; there was no equivalent of the Shia or Kurdish groups internally to cooperate with an external occupier. The current situation in Iraq is
exarcabated by this situation.
3. The First World War was not fought specifically to drive out the German government although as it developed that was the end result.
4. The Iraqi insurgency is very different to the fighting between freikorps and communists.
5. The SPD government did enjoy some popularity (in terms of votes) and was home-grown (rather than imposed-although such parties are emerging in Iraq).
6. Germany was not an artificially imposed country created by an imperial power; although to some extent Prussia had imposed its authority on independent states.
7. Religious aspect of Iraq very important.
But are similarities
1. Society traumatised by defeat with plenty of ex-soldiers embittered by defeat.
2. Chaos due to blockade and economic collapse.
3.Groups wanting a return to the old authoritarian order.
4. Forces wanting to take power away from the state.
5. Potential demagogues; ie. al-Sadr
6. Fighting, assasinations etc becoming 'normalised'.
7. Difficulty of establishing democracy in such chaotic and difficult circumstances.
It's certainly a fruitful area for comparison. I agree it's good to get them thinking; i do like the comparison exercise between Reichstag Fire and War on Terror; v.good!

[Laurence Hicks]

Another possible similarity with Weimar Germany is Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Firstly, because of the initial disintegration of law and order. Secondly, because democracy was the convenient scapegoat for the economic problems of the 1990s. Thirdly, because of Russia’s nostalgia for its imperial past. And finally, because Vladimir Putin didn’t waste much time in bringing back autocratic government to Russia. All in less than 14 years, too!