Hi
According to Ian Kershaw’s condensed biography of Hitler: “Hitler” (p. 65 paperback edition) “He (Hitler) was able to stave off demobilization longer than almost all former comrade, and to keep on the payroll, until 31 March 1920”. Kershaw does not explain why. Perhaps he does in his original 2-volume work on Hitler, which I haven’t read yet. Can anyone explain to me why he was not demobilized earlier? Was this an internal Bavarian state issue? Did the Allies not demand demobilization in Germnay/demobilization in Bavaria? I look forward to your feedback.
Sorry. That should have read “comrades”.
According to Ian Kershaw’s condensed biography of Hitler: “Hitler” (p. 65 paperback edition) “He (Hitler) was able to stave off demobilization longer than almost all former comrades, and to keep on the payroll, until 31 March 1920”.
Cursorily: Hitler was one of those people who have difficulty getting and holding down a regular job ( same here actually, except he found his metier as a dictator, which is not an option open to myself ); whilst Germany was being ravaged by inflation and predatory speculators, being stuck in the army was a good gig. I believe he wangled an Army Propaganda job ( which sounds misleading, since in essence it was the same Public Relations Unit thing all armies have had since — earlier, Napoleon was his own Public Relations Unit ), which AH parlayed into joining the National Socialists and taking them over.
The Allies could demand whatever their fat-headed little minds desired; but even whilst smugly destroying and limiting the Armed Forces to a fraction, recognised — as they later did after WWII — they needed what German forces there were to stave off bolshevism. Not merely holding the line in the East with Freikorps, but more particularly internally in Germany and most so in Bavaria than Prussia, which outside Berlin was not attracted to either communism or fascism, unlike those fiery southerners.
Not only did he serve as a lecturer who indoctrinated other soldiers for the army (his officers considered him something of an expert on politics, and he was viruently anti-Communist), he was also an undercover agent tasked with infiltrating and reporting on the many political factions that had sprung up after WWI. This was what led him to the German Workers’ Party, which invited him to join after they heard him harangue a guest speaker into silence. He finally left the army to devote himself entirely to politics and took over the party in a fairly short time, renaming it the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (abbreviated NSDAP in German), i.e., the Nazi Party.
He also acted as an informer, spying on his comrades during the postwar period of political disarray that followed the collapse of Germany in 1918.
The date of 31st March 1920 is significant, since that was the deadline under the Treaty of Versailles for the German army to be reduced to 100,000 men. He was proving useful in his indoctrination/propaganda role, but was not seen as having a long-term place in the smaller post-Treaty military. So they kept him on as long as they could, but then demobilised him in accordance with the Allied demands.
Which would explain why he - or someone with a very similar name - appears to have stood for election to one of the soldiers’ councils (aka soviets) during the Bavarian revolution.
Kershaw suggests that may also have been simple opportunism in a situation that was changing almost every day. His true sympathies clearly lay elsewhere, as became evident once the revolution was crushed.
Thank you terentii. Kershaw does expand on that point further on in the book. Thank you all. Very helpful.