Talk:March 1933 German federal election/Archive 1

NSDAP percentage might be wrong
According to ISBN 978 0 719 577130, P. 159, the NSDAP gained 52% of the vote on 5 March 1933. Can someone check which figure is right? It Is Me Here (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The figure of 52% is that of the NSDAP + the DNVP. The table in the article gives 43.9% for the former and 8.0% for the latter. Norvo (talk) 23:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Saz1925.jpg
The image Image:Saz1925.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Math Problems
♠The article suffers from a number of math problems which may be substantial enough to have some effect on historical interpretation.

For the following, I assume full participation by all 647 Reichstag members in the vote on the Enabling Act (in fact, it appears that except for the Communists, who were completely suppressed, and the Social Democrats, who were partially suppressed, all the other Reichstag members did in fact vote --in favor of the Act, i.e. with Hitler-- on the Enabling Act amendment to the Constitution).

1  First of all, the article states (or implies) that if all the Communist members had fully participated in the vote on the Enabling Act --and surely, Communists being Communists, it seems that they would have done so unless prohibited physically or otherwise by duress-- they would have contributed 17% of the parliamentary vote in the Reichstag.

The correct figure is instead about 12.5% (81 KDP seats out of a possible 647 total Reichstag seats); the error apparently comes from using the 110-seat figure for the KDP that existed in the preceding Reichstag rather than the 81-seat figure from the 1933 elections.

2  The article also states (or implies) that in the end, with the Communists conveniently out of the way, thanks to the Reichstag Fire and its fallout, only the SPD was left to oppose the Enabling Act.

But if this is true, then the suppression of the Communists was entirely irrelevant: the SPD together with the KDP would only constitute 201 seats, considerably less than the 216 seats needed to veto a supermajority action (one-third of 647 = 215.7).

3  The article also states (or implies) that the necessary supermajority would be obtained with the coalition of Nazi + Centre + DNVP. But these three parties together only made up 64% (414 seats) of the aggregate 647 seats -- a bit less than the two-thirds needed to meet the supermajority rules.

The fact is that if Hitler could engineer an effective coalition with the Center and the DNVP on the Enabling Act vote-- that is, if those two non-Nazi parties could deliver virtually 100% of their membership in a parliamentary vote requiring supermajority action -- then not much suppression of the Communists would be necessary.... knocking out 27 of their 81 seats would be enough. That would reduce the full Reichstag vote to 620, and the three-party coalition of 414 would be more than two-thirds.

4 The numbers given for the party compositions in the tables don't match the German source shown in the footnotes. That source (a table in German) shows the following as the Reichstag composition after the March 1933 parliamentary elections:

Nazis     288

SPD       125 (120 + 5 aligned with SPD)

KPD        81

Center     73

DNVP       53

BVP        19

Minor       9

TOTAL     647

In the end, the vote on the Enabling Act was 441 to 81: All those voting NO were in fact Social Democrats. Shirer, Rise and Fall.

And since SPD[125] + KPD[81] = 206 leftist members, then it appears that (a) there were no other absences or abstensions (other than the repressed leftist parties) and (b) all the other 441 members voted for the Hitlerian plan (since 441 + 206 = 647).

No other member of any other non-leftist party even abstained? All the non-leftist parties went with the Nazis? Really quite remarkable.

♠ SixBlueFish (talk) 22:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Catholic Center Party or just Center Party?
Source http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.25.178.220 (talk) 05:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Arithmetic irk
The Vote Percentage column in the table states a sum of 100%, however the individual percentages actually tally to 99.9%. Examinator (talk) 11:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In Wikipedia, as in life, some numbers may not add due to rounding. Ground Zero | t 11:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Untitled
What is this nonsense about the concordat causing the Catholic Centre Party to sign? That is a myth. The concordat came much later and even without the centre party they would have had enough votes. 83.128.72.82 (talk) 18:37, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hindenburg's Blessing?
The second paragraph of the article refers to Paul von Hindenburg and the need for his blessing. Was it contemplated that he would use Holy Water? This needs clarification.John Paul Parks (talk) 20:10, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

German "federal" election in March 1933 ?
Whoever had heard that before ? Maybe Hitler then became federal chancelor ??

NO - repeat NO - English-speaking academic historian will ever call the elections in the Weimar Republic "federal" elections, but national or Reichstag elections. The term federal can be used for elections to the Bundestag after 1949, but not for elections before 1945. And according to Wikipedia there were federal elections even under the Kaiser !

Let's rename history and make a joke out of it.

Using the term of "federal elections" for German national elections before 1945 does not further the reputation of Wikipedia as a encyclopedia that can be taken for serious.

Using it is simply wrong and the title of articles should be changed.

--Ft (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Colors switched
The colors are switched between: Ludwig Kaas - Centre Party and Alfred Hugenberg - DNVP

Please compare with the dotted seat distribution below the pictures. There are more blue than black dots, that is - more "Center" than "DNVP"s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.82.209.235 (talk) 06:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Last Multi-Party Elections
This was indeed the last multi-party elections, but not until 1990 as stated prior to my edit. State elections where multiple parties had partecipated were held in both East and West Germany in 1946. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 07:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Color coding for Results chart is off
I'm not sure how to fix this but I noticed that the color coding for the Results chart is off. In the key, the Center Party is coded as black when the chart shows Center Party seats in yellow. And German National People's Party is coded as blue when the chart shows them in black. The same issue is apparent at November 1932 German federal election and July 1932 German federal election (maybe elsewhere too but these are the ones I checked). Does anyone know how to fix this? Many thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Centralised discussion on this issue here. Number   5  7  23:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

The Election results section is really confusing, the colours don't match up.
I dont know how these election parliament graphics are made, but the colours here are confusing and misleading as they don't match up with the results table, for example the Center Party are coloured as black in the table, but black actually respresents the Struggle Allience in the graphic. This would imply the Centre party was part of the Coalition with the Nazis, which is not correct.

I'm open to fixing this myself, but am not sure how the graphics are made and what the standards are for election reporting. EvanM2015 (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)