Comment by mmarq
3 years ago
I am going to say that you sound a bit confused.
> But as we consider the inflation we are seeing today, try to imagine how it would be if the inflation is not 5-10% but 29500%
Hitler took power 10 years after the hyperinflation. People didn’t vote for the NSDAP because of hyperinflation, nor they started hating the Jews more than before because of it.
> You are absolutely right that antisemmitism didn't suddenly pop up in 1922, or even with the creation of the "Protocols" conspiracy. But prior to 1922, antisemitism probably wasn't worse in Germany than most other western countries.
Antisemitism was rampant everywhere in the West, the Germans only took it to its inevitable consequences and only after 1933. Of course, this doesn’t change the fact that nazis were criminals, but the Shoah has much deeper roots that the hyperinflation or some temporary unemployment.
For instance, only in 1870 Roman Jews became full citizens, before then they couldn’t own property and, among other things, once a year they were forced to run naked during the Roman carnival. This was only 60 years before Hitler seized power.
You can find similar stories about all cities that had a large Jewish community.
> The person that would say today, that "It's ok to punch a nazi." (meaning MAGA-republican), might very will be the person in 1923 thinking that "It's ok to punch a jew.".
No, it’s not the same thing because no MAGA-republican has been punched and arrested and they even elected a president.
> deeper roots that the hyperinflation or some temporary unemployment.
Oh, and about this part, I think you underestimate the hyperinflation in 22-23 in Germany. Over a period of about 2-3 years, people who had been comfortably part of the upper middle class would lose EVERYTHING, and in many cases end up starving to death. That's not "temporary unemployment".
Read this quote:
- One particularly arresting story is that of Maximilian Bern, a man of literary education exemplary of Germany’s formerly middle-class Bildungsbürgertum. In 1923, writes Taylor
- "[he] withdrew all his savings—100,000 marks, formerly sufficient to support a modestly comfortable retirement—and purchased all it would buy by that time: a subway ticket. The old gentleman took a last ride around the city, then went back to his apartment and locked himself in."
- If you are like me, you probably assumed the next sentence would conclude with suicide. No. “There he died of hunger.” I had to linger over that sentence to fully grasp the reality: starvation in a society that had recently been among the most technologically and commercially advanced of any on earth.
https://fee.org/articles/how-hyperinflation-shattered-german...
For the Germans, this left an impression that resembled the Shoah for the jews.
Imagine seeing former affluent tech workers starving to death in San Francisco in 2029, looking like the corpses of Bergen-Belson prisoners. What would that do to the survivors?
They say that, of all causes of death, hunger is the most horrible.
> people who had been comfortably part of the upper middle class would lose EVERYTHING, and in many cases end up starving to death
The upper middle class own non-monetary assets, they are probably the least affected by inflation.
> For the Germans, this left an impression that resembled the Shoah for the jews.
No, not really and not even close. At least because the Weimar hyperinflation hasn’t caused mass starvation. Second because losing your savings is not even close to being stripped naked and beaten once a week and then being put on a cattle wagon to be slaughtered 1000 kilometres from home.
This subthread was not my main reply, just an aspect I had left out in the other reponse.
> The upper middle class own non-monetary assets, they are probably the least affected by inflation.
First of all, don't confuse hyperinflation with regular inflation. Regular inflation is an indication of a rebalancing of an economy, with some mismanagement on top. Hyperinflation happens when the economic system collapses completely.
One difference is that during normal inflation, non-monetary assets often retain much of their value, while in hyperinflation only assets that help produce food and other essentials really matter (such as owning a farm, a factory, etc).
Middle class workers pre-inflation may have a house, a "save" job with a fixed income and some savings in the bank. When hyperinflation struck, they may have been able to sell the house, but the cash gained would be gone in a couple of weeks. The savings were also gone quickly, and many such jobs would either have salaries lagging behind inflation or people might get fired, unable to find similar work.
Meanwhile, workers in factories and on farms were more like "essential workers" during covid.
>> .... this left an impression ....
> No, not really and not even close.
If you read what you quoted, I was not referring to the effects on those that died, only those who remained. In other words, I was comparing the effect on the German people with the SURVIVORS of the holocaust, as well as on jews that were not directly affected.
These effects are primarily cultural. To this day, the German nation remains fiscally conservative due to the events of 2022-23, very reluctant to allow inflationary actions by the ECB, for instance (as experienced by Greece, 10 years ago).
You are right, of course, that the Holocaust was a larger event, even in terms of the cultural effects. But even if the wound of the hyperinflation was smaller, it was still many times greater than the scars after the 2008 crash in the West.
Maybe the number of actual deaths by starvation was limited, it did occur, especially with people unable to work a job (retired people). Also, even for those who did not die from lack of calories, many were left undernourished or malnourished, causing an uptick in deaths from infections, etc.
But as stated above, my main point is what effect it had on the survivors. Those who saw the previously affluent widdowed aunt fall from grace, having to beg her nephews and nieces for bread. Maybe having to refuse to giver her that bread, because your children were hungry, too.
Experiencing (either directly or through some newspaper) the humiliation when French soldiers entered Germany to confiscate assets when Germany could not (or would not) pay the reparations that was demanded, including seeing the Germans that were either shot or turned into refugees.
Seeing how rich were able to (and smart enough to) shifts their assets that would continue to be productive even during hyperinflation. While you, who were used to thinking that money in the Bank was the safest way to save, kept your money there.
And even if you did manage to secure just enough bread for your familiy to make it into 1924, you would hear stories or see pictures of those who did not, and feel the fear that something happened to you that would prevent you from showing up at the factory that, on most days, would pay you to work.
Such experiences leave deep mental scars, and will tend to harden a person and make them more tribal and aggressive. Make them perfect raw materials to be molded by demagoues like Hitler and Goebbels.
In the end, some did become evil monsters. Maybe some were even born that way. But to the extent that is was environmental, it was certainly not born from privilege. It was, just like in most other cases where the result is genocide, born from hardship and humiliation, combined with a strong feeling of resentment towards those who were seen as responsible.
> Hitler took power 10 years after the hyperinflation.
Hitler started planning a coup in late 1922, during the hyperinflation. It was attempted in late 1923, around the time the hyperinflation was stopped. It failed, and he ended up in prison. In 1924, during his time in prison, he wrote Mein Kampf, which lays out the plan he followed (or tried to) thereafter.
Before 1922, NSDAP (aka Nazi party) was very tiny. During the hyperinflation, it grew to 20000, mostly in Munich. Still small on a national basis, but enough to give it a solid basis as an organization.
Between 1925 and 1929, it grew slowly, but exploded after 1929, as the Great Depression hit Germany hard.
As for the role of hyperinflation in this, it is relatively well documented. Here is one quote from wikipedia:
"The Nazis' strongest appeal was to the lower middle-classes—farmers, public servants, teachers and small businessmen—who had suffered most from the inflation of the 1920s, so who feared Bolshevism more than anything else."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
> Antisemitism was rampant everywhere in the West
At least very widespread. Still, the situation of jews in the West, including in Germany was much better at the time than it was for Blacks in the USA.
In Germany, there were many highly respected German leaders and intellectuals, such as Einstein, Freud and (less known today) Rudolf Hilferding. Hilferding is, quoting wikipedia again "almost universally recognized as the SPD's foremost theoretician of this (20th) century."
> the Germans only took it to its inevitable consequences and only after 1933.
I don't agree that it was inevitable. The Nazis were a marginal force up until 1929. By 1929, most Germans may have gotten over the terrors of 1922-23, but in 1929 the wounds were torn open, and the messages of the "little man with the funny mustache" didn't seem so crazy, after all.
It didn't help that Hilferding was Minister of Finance at the time the Depression started.
"Of course, this doesn’t change the fact that nazis were criminals, but the Shoah has much deeper roots that the hyperinflation or some temporary unemployment."
I'm not claiming that the hyperinflation was the root. I'm claiming it was one of the main sources of energy, and a great inspiration for Hitler himself, direcly before writing Mein Kampf. (Even though he was already an antisemite before 1922, I'm sure the things he saw during those two years reinforced his convitions. Hitler was known to tailor his speechest according to what ressonated with the audience.).
> You can find similar stories about all cities that had a large Jewish community.
Yes, I know. Being a minority comes with a lot of risks and problems. I fully understand why some jews prefer to have at least one state where they can be the majority. (Though it might have been better for world peace had they been given Köningsberg/East Preussia in 1945 instead of being supported in becoming the majority in Israel/Palestine).