‘By the beginning of 1929, the prospects for the survival of the Weimar Republic looked
good’. How far do you agree?
By the beginning of 1929, one could argue that prospects for the Weimar Republic were very
posi ve. This can be said for a plethora of reasons such as the discernible boost of support
in favour of democracy, an increase in economic prosperity as well as the reforma on of the
social welfare system. However what appeared to be successes on the surface, were in
actual fact marred with major weaknesses which assuredly led to the reduc on in the
chances of survival for the Weimar Republic.
One crucial part of the Weimar Republic which exhibited some signs of promise was poli cs.
The SPD (the most prominent democra c party) made major gains in the elec on of 1928
gaining 28.8% of the total votes casted. The prevalence of democracy was further
demonstrated by the reduc on in votes for par es such as the KPD and the Nazi party. As a
result, it could be said that the facet of poli cs illustrated a forward outlook. Yet, there were
s ll fundamental aws within the poli cal system that tarnished these posi ve aspects. For
example, the system of propor onal representa on meant that par es had to rely on
coali ons in order to form a majority within the Reichstag. Ul mately, this meant that many
Germans became disenchanted with the poli cal system, as par es failed to collaborate
e ec vely due to their contras ng poli cal agendas. Chancellor Stresemann had a strong
understanding of the aws within the system and stated in a 1928 speech “We are in the
midst of a parliamentary crisis”. This demonstrates how it was clear to the Chancellor that
poli cal instability was likely and that the Weimar democracy was not secure. Not only that,
but the an -democra c sen ment within Germany had been accentuated by the elec on of
Hindenburg as chancellor. Although throughout his tenure as chancellor Hindenburg abided
by his oath to uphold the cons tu on, he increasingly became the focus of groups who
wanted an authoritarian system. This was an ominous sign for the Weimar Republic, as it
was led by someone who had li le real commitment to democracy. This highlights that in
actuality, the poli cal system demonstrated a clear precedent for the dismal future of the
Weimar Republic.
On the contrary, considerable achievements were made within the provision of welfare. In
1928, two million houses were built and this meant that homelessness was reduced by 60%.
Furthermore, the construc on of local ameni es such as hospitals and parks furthered
support for the Republic. In conjunc on with the various construc on projects, the social
insurance schemes (which were extended in 1927) promoted the democra c system and
overall, the lives of workers were bene ted by the advancements made by the welfare state.
The 1927 Unemployment Insurance Law covered 17 million workers at 75 % pay for three
quarters of the year.
good’. How far do you agree?
By the beginning of 1929, one could argue that prospects for the Weimar Republic were very
posi ve. This can be said for a plethora of reasons such as the discernible boost of support
in favour of democracy, an increase in economic prosperity as well as the reforma on of the
social welfare system. However what appeared to be successes on the surface, were in
actual fact marred with major weaknesses which assuredly led to the reduc on in the
chances of survival for the Weimar Republic.
One crucial part of the Weimar Republic which exhibited some signs of promise was poli cs.
The SPD (the most prominent democra c party) made major gains in the elec on of 1928
gaining 28.8% of the total votes casted. The prevalence of democracy was further
demonstrated by the reduc on in votes for par es such as the KPD and the Nazi party. As a
result, it could be said that the facet of poli cs illustrated a forward outlook. Yet, there were
s ll fundamental aws within the poli cal system that tarnished these posi ve aspects. For
example, the system of propor onal representa on meant that par es had to rely on
coali ons in order to form a majority within the Reichstag. Ul mately, this meant that many
Germans became disenchanted with the poli cal system, as par es failed to collaborate
e ec vely due to their contras ng poli cal agendas. Chancellor Stresemann had a strong
understanding of the aws within the system and stated in a 1928 speech “We are in the
midst of a parliamentary crisis”. This demonstrates how it was clear to the Chancellor that
poli cal instability was likely and that the Weimar democracy was not secure. Not only that,
but the an -democra c sen ment within Germany had been accentuated by the elec on of
Hindenburg as chancellor. Although throughout his tenure as chancellor Hindenburg abided
by his oath to uphold the cons tu on, he increasingly became the focus of groups who
wanted an authoritarian system. This was an ominous sign for the Weimar Republic, as it
was led by someone who had li le real commitment to democracy. This highlights that in
actuality, the poli cal system demonstrated a clear precedent for the dismal future of the
Weimar Republic.
On the contrary, considerable achievements were made within the provision of welfare. In
1928, two million houses were built and this meant that homelessness was reduced by 60%.
Furthermore, the construc on of local ameni es such as hospitals and parks furthered
support for the Republic. In conjunc on with the various construc on projects, the social
insurance schemes (which were extended in 1927) promoted the democra c system and
overall, the lives of workers were bene ted by the advancements made by the welfare state.
The 1927 Unemployment Insurance Law covered 17 million workers at 75 % pay for three
quarters of the year.
