Overthrowing oppressive regimes by military force

[Thumpalumpacus]

Your same Wikipedia link CLEARLY says "Leader of the Nazi Party: In office 29 June 1921 – 30 April 1945". You've brought me no evidence that he didn't have a seat in parliament until 1933. You've shown me NO information that says that Hitler didn't hold a parliamentary seat. You fucking moron.

Actually, I have. You clearly didn't bother to read the links I presented. You want a source saying "Adolf Hitler was never a member of Parliament"? I'd be surprised if there is one, because no one except you seems to think he ever sat in such a position. But I did show that your claim that he was in the Reichstag in 1925 was false; I will presently demonstrate that your claim that he presided as NaZi leader over the Reichstag is false; I've demonstrated that he was indeed appointed to the office of Chancellor.

How about you bring evidence for your claim that he did get elected to any state office at all, while we're at it? Your posts have been entirely devoid of supporting material, probably because you cannot find one single source that supports your incorrect claim. You're clearly unaware that the NaZis were unable to select the Reichstag president until 1932, and when they did, they selected Hermann Goering. *snort* How many false claims are you going to make before you realize you don't know your ass from your elbow about this topic?

Now, I want you to support your claim.

But that's besides the point anyway. You seem to forget that your little claim that he was not elected. No one gets elected into the position of Chancellor so that point is moot, and only parliamentarians can be appointed Chancellor, obviously, unless you have evidence otherwise?

If no one gets elected to the Chancellorship, why did you claim that Hitler was elected? You certainly didn't try to claim he was elected to Parliament until I called you on your mistake which you haven't the integrity to admit. Additionally, there is no requirement in the Weimar Constitution that the Chancellor be drawn from Parliament. Here's what that Constitution has to say about the office of Chancellor:

Article 52
The Reich government consists of the chancellor and the Reich ministers.

Article 53
The Reich chancellor, and, at his request, the Reich ministers, are appointed and dismissed by the Reich President.

Article 54
The Reich chancellor and the Reich ministers, in order to exercise their mandates, require the confidence of Reichstag. Any one of them has to resign, if Reichstag votes by explicit decision to withdraw its confidence.

Article 55
The Reich chancellor presides the Reich government and conducts its affairs according to the rules of procedure, to be decided upon by Reich government and to be approved by the Reich president.

Article 56
The Reich chancellor determines the political guidelines and is responsible for them to Reichstag. Within these guidelines every Reich minister leads his portfolio independently, and is responsible to Reichstag.

Now you need to link to any state election held where Hitler won any position. Here's your chance to prove me wrong. Get digging.

I'll wait for you to actually research the topic, learn a little about it, and link to your sources for the incorrect claims.

... says the guy who assumes that the German governmental system of the 1920s runs on the same basis as the present-day Australian system.

You do realise that the President (Hindenburg) was directly elected into office by the people, right (in fact he was also re-elected in 1932 TWICE!)? And as you said it was his responsibility to appoint the Chancellor. Hitler won three straight elections - that is to say that the NAZI party held the largest number of seats.

Hitler did not win a single election. 288 NaZis did in March 1932, and Hitler wasn't one of them, because he didn't run for a seat. That was their high-water mark in terms of seats held, by the way. Their numbers shrank in the autumn elections, and the two elections in one year damned near bankrupted the party -- further evidence that they were losing favor in the public eye -- higher expenditures still not gaining votes.

Before Hitler the other Chancellors had also routinely issued rule by decree, so that wasn't anything new either. And they had also been granted emergency powers, so even that wasn't new. Abaris claimed that "virtually every other party was opposed to him" - that's just not true. Firstly, the NAZI's formed a coalition with the German National People's Party, and that did give them an outright majority of 52% in the parliament. Then they went about freeing themselves from negotiations with their coalition partner by passing the Enabling Act 1933 which allowed the NAZI's to bypass parliament entirely. And that was passed into law by a parliamentary vote. Yes the President bent the rules to allow an easier passing, but it didn't matter anyway since it passed easily with 444 votes in favour and 94 against - which was more than the 2/3rd majority required (before any rule bending). It passed with an 83% vote and only needed 67% (2/3rds). If the SPD parliamentarians had been allowed to vote then the result would have been 79% in favour - which is still way more than the votes required (see Wikipedia). I am aware that some people have pointed out the law was unconstitutional, but that's largely irrelevant also since the constitution could have been amended with the same requirement for quorum (67%), therefore had they taken the time to make a constitutional amendment at the same time that made this law legally sound it also would have passed, easily.

None of this -- and more to the point, none, not one, of those links, supports your contention that Hitler was elected to any office at all.

I will respond when you have the courtesy and integrity to support this claim of yours. All the rest is smoke and mirrors in an ironically transparent attempt to avoid admitting error.

Remember, your next post needs to have a source citing one -- just one -- state election that Hitler won. Not the NaZi Reichstag members, not the party as a whole; you will stop moving goalposts and support your incorrect claim that Hitler was elected.

He wasn't elected. He was appointed. I've demonstrated my assertion.

Now it's your turn. Get to work.