Schriften des Historischen Kollegs - Kolloquien 6 - Historisches Kolleg

22 Larry Eugene Jones
which Germany's parliamentary system had developedsince the founding of the Weimar
Republic. Stresemann's famous speech before the central executive committee of
the German People's Party (Deutsche Volkspartei or DVP) on February 26, 1929 3 , represented
a bitter, yet remarkably perceptive analysis of the general paralysis that had
descended upon Germany's parliamentary institutions, while Koch-Weser's cryptic
comment at the Mannheim party congress of the German Democratic Party (Deutsche
Demokratische Partei or DDP) in October 1929 that the way in which German parliamentarism
had developed represented a mockery (Zerrbild) of the Weimar Constitution
4 reflected the growing disenchantment which he and many of his party colleagues
feit towards the system of govemment in whose establishment they had played such a
prominent role 5 • Just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, this sentiment extended deep
into the ranks of the two liberal parties and represented tangible evidence of the deepening
legitimacy crisis in which German parliamentarism and the Weimar party system
found themselves during the second half of the 1920's.
Of all of Germany's political parties, none were more closely identified with the pluralistic
muli party system which Germany had developed since the end of the previous
century than the two liberal parties. Consequently, the legitimacy crisis which the German
party system experienced in the second half of the 1920's was directly related to
the fate of political liberalism during the early years of the Weimar Republic. In so far
as political parties legitimize themselves through the representation of specific social
and economic interests, the inability of the German liberal parties to protect their predominantly
middle-class constituencies against the ravages of the inflation did much
to compromise their legitimacy in the eyes of those who had initially supported them.
Moreover, the inflation had intensified the general level of interest antagonism within
the two liberal parties to the point where by the end of 1923 they were both threatened
with dissolution into their constituent social and economic interests 6 . Not only
did this leave the German liberal parties vulnerable to the agitation of special-interest
3 Speech by Stresemann before the DVP central executive committee, Feb. 26, 1929, Politisches
Archiv des Auswärtigen Amts, Bonn, Nachlaß Gustav Stresemann (hereafter cited as PA NL Strese
mann), 103/174673-90. Abridged versions of this speech can be found in Gustav Stresemann,
Vermächtnis. Der Nachlaß in drei Bänden, ed. Henry Bernhard (3 vols., Berlin 1932-33) III, 428-
33, and in an article, Die Krise des Parlamentarismus, in: Deutsche Stimmen 39/5 (Mar. 5, 1929)
134-4l.
4 Koch-Weser's speech at the DDP's Mannheim party congress, Oct. 4,1929, Bundesarchiv, Koblenz,
Bestand R 45 111 (hereafter cited as BA R 45 111), 7/17 ff.
5 For further indications of Democratic disiIlusionment with the way in which Weimar parliamentarism
had developed, see Willy Hellpach and Alexander zu Dohna, Die Krisis des deutschen
Parlamentarismus. Vorträge auf der Tagung der deutscher Hochschullehrer in Weimar
1927, (Karlsruhe 1927) 1-20, and Gertrud Bäumer, Sinn und Form geistiger Führung, (Berlin
1930), as weIl as the lecture delivered by Hermann Dietrich before the Berlin organization of the
"Front 1929", Apr. 10, 1929, Bundesarchiv, Koblenz, Nachlaß Hermann Dietrich (hereafter cited
as BA NL Dietrich), 240/3-23.
6 For a detailed analysis of the impact of the inflation upon the German liberal parties, see my
forthcoming essay, Democracy and Liberalism in the German Inflation. The Crisis of a Political
Movement, 1918-1924, in one of the forthcoming volumes in the series Beiträge zu Inflation
und Wiederaufbau in Deutschland und Europa 1914-1924.