So what? Democracy isn’t a sacrament, it doesn’t sanctify the government. Hitler was democratically elected. Democracy does not have moral valence as such.
Hitler got 33% of the vote in the last free and fair elections.
But I agree that democratic government doesn't automatically justify everything. Minority and fundamental individual rights are a problem. There are a lot of tricky issues with self referentiality if you think about independence movements for instance.
Yep, Hitler being elected Chancellor was well within the legal framework of the Weimar constitution (even if it was kind of a shady backdoor deal). Him rigging the 1933 election and later grabbing all the power through the Enabling Act wasn't.
Hitler wasn't elected, in fact the Weimar Republic was mostly incapable of forming a working government during the time it existed. Like many before him Hitler was assigned his position in the hope that his failure to uphold his promises would also cripple his support in the population. His biggest grab for power was underlined by armed SA troops in the Reichstag, a lot of imprisoned or outright missing politicians and Göring fudging the attendance count to meet the minimum requirements for a legitimate vote.
The Nazi faction, led by Hitler actually 'won' the election because their party got the most votes, but not enough to have an absolute majority so they were going to have to make some kind of coalition.
> The Nazi faction, led by Hitler actually 'won' the election because their party got the most votes, but not enough to have an absolute majority
The coalition Hitler lead had around 240 of 580 seats. They didn't have an absolute majority because they weren't even near having any kind of majority. Of course a hundred of the other seats were held by communists and those went up in flames after the Reichstag fire and the subsequent ban on left leaning political organisations.
> A similar thing could easily happen today.
The last time a German government tried to outlaw an opposition party it ended up with the courts throwing the case out for involving too many law enforcement moles.
I find the elected fascist to be an interesting thought experiment. If someone was fairly elected on a platform of genocide, would you comply? If someone doesn't, does that mean democracy is second to morality? And, if they don't, do they think that person should be allowed to stand on that plaform?
Duh, obviously democracy ranks way lower than morality.
Whether someone should be allowed to campaign for genocide depends on the laws of the country. In modern Germany platforms like that are explicitly forbidden. But the laws of the Weimar Republic were more value agnostic.
