Democracy Undermined: Polarization and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic

This paper examines the collapse of the Weimar Republic through the lens of contemporary literature on political polarization, offering insights into how extreme polarization undermines democratic stability. The Weimar case uniquely combines both ideological and affective dimensions of polarization, highlighting the interplay of elite actions, mass emotions, and deep societal divisions. By exploring the dynamics of polarization as extraordinary conflict, the paper emphasizes the centrality of mutual threat perceptions in eroding basic democratic trust. Building on Andreas Schedler’s framework, the analysis distinguishes between democratic political disagreements and polarization fueled by antagonistic relationships centered on existential threats. This distinction underscores how polarization not only disrupts pluralism but also transforms political opponents into perceived existential enemies, thereby undermining democratic safeguards. Empirical insights from the Weimar Republic illustrate how deep-rooted ideological and social divisions, compounded by growing societal threat perceptions, can transform political landscapes not only into battlegrounds between irreconcilable imagined communities, but a pervasive demand for national unity and strong leadership. The Nazis’ ability to transcend traditional political and social boundaries, capitalizing on a widespread yearning for a cohesive national identity and exploiting societal discontents, reveals the dangers inherent in extreme polarization. Their success lay in rallying diverse voter groups around a shared rejection of the threatened present and the perceived failures of the Weimar political system, resulting in mutual intolerance and the collapse of democratic trust. The Nazis’ success, thus, can be seen as both a symptom and catalyst of extreme polarization, offering top-down solutions that resonated widely due to the prevailing social, economic, and political crises. As Achen and Bartels argued, the rise of Hitler underscores electoral outcomes’ dependence on political identification and leaders’ personal charisma over policy choices, as “German voters first decided whether they liked Hitler as a potential leader, and then if they did, they adopted his policy views” (Achen and Bartels 2016, 314). Thus, “Hitler’s electoral success is a story of identity groups” and “the strong leader who can identify domestic enemies and who promises to do something about them without worrying overmuch about legalities” (Achen and Bartels 2016, 315). In sum, Hitler’s ascent marked a critical intersection between extreme polarization and a widespread societal longing for a strong leadership within a polity that provided institutional opportunities for the latter. In essence, the fall of the Weimar Republic illustrates the destructive potential of polarization. When democratic conflicts escalate into mutual existential threats, the fundamental pillars of democracy—pluralism, equality, and trust—are undermined, paving the way for authoritarian alternatives. The re-evaluation of this classic case study could provide valuable insights into contemporary challenges posed by affective polarization and democratic erosion.