Bormann or Goebbels

Discussions on all aspects of the NSDAP, the other party organizations and the government. Hosted by Michael Miller & Igor Karpov.
Ken Jasper
In memoriam
Posts: 699
Joined: 03 Apr 2002 22:56
Location: Virginia

Post by Ken Jasper » 17 Jul 2002 20:50

At minimum Bormann pretended to be as close to Hitler as Goebbels. Bormann also had a house on the Obersalzburg and socialized regularly with Hitler and Bormann's children were reportedly great favorites of Hitler's. Bormann portrayed himself to be nothing more than a totally loyal servant of Hitler. The word toady comes to mind. In fact he was so close to Hitler, I imagine he could have checked the Fuehrer for colon polyps. 8)

User avatar
LAH
Member
Posts: 834
Joined: 28 Apr 2002 16:45
Location: Telford England

Post by LAH » 17 Jul 2002 20:59

It is a strange irony that in the end Hitler was reliant on Bormann, and Bormann was reliant on Hitler for his power, without Hitler there was no power.
Bormann was so reliant on Hiler for his place that he was sending out orders from the bunker in hitlers name even after his master was dead.

It was bormann who turned hitler against goering at the end because bormann didn't want to loose his power base. (hitler)

It was a brave man who crossed bormann, most who did lived (or didn't) to regret it.

LAH

User avatar
Geli
Member
Posts: 957
Joined: 09 Jul 2002 04:53
Location: USA

Post by Geli » 18 Jul 2002 03:34

On April 29, 1945, Hitler appointed Goebbels as Chancellor of the Reich and Bormann as Party Minister, in that order. Which of those positions is more powerful?

Ken Jasper
In memoriam
Posts: 699
Joined: 03 Apr 2002 22:56
Location: Virginia

Post by Ken Jasper » 18 Jul 2002 03:45

Frankly, Geli, at that point in time such appointments were totally meaningless. With their world collapsing around them, Goebbels and Bormann were barely in charge of their own lunch.

User avatar
Geli
Member
Posts: 957
Joined: 09 Jul 2002 04:53
Location: USA

Post by Geli » 19 Jul 2002 00:26

I know that, but I think the appointments are interesting. Isn't the most powerful person the one whom Hitler would have trusted to take his place?

Ken Jasper
In memoriam
Posts: 699
Joined: 03 Apr 2002 22:56
Location: Virginia

Post by Ken Jasper » 19 Jul 2002 03:42

Well Geli, normally I would agree with you except for that the fact that on 30 April 1945, Hitler appointed Admiral Karl Dönitz to succeed him as Führer.

User avatar
Geli
Member
Posts: 957
Joined: 09 Jul 2002 04:53
Location: USA

Post by Geli » 19 Jul 2002 23:59

Dönitz was appointed President and Goebbels was appointed Chancellor. So, Chancellor is like Vice President?

User avatar
GFM2000
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 13 Mar 2002 08:27

Post by GFM2000 » 20 Jul 2002 03:42

Geli wrote:Dönitz was appointed President and Goebbels was appointed Chancellor. So, Chancellor is like Vice President?


I find this decision of Hitler's quite interesting. When Hitler came to power, he called himself "Führer and Chancellor" of the German people. The Presidential title was left untouched after Hindenburg's death.

Hitler's decision to name Dönitz his successor, and "President", would suggest that Dönitz would assume dictatorial powers similar to himself (Hitler), and yes, that would also implicate that Goebbels, as "Chancellor", would be Dönitz's adjutant.

Although Hitler's decision is somewhat academic, I am interested in finding out more about Dönitz's moves in forming his new cabinet to negotiate with the (Western) Allies. Himmler, for example, was stripped of all his powers in Hitler's last will and political testimony. That, however, did not stop the former SS chief from elbowling his way to Dönitz's office to try and negotiate a position in the crumbling Reich. Dönitz, trying to maintain a positive outlook with the Allied powers, wisely dismissed Himmler and the SS.

In the meantime, Himmler set up his own government in the independent state of Schewig-Holstein (sp).

What do you folks think? Do you have any inputs in the German government from 1945 - 1946?

Ken Jasper
In memoriam
Posts: 699
Joined: 03 Apr 2002 22:56
Location: Virginia

Post by Ken Jasper » 20 Jul 2002 04:07

Well in the American Zones, any German "Govenments" in 1945 -46 would have been mere puppets of the local US Military Governors.

varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Bormann The Bully!

Post by varjag » 20 Jul 2002 13:41

I believe that Adolph Himself, said to someone (Speer?)... that...
'I know Bormann is a bully...
but I need him to win this war...'
Hitlers choice in his testament - is absolute evidence - that he used
Bormann for his own ends, as a politician, Goebbels got his reward -
as a military leader, Dönitz got his....
Hitler was smart enough to realise that either - had to find THEIR own
'eminence grize' - and it wasn't gonna be Bormann......

User avatar
Phil V
Financial supporter
Posts: 1635
Joined: 21 May 2002 12:18
Location: Australia (usually)

Post by Phil V » 20 Jul 2002 14:12

Does anyone have a photo of Goebbels in the same room at the same time as Bormann?

And why did Herman where all that make up?

Hmmmmmmm.

pdhinkle36ID
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 19 Mar 2002 00:58
Location: USA

THE Secretary, Martin Bormann

Post by pdhinkle36ID » 21 Jul 2002 20:35

No one had more control than Bormann, everythng and every one coming in and going out of Hitlers Office was screened by Bormann.
With Hess,s departure Bormann got control and never lost it.

Return to “NSDAP, other party organizations & Government”