862.00/3131
The Ambassador in Germany (Dodd) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 20.]
Sir: In continuation of section 2 of despatch No. 225 of October 26, 1933, I have the honor to report that the campaign for the election on November 12 is now in full swing. Since the writing of the above despatch it appears even more certain that Hitler will obtain an overwhelmingly large affirmative vote which the Nazis will not fail to exploit as wide popular approval of the Government’s general policy at home and abroad. However, in the Germany of today where everything has been gleichgeschaltet, where a demagogue like Goebbels moulds public opinion and the least criticism of the Government’s policy is vigorously suppressed and severely punished, even one-hundred per cent victory at the polls could hardly be regarded as a free expression of the will of the people.
Opponents of the Nazi régime are being systematically intimidated. Nazi speakers have openly boasted that, though the balloting will be secret, a way has been devised of checking up on all the “traitors” who fail to vote for Hitler. In circles opposed to the Nazi régime it is whispered that the election judges have been secretly instructed to mark the envelopes containing the ballots scratched by persons known or suspected of being hostile to the Nazis. A more likely story is that good Nazis have been ordered ostentatiously to open and mark their ballots so that anyone in the polling booth may see the vote they cast; anyone, therefore, who tries to cast a really secret ballot will almost automatically invite suspicion.
The German Jews in particular are between the devil and the deep ska. They are being cowed and intimidated into expressing their approval of a Government which brought them political and economic ruination. By staying away from the polls they would become traitors to the country which tolerates them as a “guest people”; by voting against the Government they run the risk of inviting further political reprisals against them. In private conversation German Jews have made it clear that disfranchisement would be less humiliating than going to the polls on November 12.
[Page 264]In his campaign speeches Hitler takes pains to stress Germany’s love of peace. The old argument that the Brown Army is no more capable of military employment than firemen or the Salvation Army is again brought to the fore. The absurdity of this argument was pointed out in the Embassy’s report on Hitler’s speech before the Reichstag on German foreign policy and disarmament (see despatch No. 2421 of May 20, 193362). This absurdity was most strikingly illustrated by the German Government’s own action in arresting Mr. Noel Panter, the Munich correspondent of the Daily Telegraph, on the charge of espionage because of his report describing a parade and exercises by the S.A. at Kelheim. If the S.A. is as harmless as the Salvation Army it has nothing to conceal and the charge of espionage is incomprehensible. By accusing the correspondent of the Daily Telegraph, the German Government is really accusing itself.
Only a comparatively small number of the more intelligent Nazis realize, or are willing to admit, that the primary purpose of the election is to strengthen Hitler’s position at home. Most Nazis are convinced that “a victory at the polls” can not fail to make an impression on foreign countries, and that the former Allies will then be more inclined to concede to Germany the right to possess at least defensive armaments. These elements have unbounded faith in the daring, courage and pertinacity of their political leaders, as they see it. Their optimism springs from a widespread belief, that the men who hold the reins in other countries are of an inferior calibre, and, if faced with a momentous decision, are certain to make concessions to Germany rather than take the risk of involving their countries in another war. It is the same line of reasoning with which the Nazis operated against the Weimar régime in Germany, and their phenomenal success in the field of domestic politics only tends to enhance the inherent danger of such logic.
Respectfully yours,