Latest / The History of Germany: Kingdoms, War, and Rebuilding Europe — Fexingo History / The Reichstag Fire: How One Blaze Changed Germany Forever
Transcript
- Lucas: If you've been stepping into history with us episode by episode, you've seen how the Weimar Republic stumbled through crises. But on the night of February 27, 1933, something happened that would seal its fate — the Reichstag fire. Luna: The one where the parliament building burned down, right? Lucas: Exactly. And who set it has been argued about ever since. A young Dutch communist named Marinus van der Lubbe was caught inside, half-naked, carrying firelighters. He confessed immediately. But the question is: was he a lone arsonist, or was he a patsy for the Nazis? Lucas: Before we go deep on that — and I know this sounds like a tangent, but it really isn't — I want to mention something. This show exists because listeners like you support it. A couple of dollars a month is genuinely what keeps these going — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, if you've gotten something out of them. Luna: Yeah, it makes a real difference. And we don't run ads, so it's truly listener-powered. Lucas: Right. So, back to the fire. Van der Lubbe was a 24-year-old bricklayer who had come to Germany hoping to spark a revolution. He was blind, partially deaf, and had a history of mental instability. He claims he acted alone, wanting to protest the rising fascism. Luna: But the Nazis immediately blamed the communists. Lucas: They did. Hitler and Göring rushed to the scene, and within hours, Hitler convinced President Hindenburg to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree — the Reichstagsbrandverordnung. That decree suspended habeas corpus, freedom of speech, press, and assembly. It was the legal foundation for the Nazi dictatorship. Lucas: The next day, mass arrests of communists began. Thousands were thrown into prisons and makeshift camps. The Communist Party was effectively outlawed. And then, in March, the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act — the Ermächtigungsgesetz — which gave Hitler the power to make laws without parliament. Luna: So one fire let them dismantle democracy in a matter of weeks. Lucas: Exactly. But here's where it gets murky. Many contemporaries, and later historians, suspected the Nazis themselves started the fire to create a crisis. Göring supposedly had a tunnel from his official apartment to the Reichstag. Van der Lubbe could have been manipulated, or even framed. Lucas: The trial was held at the Reichsgericht in Leipzig in late 1933. Van der Lubbe was the main defendant, along with four Bulgarian communists, including Georgi Dimitrov. Dimitrov famously cross-examined Göring himself, exposing contradictions. All four Bulgarians were acquitted, but van der Lubbe was convicted and executed by guillotine. Luna: Wait, so the court believed van der Lubbe acted alone? Lucas: They did. But that verdict has been contested ever since. During the trial, a counter-trial was organized by émigrés in Paris, the 'Braunbuch' — Brown Book — which argued the Nazis were responsible. After the war, new evidence emerged, like the testimony of an SA man named Hans Walter who claimed he was part of a squad that set the fire. Lucas: But then in 2008, Berlin historian Sven Felix Kellerhoff pored over the archives and argued convincingly that van der Lubbe did it alone. He points to the fact that van der Lubbe's fingerprints were on the firelighters, and his path through the building was consistent with a single person acting quickly. Luna: So is there a consensus now? Lucas: Not really. Most German historians today lean towards van der Lubbe as the sole perpetrator, but a minority still believe the Nazis were involved. The truth is, we may never know for sure. What is certain is the political impact: the fire was the excuse Hitler needed to consolidate power. Lucas: Van der Lubbe's legacy is complicated. After the war, his conviction was overturned in 1967 under a law that allowed for posthumous pardons for Nazi-era injustices. But many still see him as a tool of the Nazis, not a hero. Luna: It's a reminder how fragile democracy can be. Lucas: It really is. And that's something worth reflecting on, especially today. Next time, we'll look at how the Enabling Act actually worked — the vote that sealed the deal.