What do you think?
Rate this book
1923: The Forgotten Crisis in the Year of Hitler’s Coup
'Gripping . . . thoroughly researched and beautifully written . . . a warning for our times' Alex Watson, author of Ring of Steel
'Fascinating . . . shows powerfully that there was nothing inevitable about the survival of Germany's young democracy in that year - nor about its death a decade later. A timely reminder' Katja Hoyer, author of Beyond the Wall
The astonishing year when German democracy faced crisis and near destruction.
1923 was one of the most remarkable years of modern European history. In January, France and Belgium militarily occupied Germany's economic heartland, the Ruhr; triggering a series of crises that almost spiralled out of control. Hyperinflation plunged millions into poverty. The search for scapegoats empowered political extremes. Hitler's populism ascended to national prominence. Communists, Nazis, separatists all thought that they could use the crises to destroy democracy.
None succeeded. 1923 was the year of Hitler's first victory - and his first defeat. Fanning the flames of instability, anti-government and antisemitic sentiment, the Nazis' abortive yet pivotal putsch in a Munich beer hall failed when they were abandoned by their likeminded conservative allies.
Drawing on previously unseen sources, Mark Jones weaves together a thrilling and resonant narrative of German lives in this turbulent time. Tracing Hitler's rise, we see how political pragmatism and international cooperation eventually steered the nation away from total insurrection. A decade later, when Weimar democracy eventually succumbed to tyranny, the warnings from 1923 - rising of nationalist rhetoric, fragile European consensus, and underestimation the of the enemies of liberalism - became only too apparent.
This account of the republic's convulsions and survival offers a gripping image of a modern society in extreme crisis.
'Fascinating . . . shows powerfully that there was nothing inevitable about the survival of Germany's young democracy in that year - nor about its death a decade later. A timely reminder' Katja Hoyer, author of Beyond the Wall
The astonishing year when German democracy faced crisis and near destruction.
1923 was one of the most remarkable years of modern European history. In January, France and Belgium militarily occupied Germany's economic heartland, the Ruhr; triggering a series of crises that almost spiralled out of control. Hyperinflation plunged millions into poverty. The search for scapegoats empowered political extremes. Hitler's populism ascended to national prominence. Communists, Nazis, separatists all thought that they could use the crises to destroy democracy.
None succeeded. 1923 was the year of Hitler's first victory - and his first defeat. Fanning the flames of instability, anti-government and antisemitic sentiment, the Nazis' abortive yet pivotal putsch in a Munich beer hall failed when they were abandoned by their likeminded conservative allies.
Drawing on previously unseen sources, Mark Jones weaves together a thrilling and resonant narrative of German lives in this turbulent time. Tracing Hitler's rise, we see how political pragmatism and international cooperation eventually steered the nation away from total insurrection. A decade later, when Weimar democracy eventually succumbed to tyranny, the warnings from 1923 - rising of nationalist rhetoric, fragile European consensus, and underestimation the of the enemies of liberalism - became only too apparent.
This account of the republic's convulsions and survival offers a gripping image of a modern society in extreme crisis.
382 pages, Kindle Edition
Published May 25, 2023
61 people are currently reading
528 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
August 22, 2024
Mark Jones has written a very strong and informative book on a year that almost destroyed democracy and Germany the nation itself.
The book is set out very well with a description of the political parties in German in 1923, and also an introduction to German in 1923 entitled The Democracy that would not die. From here the four major parts cover 1922 and the coming crisis and then Winter & Spring 1923, Summer 1923 and Autumn and Winter 1923.
The story as a whole is relatively well-known but what I thought was well done by Mr Jones is that he clearly outlines the French and Belgian occupation of the Ruhr, and how this event sparked serious criticism and industrial action to reduce industrial production, notably coal, for the allies and their reparations. Moreover, with the hyperinflation, the antisemitism across Germany and the failed putsches, including Hitler's in November 1923, that he describes the reader comes away better understanding events and ready to read further and deeper.
The detail on how the Ruhr occupation was actually managed and policed by the French was eye-opening, and it was here that I had not realised the sheer brutality and violence meted out to the Germans by the occupiers. Most notably Jones highlights the physical and sexual violence against women, with rapes, often in home invasions and indeed even group sponsored male rape. The record of the French in prosecuting this is best described as patchy as we read of investigations and aftermath.
The policy and strategy of French prime minister Raymond Poincaré underwrote this violence as France looked to destroy any German spirit of resistance. The occupiers went as as far as creating a new railway company controlled by France and at one stage seriously considering annexing the Ruhr. Numerous arrests followed the path of the occupation including leading industrialists sentenced to spells in prison.
Throughout Poincaré stood firm to criticism from other nations and ignored pleas from German politicians and industrialists to temper violence and enable Germany to function and pay reparations; all the while further fermenting the seeds of left- and right-wing extremism.
The period of hyperinflation and how and why it happened - directly linked to a policy of funding wages, childcare and other social costs for workers who were on strike in the Ruhr - and what happened is very well done. In essence, we have a early version of what many states did during Covid by furloughing their workforce. The challenges created those photos we have all seen of wheelbarrows of cash to buy (hopefully) a loaf of bread or children building huge towers with paper money.
With the deprivation and hyperinflation the underlaying antisemitism that was very present in 1920s German exploded with violence across the country being seen. The Beer Hall Putsch was not the only attempted coup d'etat that year but, as Jones describes, it is the most famous/infamous thanks in the main to the Nazi's rise to and in power from 1933.
The role of newspapers is also well explored and used to illustrate events and show how 1923 was seen and reported by the various titles across the political spectrum. The period of this single year comes to life under Mr Jones's pen and his final chapter on De-escalation and the Triumph of Reason discusses the failure of the Ruhr occupation, a new reparations deal, the long path back to prosperity for the middle-classes and the changes in personnel for the Weimar administration whilst keep democracy alive.
His final chapter discusses the path to 1933 and after where Hitler was able to take power using the ballot box and then reversing the democracy of Weimar to create the Third Reich. It is clear from Jones's views in summing up this reasoned end to the book that the path to Hitler was not wholly straight or created by early Weimar, but as we now know those events of 1923 greatly scarred Germany and its politics, and helped weaken a fledgling democracy to allow national socialism an unwelcome place in 20th century European history. One question I was left with: Had Poincaré not occupied the Ruhr to secure greater reparation payments and break Germany would German and world history see Hitler as a even a little footnote? One cannot know but reading this book has made me think possibly, just possibly.
The book is set out very well with a description of the political parties in German in 1923, and also an introduction to German in 1923 entitled The Democracy that would not die. From here the four major parts cover 1922 and the coming crisis and then Winter & Spring 1923, Summer 1923 and Autumn and Winter 1923.
The story as a whole is relatively well-known but what I thought was well done by Mr Jones is that he clearly outlines the French and Belgian occupation of the Ruhr, and how this event sparked serious criticism and industrial action to reduce industrial production, notably coal, for the allies and their reparations. Moreover, with the hyperinflation, the antisemitism across Germany and the failed putsches, including Hitler's in November 1923, that he describes the reader comes away better understanding events and ready to read further and deeper.
The detail on how the Ruhr occupation was actually managed and policed by the French was eye-opening, and it was here that I had not realised the sheer brutality and violence meted out to the Germans by the occupiers. Most notably Jones highlights the physical and sexual violence against women, with rapes, often in home invasions and indeed even group sponsored male rape. The record of the French in prosecuting this is best described as patchy as we read of investigations and aftermath.
The policy and strategy of French prime minister Raymond Poincaré underwrote this violence as France looked to destroy any German spirit of resistance. The occupiers went as as far as creating a new railway company controlled by France and at one stage seriously considering annexing the Ruhr. Numerous arrests followed the path of the occupation including leading industrialists sentenced to spells in prison.
Throughout Poincaré stood firm to criticism from other nations and ignored pleas from German politicians and industrialists to temper violence and enable Germany to function and pay reparations; all the while further fermenting the seeds of left- and right-wing extremism.
The period of hyperinflation and how and why it happened - directly linked to a policy of funding wages, childcare and other social costs for workers who were on strike in the Ruhr - and what happened is very well done. In essence, we have a early version of what many states did during Covid by furloughing their workforce. The challenges created those photos we have all seen of wheelbarrows of cash to buy (hopefully) a loaf of bread or children building huge towers with paper money.
With the deprivation and hyperinflation the underlaying antisemitism that was very present in 1920s German exploded with violence across the country being seen. The Beer Hall Putsch was not the only attempted coup d'etat that year but, as Jones describes, it is the most famous/infamous thanks in the main to the Nazi's rise to and in power from 1933.
The role of newspapers is also well explored and used to illustrate events and show how 1923 was seen and reported by the various titles across the political spectrum. The period of this single year comes to life under Mr Jones's pen and his final chapter on De-escalation and the Triumph of Reason discusses the failure of the Ruhr occupation, a new reparations deal, the long path back to prosperity for the middle-classes and the changes in personnel for the Weimar administration whilst keep democracy alive.
His final chapter discusses the path to 1933 and after where Hitler was able to take power using the ballot box and then reversing the democracy of Weimar to create the Third Reich. It is clear from Jones's views in summing up this reasoned end to the book that the path to Hitler was not wholly straight or created by early Weimar, but as we now know those events of 1923 greatly scarred Germany and its politics, and helped weaken a fledgling democracy to allow national socialism an unwelcome place in 20th century European history. One question I was left with: Had Poincaré not occupied the Ruhr to secure greater reparation payments and break Germany would German and world history see Hitler as a even a little footnote? One cannot know but reading this book has made me think possibly, just possibly.
October 15, 2023
I'm afraid, this read like an apologia; a justification of the atrocities later committed by Hitler and his cronies.
I do understand the economic devastation that the German nation endured during the foreign occupation of the Ruhr industrial region, may have led somewhat directly to later events. But I cannot believe a few true and false allegations of rape and pillage would have justified the massacre of millions of people.
I do understand the economic devastation that the German nation endured during the foreign occupation of the Ruhr industrial region, may have led somewhat directly to later events. But I cannot believe a few true and false allegations of rape and pillage would have justified the massacre of millions of people.
February 4, 2023
Die französische Besetzung des Rheinlandes bildet den Hauptteil des Buches. Die Details dazu waren mir bisher nicht bekannt. Ein gut zu lesendes bzw. übersetztes Buch.
July 5, 2025
This book changed my thinking. Liberal democracies need to be stricter with groups whose ideology is fundamentally against liberal democracy.
Our societies are built on plurality and universal suffrage and freedom of worship and equal treatment before the law. If you’re fighting against these things then you can f*ck off. We can be liberal about everything except illiberalism.
Lots of super-interesting history here. I didn’t realise that the occupation of the Ruhr was separate to the Rhineland occupation under the Versailles treaty. The Ruhr occupation was French military do-something-ism under the president Poincaré, trying to look tough to a domestic audience and punish Germany for making a reparations side-deal with Russia.
As the history of Europe's empires during the twentieth century shows clearly, it is a lot harder for politicians to admit to post-imperial powerlessness than it is for them to attempt to deliver military solutions to political and economic problems
The consequences of the Ruhr occupation were disastrous. Under occupation there was no coal or steel for anyone, and the need to pay wages bankrupted the state and lead to the hyper-inflation. It was also fascinating reading about the action that took place in all the local places in the Ruhr that I know well - Gelsenkirchen, Essen, Bochum, Dortmund, Buer!
The German national government in this era had the legal tools to crack down on the fascists - they passed a special law like the Verfassungsschutz now. But they didn’t use it on Hitler after the Munich putsch - they let him be tried by a sympathetic local court. Everyone seemed worried about upsetting the fascists and getting shouted at. It was easier to go hassle the communists instead.
The organisation of these early-days Nazis was also a surprise. I’d always wondered how you had paramilitary groups like the SA wandering the streets before Hitler took power - how was that even legal? It seems they just started organising and got lucky that the state (Bavaria, and the national government) didn’t come in early and take their guns and lock them up. Then they got more confident and better organised and it was too late.
And the guy in charge had a clear vision of how to push forward:
For him, there could never be an internal or external truce. Violence was sacred to him. Already at this time, his conception of politics was based upon having the willpower to go on the offensive, regardless of any material or strategic limitations. This conception would remain fundamental to his decision-making for the rest of his life.
Anyway I’d better not be too explicit about the comparisons to Trumpism (like attacking the press, attacking the critics, encouraging worship of himself and the military, seeing the administrative state as the enemy, and of course the odd political assassination by your supporters) or someone will report my review and they won’t let me back into the US.
And I’d better not suggest banning the AfD as a verfassungsfeindliche Organisation or I’ll get beaten up in some street march!
Some other similarities to present times - the reaction of the ‘sensible majority’, talking down the threat and associating the success with less-educated people. This kind of arrogance just adds fuel to the fire, and that fire is burning under your house!
In an early example of the belief that Germany was too educated to fall for his racist politics, it added that the people who supported Hitler were largely drawn from the less well-educated sections of society.
Hitler was aware his movement was considered low class by the Bavarian establishment. That is why in the spring of 1923 he craved the support and acknowledgement of his social superiors. He enjoyed developing relations with upper-class benefactors, privately plaving the role of socially awkward but politically astute rising star.
I love the bio of the author of this book. Grew up in Ireland, watching the Troubles. Wanted to study violent conflict but recognised it would be hard to be objective about NI, so went to Germany, studied the Ruhr Uni Bochum and the FU Berlin. Dedicated the book to his German wife and dual-nationality kids :)
Our societies are built on plurality and universal suffrage and freedom of worship and equal treatment before the law. If you’re fighting against these things then you can f*ck off. We can be liberal about everything except illiberalism.
Lots of super-interesting history here. I didn’t realise that the occupation of the Ruhr was separate to the Rhineland occupation under the Versailles treaty. The Ruhr occupation was French military do-something-ism under the president Poincaré, trying to look tough to a domestic audience and punish Germany for making a reparations side-deal with Russia.
As the history of Europe's empires during the twentieth century shows clearly, it is a lot harder for politicians to admit to post-imperial powerlessness than it is for them to attempt to deliver military solutions to political and economic problems
The consequences of the Ruhr occupation were disastrous. Under occupation there was no coal or steel for anyone, and the need to pay wages bankrupted the state and lead to the hyper-inflation. It was also fascinating reading about the action that took place in all the local places in the Ruhr that I know well - Gelsenkirchen, Essen, Bochum, Dortmund, Buer!
The German national government in this era had the legal tools to crack down on the fascists - they passed a special law like the Verfassungsschutz now. But they didn’t use it on Hitler after the Munich putsch - they let him be tried by a sympathetic local court. Everyone seemed worried about upsetting the fascists and getting shouted at. It was easier to go hassle the communists instead.
The organisation of these early-days Nazis was also a surprise. I’d always wondered how you had paramilitary groups like the SA wandering the streets before Hitler took power - how was that even legal? It seems they just started organising and got lucky that the state (Bavaria, and the national government) didn’t come in early and take their guns and lock them up. Then they got more confident and better organised and it was too late.
And the guy in charge had a clear vision of how to push forward:
For him, there could never be an internal or external truce. Violence was sacred to him. Already at this time, his conception of politics was based upon having the willpower to go on the offensive, regardless of any material or strategic limitations. This conception would remain fundamental to his decision-making for the rest of his life.
Anyway I’d better not be too explicit about the comparisons to Trumpism (like attacking the press, attacking the critics, encouraging worship of himself and the military, seeing the administrative state as the enemy, and of course the odd political assassination by your supporters) or someone will report my review and they won’t let me back into the US.
And I’d better not suggest banning the AfD as a verfassungsfeindliche Organisation or I’ll get beaten up in some street march!
Some other similarities to present times - the reaction of the ‘sensible majority’, talking down the threat and associating the success with less-educated people. This kind of arrogance just adds fuel to the fire, and that fire is burning under your house!
In an early example of the belief that Germany was too educated to fall for his racist politics, it added that the people who supported Hitler were largely drawn from the less well-educated sections of society.
Hitler was aware his movement was considered low class by the Bavarian establishment. That is why in the spring of 1923 he craved the support and acknowledgement of his social superiors. He enjoyed developing relations with upper-class benefactors, privately plaving the role of socially awkward but politically astute rising star.
I love the bio of the author of this book. Grew up in Ireland, watching the Troubles. Wanted to study violent conflict but recognised it would be hard to be objective about NI, so went to Germany, studied the Ruhr Uni Bochum and the FU Berlin. Dedicated the book to his German wife and dual-nationality kids :)
January 28, 2025
I knew most of the stuff anyway from general interest in the topic but this was more in depth which was nice
July 24, 2024
This was an excellent read about a pivotal year in German history. I found it full of information I was not aware of. I knew the basics: French and Belgian occupation of the Ruhr, the mega-inflation crisis, and Hitler's failed putsch. I know of these because they came up in O-Level and A-Level history, but we never dug down into the detail.
I never knew, for example, how hostile the Ruhr occupation was. How insanely Poincaré kept pushing it even as it became clear that it wasn't going to achieve what it was going to achieve and how much it helped undermine - but not destroy - the Weimar Republic. The details were quite a shock.
However Jones does a great job of talking through events and consequences whilst pointing out that Hitler's rise to power wasn't inevitable after 1923. As well as why opportunities were missed to stamp far right Nationalism out. Weimar was unlucky.
Jones also draws some lessons for us in 2024 from those events about populism and how to combat it. I think one rule is that extremists can't be moderated by being made part of a government. Sooner or later they're going to overthrow that government. The important thing is to defend democracy with all the tools at its disposal, which is often hard when the media is owned by people who have an interest in undermining democracy.
This is also an excellent book to read for those people who think Nazism was 'socialist'.
Worth reading and pondering on.
I never knew, for example, how hostile the Ruhr occupation was. How insanely Poincaré kept pushing it even as it became clear that it wasn't going to achieve what it was going to achieve and how much it helped undermine - but not destroy - the Weimar Republic. The details were quite a shock.
However Jones does a great job of talking through events and consequences whilst pointing out that Hitler's rise to power wasn't inevitable after 1923. As well as why opportunities were missed to stamp far right Nationalism out. Weimar was unlucky.
Jones also draws some lessons for us in 2024 from those events about populism and how to combat it. I think one rule is that extremists can't be moderated by being made part of a government. Sooner or later they're going to overthrow that government. The important thing is to defend democracy with all the tools at its disposal, which is often hard when the media is owned by people who have an interest in undermining democracy.
This is also an excellent book to read for those people who think Nazism was 'socialist'.
Worth reading and pondering on.
August 29, 2024
It's always interesting what can be learned from a deep dive into just one year of history. I suppose I knew that 1923 was roughly the year Hitler first attempted to seize power in Germany, and that the famous hyperinflation took place around that same time, when people had to push wheelbarrows full of bank notes just to buy a loaf of bread.
But 1923 found Germany in even rougher position than that. It started early, when France invaded the industrial Ruhr area of Germany, intending to take over the coal and other products produced in that region. This is actually something I don't remember ever knowing about before, but it set all the events of that year in motion. As an attempt to fight the French without actually going to war, the government came up with passive resistance, asking all the miners and laborers in the Ruhr to refuse to work for the French. This meant those people had to be paid, and in order to do that, the government printed up much more money than it had before (and there was already a pretty heavy inflationary load in the country). That led the money to become worth less and less, reaching absurd levels by the fall of that year.
Into this instability came three factors. There was a movement in the Rhineland to try to secede from Germany and start its own nation. There were two large states within Germany where communists tried to take over the government. And, the Nazis figured they'd been complaining for a long time, so they staged a putsch in Munich. The national government managed to suppress all these attempts, and Jones lays out the details of how they did it very well. Of course, for whatever reason, and Jones offers some speculation, Hitler and his cronies were not punished nearly as heavily as their actions deserved, which allowed them to come back and actually succeed a few years later.
The great lesson Jones offers is: "The politics of hatred can only function when violent and discriminatory speech acts go unpunished. Ultimately, politics in a democracy can only function when the system itself is respected and honoured." Yep.
But 1923 found Germany in even rougher position than that. It started early, when France invaded the industrial Ruhr area of Germany, intending to take over the coal and other products produced in that region. This is actually something I don't remember ever knowing about before, but it set all the events of that year in motion. As an attempt to fight the French without actually going to war, the government came up with passive resistance, asking all the miners and laborers in the Ruhr to refuse to work for the French. This meant those people had to be paid, and in order to do that, the government printed up much more money than it had before (and there was already a pretty heavy inflationary load in the country). That led the money to become worth less and less, reaching absurd levels by the fall of that year.
Into this instability came three factors. There was a movement in the Rhineland to try to secede from Germany and start its own nation. There were two large states within Germany where communists tried to take over the government. And, the Nazis figured they'd been complaining for a long time, so they staged a putsch in Munich. The national government managed to suppress all these attempts, and Jones lays out the details of how they did it very well. Of course, for whatever reason, and Jones offers some speculation, Hitler and his cronies were not punished nearly as heavily as their actions deserved, which allowed them to come back and actually succeed a few years later.
The great lesson Jones offers is: "The politics of hatred can only function when violent and discriminatory speech acts go unpunished. Ultimately, politics in a democracy can only function when the system itself is respected and honoured." Yep.
July 12, 2024
Definitely recommend for any history reader 👍 The book is not entirely about Hitler, but focuses on the catastrophic political turmoil taking place in Germany in 1923 (particularly hyperinflation and France occupation) that nearly lead to a German civil war.
The author does a fantastic job shining a light on how Hitler managed to gain followers during a time of such great suffering. Very insightful and well researched. 5 ⭐️
The author does a fantastic job shining a light on how Hitler managed to gain followers during a time of such great suffering. Very insightful and well researched. 5 ⭐️
February 23, 2024
A great incite to European history after WW1 and how Germany’s defeat was handled by the victors. This precipitated the inflation, depression, oppression by the French to try to annex part of the country, and division of the different sects to almost total civil war. The rise of Adolph Hitler and the Nazi’s was in its infancy and was defeated in a putsch in 1923 only to arise again in a fervor. The German’s as a whole were totally beaten down to drastic living after the first WW. They had to find rallying points to survive. The terrible thing was they found racism and dictatorship from Hitler as their escape. Hopefully the world has learned from this situation.
January 22, 2025
- Page Turner
April 21, 2025
From riots in the Ruhr to Bavarian beer halls and even Soviet Saxony, this book covers all the shocking events that took place within this one year of unparalleled crisis in German history.
January 28, 2024
3.75 / 5.0
Ordered and Purchased from Phinney Books January 19th and January 24th, 2023
Well written deep dive into 1923 Germany. Illuminates some hidden corners of events and players.
Over promises on theme though and is a bit disappointing as a result.
Ordered and Purchased from Phinney Books January 19th and January 24th, 2023
Well written deep dive into 1923 Germany. Illuminates some hidden corners of events and players.
Over promises on theme though and is a bit disappointing as a result.
November 2, 2024
Despite presenting a decent amount of new information to me (which is a low bar due to my ignorance of the period), this work by historian Mark Jones isn't something I'd recommend. Because of its misleading characterization, a weak central argument, and near-obsession with violence, it felt more like a cable network newstainment program teasing you with the lead the whole time but making you wait 47 minutes for what turns out to be a less-than-spectacular story.
I don't want to talk shit about an author's work, particularly when I've never written or published a damn thing myself, and I definitely don't take pleasure in giving a thumbs down to a historian's effort at helping us better understand the world, but damn it, I also can't lie.
Let me start with what I thought was good about the book. Jones helps the reader understand the conditions of the German people after the World War and within the period of the Weimar Republic. It's not just the wild inflation of a shattered economy or the limitations put forth at the Treaty of Versailles, both of which I knew about. It was the occupation of the Ruhr region by the French and Belgians, and we're talking a brutal occupation that included beatings of the citizens on the street, rape of the women in their homes, and plain old murder. I never knew about any of this, and it's an important part of explaining why extremists groups gained support in the country during this time.
The economics are delved into quite a bit, with the French leadership portrayed as a sort of villain in the story, extracting as much of the natural resources from Germany as they can to pay war reparations and, frankly, for revenge for what happened to France in WWI. The development of numerous factions among the German people was also fascinating to learn about; it gave me an opportunity to see how different the regions actually are from each other (Bavaria, the Rhineland, Prussia, Berlin, etc). And I felt that the details provided on communist aggression and Jewish treatment were excellent.
Where it primarily fell apart for me can be categorized into two big reasons and two little ones. First and foremost, I felt led on that this was going to be a book focusing on terrible things Adolf Hitler and his Nazis were doing to people in order to grab power from a weak government and what that government was doing about it. It wasn't. From the first page on, Jones continued to hint at the badness of Hitler but the bulk of the actual violence was performed by the communists, French occupiers, and other political factions.
Once we finally get to the November 1923 putsch itself (and I had to look up that word), it was anticlimactic. Throwing some folks up against the wall and slapping them around was considered violence by the author, which it is, but, compared to the atrocities committed by other parties before this time, it's a joke. And when the actually “takeover” of the streets happened, it was the Nazis themselves with the biggest casualties. The putsch was a failure, Hitler goes to jail, and (before he writes his book) is considering suicide because of this complete defeat. So to me, it felt like false advertisement.
The other big reason I'd give a thumbs down was the author's argument not being sufficiently defended. “ .. when its norms are not supported and defended, with force if necessary, then democracy itself can disappear,” writes Jones. While a deeper discussion on this would good for the public, it wasn't clear what he meant by terms like “norms” or “force” in the book. Had the Weimar Republic followed its own available laws more strictly, Hitler would have been in jail a lot longer than one year and the Nazi movement would have fizzled out. Having the 1923 chaos fade away was due to a free press, not a restricted one. The mechanisms put in our of fear and shortsightedness to guard against the hated thing will eventually benefit the hated thing itself when it takes power… as it did in Germany in 1933. I believe Jones makes a great case against his own argument.
The little things that bothered me were writing style choices. One example is including long lists of stats to show the extent of financial problems for the Germans, when just a few examples would have sufficed. Another is how often he connected terms like “right wing” and “conservative” to the Nazis at the beginning of the book, and how little he used more correct terms like “fascist” and “extremists” or even “terrorists.” It smacks of someone trying to market his work to a left-wing audience, which is where most purchases of books come from, I believe, so maybe it was a business decision.
I did like how the author admitted his lifelong interest in political violence in the Acknowledgements section of the book. Some bad things happened around him as a child in Ireland in the late 80s and early 90s, so that may explain his fascination of factional aggression. I'm not certain, however, if it's a healthy lens to view the world from, even as a historian.
I don't want to talk shit about an author's work, particularly when I've never written or published a damn thing myself, and I definitely don't take pleasure in giving a thumbs down to a historian's effort at helping us better understand the world, but damn it, I also can't lie.
Let me start with what I thought was good about the book. Jones helps the reader understand the conditions of the German people after the World War and within the period of the Weimar Republic. It's not just the wild inflation of a shattered economy or the limitations put forth at the Treaty of Versailles, both of which I knew about. It was the occupation of the Ruhr region by the French and Belgians, and we're talking a brutal occupation that included beatings of the citizens on the street, rape of the women in their homes, and plain old murder. I never knew about any of this, and it's an important part of explaining why extremists groups gained support in the country during this time.
The economics are delved into quite a bit, with the French leadership portrayed as a sort of villain in the story, extracting as much of the natural resources from Germany as they can to pay war reparations and, frankly, for revenge for what happened to France in WWI. The development of numerous factions among the German people was also fascinating to learn about; it gave me an opportunity to see how different the regions actually are from each other (Bavaria, the Rhineland, Prussia, Berlin, etc). And I felt that the details provided on communist aggression and Jewish treatment were excellent.
Where it primarily fell apart for me can be categorized into two big reasons and two little ones. First and foremost, I felt led on that this was going to be a book focusing on terrible things Adolf Hitler and his Nazis were doing to people in order to grab power from a weak government and what that government was doing about it. It wasn't. From the first page on, Jones continued to hint at the badness of Hitler but the bulk of the actual violence was performed by the communists, French occupiers, and other political factions.
Once we finally get to the November 1923 putsch itself (and I had to look up that word), it was anticlimactic. Throwing some folks up against the wall and slapping them around was considered violence by the author, which it is, but, compared to the atrocities committed by other parties before this time, it's a joke. And when the actually “takeover” of the streets happened, it was the Nazis themselves with the biggest casualties. The putsch was a failure, Hitler goes to jail, and (before he writes his book) is considering suicide because of this complete defeat. So to me, it felt like false advertisement.
The other big reason I'd give a thumbs down was the author's argument not being sufficiently defended. “ .. when its norms are not supported and defended, with force if necessary, then democracy itself can disappear,” writes Jones. While a deeper discussion on this would good for the public, it wasn't clear what he meant by terms like “norms” or “force” in the book. Had the Weimar Republic followed its own available laws more strictly, Hitler would have been in jail a lot longer than one year and the Nazi movement would have fizzled out. Having the 1923 chaos fade away was due to a free press, not a restricted one. The mechanisms put in our of fear and shortsightedness to guard against the hated thing will eventually benefit the hated thing itself when it takes power… as it did in Germany in 1933. I believe Jones makes a great case against his own argument.
The little things that bothered me were writing style choices. One example is including long lists of stats to show the extent of financial problems for the Germans, when just a few examples would have sufficed. Another is how often he connected terms like “right wing” and “conservative” to the Nazis at the beginning of the book, and how little he used more correct terms like “fascist” and “extremists” or even “terrorists.” It smacks of someone trying to market his work to a left-wing audience, which is where most purchases of books come from, I believe, so maybe it was a business decision.
I did like how the author admitted his lifelong interest in political violence in the Acknowledgements section of the book. Some bad things happened around him as a child in Ireland in the late 80s and early 90s, so that may explain his fascination of factional aggression. I'm not certain, however, if it's a healthy lens to view the world from, even as a historian.
July 21, 2024
For a Belgian like myself, the occupation by French and Belgian forces in 1923 of the Ruhr, the industrial heartland of western Germany, merited a short paragraph in the schoolbooks. A forgotten episode, somewhat regretted, seemingly inconsequential. The French and Belgians wanted to put pressure on Germany to accelerate the payment of reparations for the devastation of WWI, and they failed. Little thought was given to its consequences.
Mark Jones unearths the political currents behind this occupation and its dangerous consequences. In April 1922, Europe's pariah states, Germany and the USSR, shocked the world by signing the treaty of Rapallo, by which they sought to end their isolation and establish economic links and military cooperation. In France, Raymond Poincaré took the dangerous decision to respond by increasing the pressure on Germany even more. In January 1923, soldiers marched in to occupy part of Germany. In political terms, the French would win a modest victory, because the German government proved unable to maintain its campaign of "passive resistance" against the occupation. Poincaré showed that boots on the ground could force Berlin to the negotiation table. Unfortunately for him, he failed to foresee that France would also end up politically isolated because of his policy. And in economic and financial terms it was an expensive and predictable failure.
In Germany, it triggered a wave of crisis situations that Mark Jones analyses bit by bit, not quite in chronological order, but thematically. The new German Republic was confronted with the occupation, with the hyperinflation of the German mark, an increase in political and racist violence, French-sponsored separatist movements in the Rhineland, the emergence of governments with authoritarian tendencies in several of the federal states, and attempted coups. Most famously the "beerhall putsch", the unsuccessful attempt of Hitler and the Nazis to grab power in Munich. Somehow, the democratic government survived it all. Jones followed the twisting track of governments struggling to retain some control and legitimacy. His respect for Gustav Stresemann is obvious. Still, the picture that Jones paints is not that of a successful grand strategy, but that of a long series of tactical moves, some inspired, some erroneous, with the republic still emerging as the winner from 1923. Bloodied and weakened, perhaps, but surviving.
For a book, this certainly it not a new theme; the unexpected resilience of the Weimar Republic in its years of crisis has been described by others. From 1919 to 1933, it stubbornly survived, because the German people repeatedly rejected attempts to establish an authoritarian government. And because the army leadership refused to lend its support to an actual coup, either out of respect for the constitution, or because it feared the consequences (it might well have meant war). What makes Jones' book a valuable contribution is his level of detail; without following every thread to the end, he makes smart choices to illuminate some key points. Also, his account of the occupation of the Ruhr contained much that was new to me, and certainly evidences how disastrously misguided this policy was.
There are no grand new insights emerging from this book. It is what it says on the cover, a detailed study of a society in extreme crisis.
Mark Jones unearths the political currents behind this occupation and its dangerous consequences. In April 1922, Europe's pariah states, Germany and the USSR, shocked the world by signing the treaty of Rapallo, by which they sought to end their isolation and establish economic links and military cooperation. In France, Raymond Poincaré took the dangerous decision to respond by increasing the pressure on Germany even more. In January 1923, soldiers marched in to occupy part of Germany. In political terms, the French would win a modest victory, because the German government proved unable to maintain its campaign of "passive resistance" against the occupation. Poincaré showed that boots on the ground could force Berlin to the negotiation table. Unfortunately for him, he failed to foresee that France would also end up politically isolated because of his policy. And in economic and financial terms it was an expensive and predictable failure.
In Germany, it triggered a wave of crisis situations that Mark Jones analyses bit by bit, not quite in chronological order, but thematically. The new German Republic was confronted with the occupation, with the hyperinflation of the German mark, an increase in political and racist violence, French-sponsored separatist movements in the Rhineland, the emergence of governments with authoritarian tendencies in several of the federal states, and attempted coups. Most famously the "beerhall putsch", the unsuccessful attempt of Hitler and the Nazis to grab power in Munich. Somehow, the democratic government survived it all. Jones followed the twisting track of governments struggling to retain some control and legitimacy. His respect for Gustav Stresemann is obvious. Still, the picture that Jones paints is not that of a successful grand strategy, but that of a long series of tactical moves, some inspired, some erroneous, with the republic still emerging as the winner from 1923. Bloodied and weakened, perhaps, but surviving.
For a book, this certainly it not a new theme; the unexpected resilience of the Weimar Republic in its years of crisis has been described by others. From 1919 to 1933, it stubbornly survived, because the German people repeatedly rejected attempts to establish an authoritarian government. And because the army leadership refused to lend its support to an actual coup, either out of respect for the constitution, or because it feared the consequences (it might well have meant war). What makes Jones' book a valuable contribution is his level of detail; without following every thread to the end, he makes smart choices to illuminate some key points. Also, his account of the occupation of the Ruhr contained much that was new to me, and certainly evidences how disastrously misguided this policy was.
There are no grand new insights emerging from this book. It is what it says on the cover, a detailed study of a society in extreme crisis.
March 9, 2024
Masterful and worrisome - a must read in these times
This is history writing at its best. I read it and listened to it, could not put it down. It not only is a great book to understand the forces that destroyed the Weimar Republic and laid the groundwork for Nazism. Covers all domestic and international aspects of the crisis.
The only downside is that it would have been great if it went all the way to 1933 (maybe a second volume?).
The most important aspect of the book are lessons for today. We read about 1923 and it feels prescient - lessons for 2023. There are even sections of the book where we can almost substitute a couple of term (e.g., MAGA rally for beer hall rally) that bring some chills. The following excerpts could be seen as describing events in 2023-2024:
“(Thomas) Mann’s earlier optimism is a reminder that in their moment of victory the supporters of Weimar democracy squandered their chance to destroy Nazism once and for all. The failure to insist on the punishment of the putschists according to the laws created for the protection of the republic was a terrible error. If anything, in their moment of victory democracy’s supporters were too complacent.
That complacency did not just allow the putschists to avoid punishment, it helped them secure a symbolic victory. They might not have seized power on 9 November 1923, but they had terrorized the state and their stories about the event became central to their political movement for the remainder of its existence. Instead of removing the anti-democratic thread from the tapestry of modern German history, the victors of the 1923 crisis left it hanging on. Within a decade they became impotent when the forces they had defeated in 1923 returned to destroy them and the democracy that they cherished so dearly. The speed of democracy’s unravelling in 1933 is a reminder that, when its norms are not supported and defended, with force if necessary, then democracy itself can disappear.”
This is history writing at its best. I read it and listened to it, could not put it down. It not only is a great book to understand the forces that destroyed the Weimar Republic and laid the groundwork for Nazism. Covers all domestic and international aspects of the crisis.
The only downside is that it would have been great if it went all the way to 1933 (maybe a second volume?).
The most important aspect of the book are lessons for today. We read about 1923 and it feels prescient - lessons for 2023. There are even sections of the book where we can almost substitute a couple of term (e.g., MAGA rally for beer hall rally) that bring some chills. The following excerpts could be seen as describing events in 2023-2024:
“(Thomas) Mann’s earlier optimism is a reminder that in their moment of victory the supporters of Weimar democracy squandered their chance to destroy Nazism once and for all. The failure to insist on the punishment of the putschists according to the laws created for the protection of the republic was a terrible error. If anything, in their moment of victory democracy’s supporters were too complacent.
That complacency did not just allow the putschists to avoid punishment, it helped them secure a symbolic victory. They might not have seized power on 9 November 1923, but they had terrorized the state and their stories about the event became central to their political movement for the remainder of its existence. Instead of removing the anti-democratic thread from the tapestry of modern German history, the victors of the 1923 crisis left it hanging on. Within a decade they became impotent when the forces they had defeated in 1923 returned to destroy them and the democracy that they cherished so dearly. The speed of democracy’s unravelling in 1933 is a reminder that, when its norms are not supported and defended, with force if necessary, then democracy itself can disappear.”
September 17, 2025
Ik kocht dit boek in de uitverkoop, bij boekhandel Dominicanen in Mstreech, en achteraf snap ik wel hoe het daar terecht is gekomen. Jones schrijft niet echt lekker, hij mist een beetje oog voor details en anekdotes. En eigenlijk hangt zijn boodschap een beetje in de lucht. De lijn van zijn betoog is ongeveer: na het einde van het Duitse keizerrijk in 1918, brak er een korte periode van revolutie uit, waarna de Weimar-republiek werd uitgeroepen, de eerste keer dat Duitsland een niet-autoritaire regeringsvorm had. Die was dus ook niet meteen populair, maar zoals Jones laat zien veel sterker dan je op het eerste gezicht zou denken in een land waar een groot deel van de bevolking nogal autoritair was ingesteld (volgens Karen Stenner is het een bijna genetisch feit dat 30% van de mensen een autoritaire persoonlijkheid heeft, maar dat is een ander boek). 1923 was met de Franse bezetting van het Rijnland (ze waren daar ook nogal autoritair) een jaar van diepe crisis, waaronder die hyperinflatie die een groot deel van de middenklasse (de arbeiders hadden toch al niks) van zijn centen af heeft geholpen. Je zou dus zeggen dat er zeer vruchtbare voedingsbodem was voor een fascistische coup, en die was er ook, maar de Bierkellerputsch (die volgde op een nachtje doorhalen van een roedel nazi's in een stel Münchener bierkelders, na een dag paraderen) was een aanfluiting. Bij het eerste schot gingen de revolutionairen op de loop, Hitler voorop, die zich dezelfde dag nog 70 km verderop verstopte. Je kunt het als een triomf van de Weimar-republiek zien dat dit goed is afgelopen, en dat is ook de conclusie van Jones.
Maar ja, 10 jaar later was het natuurlijk wel voorbij, dus eigenlijk heeft de Weimar-republiek alleen voor uitstel gezorgd. Of misschien moet je zeggen: er was "wat meer" (dit is echt wel een understatement) voor nodig om van Duitsland een fatsoenlijke parlementaire democratie te maken. Maar je kan het verhaal van Jones ook zo lezen dat Duitsland het ook al in 1923 in zich had om dat te zijn. Daarmee doe je de auteur meer recht.
Verder is het verleidelijk om te zoeken naar patronen in de geschiedenis en te kijken of we er iets van kunnen leren voor de huidige tijd. Daar moet je wel voorzichtig mee zijn. 1923 was wel een heel extreem jaar met die hyperinflatie en de bereidheid om geweld te gebruiken was ook veel groter dan nu. Misschien niet zo vreemd met de slachtpartij van WO I vers in de herinnering. Heel misschien zou je kunnen zeggen dat in tijden van economische crisis autoritaire persoonlijkheden minder bereid zijn om een pluriform, parlementair systeem te tolereren, maar dit soort processen werkt niet zo rechtlijnig en voorspelbaar. Samenlevingen zijn onvoorspelbare ecosystemen, geen maakbare machines.
Maar ja, 10 jaar later was het natuurlijk wel voorbij, dus eigenlijk heeft de Weimar-republiek alleen voor uitstel gezorgd. Of misschien moet je zeggen: er was "wat meer" (dit is echt wel een understatement) voor nodig om van Duitsland een fatsoenlijke parlementaire democratie te maken. Maar je kan het verhaal van Jones ook zo lezen dat Duitsland het ook al in 1923 in zich had om dat te zijn. Daarmee doe je de auteur meer recht.
Verder is het verleidelijk om te zoeken naar patronen in de geschiedenis en te kijken of we er iets van kunnen leren voor de huidige tijd. Daar moet je wel voorzichtig mee zijn. 1923 was wel een heel extreem jaar met die hyperinflatie en de bereidheid om geweld te gebruiken was ook veel groter dan nu. Misschien niet zo vreemd met de slachtpartij van WO I vers in de herinnering. Heel misschien zou je kunnen zeggen dat in tijden van economische crisis autoritaire persoonlijkheden minder bereid zijn om een pluriform, parlementair systeem te tolereren, maar dit soort processen werkt niet zo rechtlijnig en voorspelbaar. Samenlevingen zijn onvoorspelbare ecosystemen, geen maakbare machines.
December 17, 2023
This work is not exactly an uplifting account of the critical year of 1923 in German history. Most would know it from the Beer Hall Putsch, which was at once a colossal failure for Adolph Hitler and the Nazis, but also the start of the Nazi movement to achieve ultimate power. Yet, the Putsch didn't happen in a vacuum. This work looks at all of Germany in 1923, where rough economic conditions in a nation still trying to recover from WWI left many of the government institutions weakened. There was corruption in the highest ranks, and extreme right and left wing agitators were maneuvering within the German government. There was also the French occupation of the Ruhr, which was a brutal time for German citizens, subjected to the worst of the French military (this doesn't get a lot of attention).
While 1923 is not meant as an exact parallel to the modern era, where uncertainty in governments and the rise of radical extremists, particularly those identified as Right Wing, continue to grow. Given the events of January 2021 in Washington D.C., the emphasis on finding parallels is particularly strong. It is not as large a leap in logic to equate Germany's 1923 to America's 2021. Does it turn out the exact same? Maybe not, but there are enough similarities that it is worth reviewing, at least to see what could plausibly happen. Worth the read regardless of format.
While 1923 is not meant as an exact parallel to the modern era, where uncertainty in governments and the rise of radical extremists, particularly those identified as Right Wing, continue to grow. Given the events of January 2021 in Washington D.C., the emphasis on finding parallels is particularly strong. It is not as large a leap in logic to equate Germany's 1923 to America's 2021. Does it turn out the exact same? Maybe not, but there are enough similarities that it is worth reviewing, at least to see what could plausibly happen. Worth the read regardless of format.
January 26, 2024
3.5/5
1923 is een zeer overzichtelijk en duidelijk boek als je een beeld wilt krijgen over hoe het crisisjaar verliep in Europa. Verschillende aspecten worden op verschillende niveaus behandeld om een zo volledig mogelijk beeld te krijgen, en de inzichten die daaruit te verkrijgen zijn, zijn zeer interessant.
Een ander groot pluspunt is de beknopte (maar toch goed en duidelijk uitgelegde) ontkrachting van de mythe rond de Bierkellerputsch.
Jammer genoeg blijft op cruciale momenten en bij opmerkelijke (en voor een historicus soms behoorlijk gekleurde) claims van de auteur bronvermelding achterwege, en worden bronnen uit de Vorwärts en de C.V.-Zeitung doorgaans veel minder op de korrel genomen dan de andere.
1923 is een zeer overzichtelijk en duidelijk boek als je een beeld wilt krijgen over hoe het crisisjaar verliep in Europa. Verschillende aspecten worden op verschillende niveaus behandeld om een zo volledig mogelijk beeld te krijgen, en de inzichten die daaruit te verkrijgen zijn, zijn zeer interessant.
Een ander groot pluspunt is de beknopte (maar toch goed en duidelijk uitgelegde) ontkrachting van de mythe rond de Bierkellerputsch.
Jammer genoeg blijft op cruciale momenten en bij opmerkelijke (en voor een historicus soms behoorlijk gekleurde) claims van de auteur bronvermelding achterwege, en worden bronnen uit de Vorwärts en de C.V.-Zeitung doorgaans veel minder op de korrel genomen dan de andere.
June 16, 2025
4.5/5 have to be harsh and round down for Goodreads.
Really good. Focused mainly on the violence in Germany in 1923. The first half of the book (and the best bit personally) is about the French occupation of the Ruhr. The bulk of the second half of the book is the various crisis's the Weimar Republic faced later on in 1923 - Rhineland separatism, the far left in Saxony, rightwing anti-republic forces in Bavaria and finally Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch. While the hyperinflation has to be mentioned in any book about Germany in 1923 it is very much secondary in this one.
The book is well written, good mix of high level politics and the experiences of ordinary people , especially in the occupied Ruhr (there's a lot on sexual violence during the occupation).
Overall would recommend.
Really good. Focused mainly on the violence in Germany in 1923. The first half of the book (and the best bit personally) is about the French occupation of the Ruhr. The bulk of the second half of the book is the various crisis's the Weimar Republic faced later on in 1923 - Rhineland separatism, the far left in Saxony, rightwing anti-republic forces in Bavaria and finally Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch. While the hyperinflation has to be mentioned in any book about Germany in 1923 it is very much secondary in this one.
The book is well written, good mix of high level politics and the experiences of ordinary people , especially in the occupied Ruhr (there's a lot on sexual violence during the occupation).
Overall would recommend.
January 10, 2024
I found this book more readable and modern than The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. The author takes a systemic approach to explaining the rise of Hitler in post WWI Germany and discusses the social and economic environment that led to the overthrow of Weimar Germany. He takes issue with the broadly held claim that the Treaty of Versailles was responsible for Germany’s descent into l totalitarianism and instead leans heavily on the French occupation of the Ruhr and the policies of French President Poincaré as a primary factor. Worth a read.
May 5, 2024
This is an engaging work on the trials and tribulations of Post World War I Germany and the fledgling Weimar Republic. Despite democracy being a concept not well known in Germany, the Weimar constitution was based on successful principles found in the US Constitution. With the economic turmoil and rampant antisemitism of the times as focal points, this book explains how the forces of the left and right fought unsuccessfully to destroy the republic in 1923 and how that fight contributed to the success of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis 10 years later.
October 4, 2023
A split decision
Thoughtful, but not always on target. German democracy was set back in May 1924 elections and revive only somewhat in Dec 1924. Minority regimes run by financial technocrats ran thngs. Hindenburg was elected President, not your democrats type. The failure of the Young Plan worked to revive and fortify the Nazi message. Best parts are graphic details of social and political violence. Some faux pas..
Thoughtful, but not always on target. German democracy was set back in May 1924 elections and revive only somewhat in Dec 1924. Minority regimes run by financial technocrats ran thngs. Hindenburg was elected President, not your democrats type. The failure of the Young Plan worked to revive and fortify the Nazi message. Best parts are graphic details of social and political violence. Some faux pas..
August 9, 2025
This book does a tremendous job of setting the stage of Europe and Germany in the immediate aftermath of World War I and tying all the threads that wove Germany's reality in 1923, going from the upper levels of major governments down to the daily life of the people. Once the threads are tied together, it provides a clear picture of how Germany got from the failed putsch in 1923 to a dictatorship 10 years later. Clearly written, engaging and ever-relevant.
March 3, 2024
Fascinating review of the hyperinflation of the Weimar Republic and the French occupation of the Ruhr to enforce reparations payments.
The beginning of Hitler.
The author tries to draw a parallel between the USA today and Germany then , but it doesn’t hold water .
Except that polarization is bad for the fabric of society . And demagogues are always dangerous
The beginning of Hitler.
The author tries to draw a parallel between the USA today and Germany then , but it doesn’t hold water .
Except that polarization is bad for the fabric of society . And demagogues are always dangerous
February 5, 2024
Great book. Jones does well describing the precursors to and the conflicting positions in 1923. You gain a good understanding of those events and that some are operating out of the same fascist playbook today.
May 30, 2024
I found this to be a very detailed, eye-opening account of the political and economical systems that eventually led to the rise of Hitler and demise of democracy in Germany. Many gaps in the sparse history we have been taught were filled by the author’s excellent work.
August 29, 2024
Enjoyable and genuinely interesting book. I learnt a lot and found it made me think more about what caused the rise of Nazism. Well researched and written, but not necessarily the most gripping book.
December 31, 2022
Great-Man-Theory, pathetisches Demokratengelaber à la rot gleich braun und kaum politische Ökonomie, von Klassenanalyse ganz zu schweigen.
February 13, 2023
Erstklassige, schockierende Studie zum "Ruhrkampf" des Jahres 1923.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews