>>31938
>Why do you think people voted for Hitler if "Weimar" was so great as (((western))) propaganda try to sell us?
Anyone with a minimum literacy in history is aware of suffering in the Weimar period. In fact, keins often overstate it, not being aware that, in between the painful first years and the Great Depression, there was a brief period of stability and under Stresemann there was a strategy to improve the situation at work.
>Of course it had
Read the posts, please. This is not even a question of which regime was in power, but of large-scale societal and economic imbalances between the countries. The German Empire, Weimar and the Third Reich were all behind England, and even more so, America. This is simply because Germany itself was behind in industrialization and had less favorable economies of scale. Under the Kaiser it was catching up but was still behind, like Japan, which, despite its fantastic entrance into the industrialized world, still took a long time to truly catch up with the First World in living standards and economic modernization. Under Weimar, aside from circa 1925 to 1929 there was too much internal and external pressure to maintain this momentum. Then Hitler had a broad geopolitical plan to solve the problem of economies of scale, but what happened in the 30s was merely a prelude to this plan's fulfillment. In 1939 Germany was still behind and its living standards were still lower.
The German countryside was very poor, wheter in 1900, 1925 or 1936. The processes of mechanization, agricultural modernization, urbanization, etc. were incomplete and far behind England and America. Germany had a large rural population with low productivity that still hadn't been released into the industries. The ratio of rural population to land was unfavorable to Germany, and this is where "land hunger" comes from. Nazi agrarians had a good grasp of these realities and the regime wanted to modernize the countryside once its wider plan had been concluded and land hunger had been solved.
Germany's resource position made it an inherently high-import country. From the Great Depression onwards it had neither the exports nor the credit to pay for those imports and this was a crippling limitation which required great sacrifices to live with and twice managed to stop rearmament dead in its tracks.
German industry wasn't bad but it didn't live up to America's economies of
>As a result of blockade, boycotts and straight plunder by the allies.
You're trying to explain decade, even century-spanning differences in the modernization process in terms of a single time period's external pressures. And even those conjunctural problems were not entirely geopolitical, you're probably thinking of prewar Germany being boycotted but the balance of payments question meant little imports could be afforded even if the entire world had its markets open.