Before taking a stab at this question, I’ll make this key point. Firstly, the concept of ‘democracy’ needs to be considered carefully, as the Weimar Democracy which preceded Nazi rule was plagued by some very undemocratic incidents. Even before Hitler came to power, the likes of Bruning, Kurt von Schleicher, von Papen and von Hindenburg were considering ways to shift the country to a more authoritarian form of rule. Thus, it is important to understand what was ‘acceptable’ in the Weimar democracy, in order to assess whether Hitler’s actions maintained or broke with these short-lived democratic traditions.

With this in mind, I’m going to focus on the period up until 1934/1935. From this point on it is largely irrelevant whether Hitler played at democracy – if you have a Gestapo, control of the law courts, concentrations camps, and policies which shift the culture of Germany to one that loves and embraces its leader, it is clearly not democratic.

The Early Years of the NSDAP

Before Hitler assumed the role of Fuhrer of Germany, he attempted the Munich Putsch of 1923. Hitler attempted his putsch following the occupation of the Ruhr Valley by forces from France and Belgium, and the subsequent hyperinflation period. This was a direct attempt at a coup in Germany – a definitively non-legal or democratic way to gain power. But after it failed, Hitler was placed in Landsberg Prison and provided with time (if a short amount) to reflect on his path to power.

After a brief flourish in support for fringe parties, Germany entered what some historians term the ‘Golden Years.’ This was a time in which both the left and right wing failed to attract members, and Nazism itself was plagued with internal disputes. Once Hitler was released from prison, he had the NSDAP focus on recruitment and their political standing. Gradually, Hitler’s bans on public speaking – a consequence of his imprisonment - were lifted between 1927 and September 1928, as various states began to consider Hitler a non-threat. This would be a fateful decision – the lifted bans on public speaking gave Hitler the ability to personally attack both the Young Plan and the Great Depression in 1929. It gave Hitler the opportunity to return to what he did spectacularly well. But prior to 1928, it was still not enough to make serious impacts into the political spectrum of Weimar Germany, and despite protests from within the party, Hitler refused the idea of launching another putsch. For now, Hitler saw the legal path to power as the only way.

Obtaining Power ‘Legally’ – The Great Depression

Before moving to the crisis point in German parliamentary rule, it is important to consider that democracy itself was quickly degrading – the Great Depression just sped up the process.

Kershaw, I. Hitler
‘Hitler and his party were the beneficiaries of this systematic crisis of the Weimar state. They were not its primary cause. Even in its ‘golden’ years, Weimar democracy had never won the hearts and minds of large numbers of Germans. And even in those years, powerful sectors of society – business, the army, big landowners, leading civil servants in charge of government administration, academics, many intellectuals and opinion-leaders – had tolerated rather than actively supported the Republic. Not a few among the power elites were awaiting the opportunity to discard the democracy they detested so much. Now, as the crisis started to unfold, such groups began to show their true colours at the same time as the masses began to desert the Republic in droves.’

Kershaw is alluding to two issues existing within the Weimar Republic. The desire to move to authoritarian government (which could be done under Article 48 and is discussed next), and the conditions necessary to drive a move to this form of government. The article of the Weimar Constitution in question stated:

Article 48
‘If a state (8) does not fulfil the obligations laid upon it by the Reich constitution or the Reich laws, the Reich President may use armed force to cause it to oblige.
In case public safety is seriously threatened or disturbed, the Reich President may take the measures necessary to reestablish law and order, if necessary using armed force. In the pursuit of this aim he may suspend the civil rights described in articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 154, partially or entirely.
The Reich President has to inform Reichstag immediately about all measures undertaken which are based on paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article. The measures have to be suspended immediately if Reichstag demands so.
If danger is imminent, the state government may, for their specific territory, implement steps as described in paragraph 2. These steps have to be suspended if so demanded by the Reich President or the Reichstag. Further details are provided by Reich law.’

This context is important when considering Hitler’s rise to power. Throughout the Weimar Republic, various Chancellors had sought and obtained von Hindenburg’s permission to wield the power of Article 48. This power meant that the Chancellor could circumvent the desires of the parliament to pass legislation. Initially designed as a protective measure to be used in the case of an emergency, it was decidedly -not- used in this way. Even in the 1920s, this was occurring with regularity, and it would escalate during the Great Depression.

But for now, when considering the Great Depression, it was a key event in Hitler’s push to achieve a legal and democratic path to power. It was also an event that would destroy democratic principles before Hitler could do it himself.