To any serious student of history, particularly history of Europe from the Napoleonic era to post WWII, it requires a profound exertion of will to seriously entertain the proposition that the Reichstag fire was not a false flag provocation. Certainly the Nazis played that game-- And one hallmark of such doings is that they seem almost …
To any serious student of history, particularly history of Europe from the Napoleonic era to post WWII, it requires a profound exertion of will to seriously entertain the proposition that the Reichstag fire was not a false flag provocation. Certainly the Nazis played that game-- And one hallmark of such doings is that they seem almost invariably so ham-handed and obvious as to have been intentionally intended to strain credulity. The Gleiwitz incident, for example.
But at least some effort at historiographic self-restraint is not out of place here. History is replete with examples of random dumb jackasses playing with matches (in this case not even figuratively, but literally) in flammable surroundings. Lee Harvey Oswald. The Trump-addled mob of gulled ignoramuses on Jan 6. The imbecile "demonstrators" setting fire to property and screaming defund the police. And of course the prince of incompetent accidental historical tinder-lighters, Gavrilo Princip.
Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany. If in fact it was the hapless Marinus who made the spark, it was the totalitarians who actually had control of it.
So in answer to your question, was there an investigation, the answer is a qualified "yes" -- yes to the extent that the Nazis went to the trouble and motions of an investigation and trial. "No" if by "investigation" you mean an open minded forensic effort to find out what actually happened. Whether the Nazis did it themselves and just grabbed a random patsy, or set him up to commit the arson, or just took advantage of a lucky chance that came their way -- the outcome of the "investigation" was established before it started.
"Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany." Yes. Why was there no legal basis for preventing the fire as a pretext? That is my question.
To any serious student of history, particularly history of Europe from the Napoleonic era to post WWII, it requires a profound exertion of will to seriously entertain the proposition that the Reichstag fire was not a false flag provocation. Certainly the Nazis played that game-- And one hallmark of such doings is that they seem almost invariably so ham-handed and obvious as to have been intentionally intended to strain credulity. The Gleiwitz incident, for example.
But at least some effort at historiographic self-restraint is not out of place here. History is replete with examples of random dumb jackasses playing with matches (in this case not even figuratively, but literally) in flammable surroundings. Lee Harvey Oswald. The Trump-addled mob of gulled ignoramuses on Jan 6. The imbecile "demonstrators" setting fire to property and screaming defund the police. And of course the prince of incompetent accidental historical tinder-lighters, Gavrilo Princip.
Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany. If in fact it was the hapless Marinus who made the spark, it was the totalitarians who actually had control of it.
So in answer to your question, was there an investigation, the answer is a qualified "yes" -- yes to the extent that the Nazis went to the trouble and motions of an investigation and trial. "No" if by "investigation" you mean an open minded forensic effort to find out what actually happened. Whether the Nazis did it themselves and just grabbed a random patsy, or set him up to commit the arson, or just took advantage of a lucky chance that came their way -- the outcome of the "investigation" was established before it started.
"Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany." Yes. Why was there no legal basis for preventing the fire as a pretext? That is my question.