Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus:
“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse.
“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.”

By studying Hitler’s mindset and “negotiating” methods, we can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party.
A classic example of Hitler’s “negotiating style” came in September, 1938, when he focused his rage and aggression on Czechoslovakia.
Seven months earlier, he had absorbed Austria. He had done so by inviting its Chancellor, Kurt Shuschnigg, to Berlin. Then Hitler threatened Austria with invasion if Shuschnigg did not immediately agree to make his country a vassal-state of Germany.
This time, his threats were aimed at Neville Chamberlain, the prime minister of Great Britain, and Eduoard Deladier, the prime minister of France. Both countries had pledged to support Czechoslovakia against Hitler’s aggression.
Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”
This consisted of the northern, southwest and western regions of Czechoslovakia, inhabited mostly by ethnic Germans.
Then he followed this up with the threat of war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”
For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.
The Cenotaph, in London, honoring the unknown British dead of World War 1
Something had to be done to prevent it. And he believed himself to be just the man to do it.
He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”
Once again, another head-of-state was prepared to meet Hitler on his home ground. Again, Hitler took this concession as a sign of weakness. And Chamberlain’s use of such words as “please” and “grateful” only further convinced Hitler of another impending triumph.
Chamberlain was determined to grant his every demand—so long as this meant avoiding a second world war.
The two European leaders met in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.
Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler
During their talks, Chamberlain said he had come to discuss German grievances. But, he added, it was necessary in all circumstances to exclude the use of force.
Hitler appeared to be shocked that he could be accused of such intentions: “Force? Who speaks of force?“
Then, without warning, he switched to an aggressive mode. He accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized—in response to the mobilization of the German army.
“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler. “I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”
Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed—and possibly angry: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. If this is so, why did you let me come to Berchtesgaden?
“In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”
Hitler was taken aback by the unexpected show of defiance. He realized he was about to lose his chance to bully the British into accepting his latest demands.
So he softened his tone and said they should consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.
Chamberlain said he must immediately return to England to consult with his colleagues.
Hitler appeared uneasy. But then the German translator finished the sentence: “…and then meet you again.”
Hitler realized he still had a chance to attain victory without going to war.
Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland. Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.
Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.
He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.
To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.
On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.
The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30.
It actually had no choice. It faced the threat of an immediate German invasion after being deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, AUSTRIA, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BORDER WALL, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES SCHUMER, CHRIS CILLIZZA, CNN, CONTRACTORS, COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS, CROOKS AND LIARS, CZECHOSLOVAKIA, DAILY KOZ, DAVID BROOKS, DEMOCRATS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DICK CHENEY, DONALD TRUMP, EDOUARD DELADIER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA), FOX NEWS, FRANCE, GEORGE W. BUSH, GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAPAN, JEDEDIAH BILA, JOSE ANDRES, JULIAN ZELITZER, KEVIN HASSETT, KURT VON SCHUSCHNIGG, MARIE ANTOINETTE, MARK SHIELDS, MIKE PENCE, MITCH MECONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUNICH CONFERENCE, NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, NEWSWEEK, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLAND, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT PAYNE, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOUP KITCHENS, STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS, SUPER BOWL, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRANSPORTATION SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (TSA), TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UBER, UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, UNITED STATES SENATE, UPI, USA TODAY, WILBUR ROSS, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WORLD WAR 11
LEARNING FROM THE MUNICH DISASTER: PART TWO (OF FIVE)
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on January 29, 2019 at 12:51 amAfter selling out Czechoslovakia, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Germany’s dictator, Adolf Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”
Neville Chamberlain
Winston Churchill knew better, predicting: “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.”
Hitler—still planning more conquests—also knew better. Speaking of the British and French leaders he had intimidated at Munich, he later asserted: “Our enemies are little worms. I saw them at Munich.”
In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.
Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.
Hitler next turned his attention—and demands—to Poland. But, this time, France and Britain refused to be intimidated—and pledged to go to war if Hitler invaded Poland.
Adolf Hitler and his generals
Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939—unintentionally triggering World War II.
In time, historians and statesmen would regard Munich as an object lesson in the futility—and danger—in appeasing evil and aggression.
But for the postwar Republican party, Hitler’s my-way-or-else “negotiating” methods would become standard operating procedure.
President Donald J. Trump used precisely the same “negotiating” style during his December 11, 2018 Oval Office meeting with then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY).
And, true to his love of publicity, Trump made sure the meeting was televised live.
Nancy Pelosi
Trump opened with on a positive note: “We’ve actually worked very hard on a couple of things that are happening. Criminal justice reform…[Republican Kentucky U.S. Senator] Mitch McConnell and the group, we’re going to be putting it up for a vote. We have great Democrat support, great Republican support.”
But he soon moved to the matter he truly cared about: Demanding $5.6 billion to create a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border: “And one way or the other, it’s going to get built. I’d like not to see a government closing, a shutdown. We will see what happens over the next short period of time.”
“One way or the other”—“so doer so”—was a favorite phrase of Adolf Hitler’s, meaning: If he couldn’t bully his opponents into surrendering, he would use violence.
PELOSI: “I think the American people recognize that we must keep government open, that a shutdown is not worth anything, and that you should not have a Trump shutdown. You have the Senate. You have the House of Representatives. You have the votes. You should pass it right now.”
Trump claimed he could get “Wall” legislation passed in the House but admitted he didn’t have the 60 votes he needed in the Senate.
PELOSI: “Well, the fact is you can get it started that way.”
Trump then contradicted himself: “The House we can get passed very easily, and we do.”
PELOSI: “Okay, then do it.”
Trump kept insisting that “the House would give me the vote if I wanted it.”
PELOSI: “Well, let’s take the vote and we’ll find out.”
SCHUMER: “We do not want to shut down the government. You have called 20 times to shut down the government….We want to come to an agreement. If we can’t come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the House and Senate right now, and will not shut down the government. And that’s what we’re urging you to do. Not threaten to shut down the government because you can’t get your way.”
Charles Schumer
TRUMP: “We need border security. And I think we all agree that we need border security.”
SCHUMER: “Yes, we do.”
TRUMP: “The wall is a part of border security. You can’t have very good border security without the wall.”
PELOSI: “That’s simply not true. That is a political promise. Border security is a way to effectively honor our responsibilities.”
By “political promise,” Pelosi meant this is was an appeal Trump had made to his hardcore base. which he expected to re-elect him.
SCHUMER: “And the experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn’t solve the problem.”
TRUMP: “It totally solves the problem.”
Schumer then goaded Trump into taking responsibility for closing down the government if he didn’t get funding for his border wall.
TRUMP: “I’ll take it. You know what I’ll say: Yes, if we don’t get what we want, one way or the other…I will shut down the government. Absolutely.”
Thus, Schumer guaranteed that any government shutdown during the Christmas season would be blamed on Trump.
But Republican leaders in Congress didn’t want to be blamed for shutting down the government. They seemed to persuade him to back away from his threat. The Senate passed a short-term funding measure without Trump’s wall money.
Vice President Mike Pence told lawmakers that Trump was open to approving it
Then the Fox News Network stepped in.
Share this: