I don't know about 1934, but this is what the ballot looked like in 1938. http://danariely.com/2010/10/05/hitler-nudge/ http://danariely.com/2010/10/05/hitler-n

I don't know about 1934, but this is what the ballot looked like in 1938. http://danariely.com/2010/10/05/hitler-nudge/ http://danariely.com/2010/10/05/hitler-nudge/ In any case, he doesn't answer the central question that arguing for anarchy inevitably provokes: once we take away the power monopoly of government, what's to stop someone from seizing power by force and being far worse than any government that preceded them? The problem with the Hitler example is that that's pretty much exactly what Hitler did. Weimar Germany was far from a model of sane government; it felt powerless after the war, it was crippled economically and it lacked real leadership. The spirit of nationalism that had made Germany such a powerful force before WWI had been broken by its defeat, and Hitler took power by stepping in to fill the void that it left. In other words, the Hitler example is exactly what a sane government prevents. The problem there wasn't the fact that there was a government in power; it was that there wasn't one. Anarchy was the problem, not the solution.