In the period of social upheaval in Germany after the First World War, there were forces from both the left and right with diametrically opposed ideas for reshaping the country. Positioned somewhat in between was Hugo Preuß, who moved from being a liberal theorist to becoming one of the most important figures in drafting a democratic constitution for the Weimar Republic. Few people today are aware of this influential figure. His political legacy is impressive, and his significance for democracy in today’s Federal Republic is reason enough to take a closer look at his life.
Dr Joseph Cronin is Director of the Leo Baeck Institute in London and specialises in research on Jewish life in Germany after the Shoah. He has taught at King’s College London and Queen Mary University of London and is currently a lecturer at Birkbeck, University of London. He is particularly interested in how the history of German Jews remains relevant to contemporary issues.
A society not governed from the top down – Lutz Vössing spoke to Joseph Cronin about this.
How did you first become aware of Hugo Preuß?
I first came across Hugo Preuß while teaching an undergraduate course on German-Jewish history. His name stood out because he played such a crucial role in shaping the Weimar Constitution, yet he remains far less well-known than many of his contemporaries.
What interested you about him?
It was the complexity of his character – he was a legal scholar, a liberal thinker, a proud German, and a committed democrat, but also someone deeply aware of the challenges facing Jews in Germany at the time. He defies easy categorization, which makes him all the more fascinating to study.
What sort of family did he come from?
Hugo Preuß came from a middle-class Jewish family in Berlin. His father was a lawyer, which no doubt influenced his own path into legal scholarship and politics. But while he had a Jewish background, Preuß wasn’t particularly religious – he identified more with the liberal German tradition than with any specific Jewish identity. That said, being Jewish in 19th-century Germany was never just a private matter; it shaped how others saw him and, to some extent, how he navigated his career. His background gave him a unique perspective on questions of citizenship and belonging, which later fed into his work on the Weimar Constitution.
How did he come to politics?
Preuß wasn’t a politician in the traditional sense – he was first and foremost a legal scholar. He spent most of his career writing about law and the state, teaching at the University of Berlin, and thinking deeply about how Germany should be governed. But his ideas had a political edge.
He was a strong believer in democracy and local self-government, which put him at odds with the more authoritarian tendencies of Imperial Germany. His first real step into political life came in 1918, when Germany’s defeat in World War I suddenly made constitutional reform an urgent issue. He was invited to help draft a new democratic constitution for Germany – an extraordinary moment when theory and practice came together.
Who were his role models and associates?
Preuß was deeply influenced by the liberal thinkers of 19th-century Germany – people like Karl von Rotteck and Robert von Mohl, who championed constitutionalism and the rule of law. He was also drawn to French and Anglo-American political traditions, particularly their emphasis on citizenship and individual rights. In terms of companions, he was closely aligned with the German Democratic Party (DDP), the main liberal party of the Weimar era, and worked alongside figures like Friedrich Naumann, who shared his vision of a democratic, federal Germany. But Preuß was never a party politician in the strict sense – he was more of a scholar-statesman, someone who brought intellectual weight to the political debates of his time.
The term Obrigkeitsstaat (authoritarian state) comes from Preuß. What does it mean?
Yes, the term Obrigkeitsstaat – which roughly translates as ‘authoritarian state’ – was one of Preuß’s key concepts. He used it to describe the Prussian-dominated Germany of his time, where power flowed from the top down, and ordinary citizens were expected to obey rather than participate. It wasn’t just about laws and institutions; it was a mindset, a way of governing that kept democracy at arm’s length. Preuß saw this as a fundamental problem and spent much of his career arguing for a different kind of state – one where citizens weren’t just subjects but active participants in shaping their own government. His work on the Weimar Constitution was, in many ways, an attempt to break away from the Obrigkeitsstaat and build something more democratic.
What did this democratic Germany look like to him?
Preuß’s vision for Germany was shaped by his belief in democracy, constitutionalism, and federalism. He wanted to move away from the old Prussian model of top-down rule – the Obrigkeitsstaat – and create a state where power was more evenly distributed, both between the government and its citizens and between different regions of Germany. He was a strong advocate for local self-government, believing that democracy worked best when people were actively involved in decision-making at all levels.
At the same time, he was a German nationalist in the liberal sense – he wanted a strong, unified Germany, but one that was democratic and committed to the rule of law. His biggest challenge was balancing these ideals with the political realities of postwar Germany. The Weimar Constitution was his attempt to put his vision into practice, but the forces of conservatism, militarism, and political extremism made it difficult to realise fully.
That sounds quite progressive.
Absolutely – Preuß’s vision was remarkably progressive for its time. He wanted to create a modern, democratic Germany where power was shared, not hoarded by elites. His emphasis on constitutional rights, popular sovereignty, and local self-government put him ahead of many of his contemporaries. He also believed in a more inclusive idea of citizenship, which was particularly significant given Germany’s history of excluding certain groups, including Jews.
His ideas were certainly not universally welcomed…
Many conservatives saw them as too radical, while socialists thought they didn’t go far enough. And, of course, the Weimar Republic itself struggled to live up to its democratic ideals. But if you look at the long arc of German history, you can see that many of the principles Preuß championed – constitutional democracy, federalism, and civil rights – became central to modern Germany.
Preuß is now called the ‘father of the Weimar Constitution’. Can you explain why?
He was its main architect. In 1918, after Germany’s defeat in World War I, he was tasked with drafting a new constitution to replace the old imperial system. It was an extraordinary challenge – Germany was in turmoil, the Kaiser had abdicated, and the country was on the brink of revolution.
What influence did he ultimately have on the finished constitution?
Preuß’s draft formed the foundation of what became the Weimar Constitution. It was a bold attempt to create a democratic Germany, with a strong parliament, civil liberties, and protections for individual rights. He also designed it as a federal system, hoping to decentralize power and move away from the authoritarian traditions of Prussia.
To what extent was he able to implement his ideas?
Of course, the final version of the constitution was shaped by political compromises, and some of Preuß’s ideas – like a more decentralized state – were watered down. But his influence was unmistakable. The Weimar Constitution was, in many ways, his vision of a democratic Germany put into law.
Who were his political opponents?
Preuß had no shortage of political enemies. His vision of a democratic, decentralized Germany was deeply unpopular with conservatives, particularly the old Prussian elites, the military, and the judiciary. They saw him as a dangerous radical – someone who wanted to dismantle the traditional structures of power that had defined Germany for decades.
He was also disliked by the far right, who not only opposed his democratic ideas but also saw him as the embodiment of everything they despised: a liberal, a democrat, and a Jew. The Nazis later singled him out as one of the ‘traitors’ responsible for Weimar’s so-called humiliation.
How did the left view his ideas?
Socialists and communists believed the Weimar Constitution didn’t go far enough in breaking with the old order. So, Preuß found himself in a difficult position – too radical for the right, too moderate for the left. That tension reflects just how precarious Weimar democracy was from the very beginning.
What remains of him today?
Preuß isn’t a household name today, but his legacy is still with us. His greatest achievement – the Weimar Constitution – was far from perfect, but it laid the groundwork for Germany’s later democratic development. In fact, many of its core principles, like fundamental rights, federalism, and the rule of law, found their way into the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany after 1949.
Beyond that, Preuß remains a symbol of the liberal, democratic tradition in Germany – one that was fragile in his time but ultimately proved more enduring than his enemies might have imagined. His name is also a reminder of the contributions that German Jews made to democracy and political thought, even in the face of hostility. Today, streets and schools in Germany bear his name, and historians continue to engage with his work. While he may not be as well-known as some of his contemporaries, his ideas helped shape the Germany we know today.
Text: Lutz Vössing
This article is part of the series ‘Civil Engagement and Democracy in German History: Jewish Experiences and Perspectives’, first published in German as Engagement & Demokratie in der jüdisch-deutschen Geschichte by the Freunde und Förderer des Leo Baeck Instituts. You can read the original article in German here: https://fuf-leobaeck.de/2025/03/hugo-preuss-demokratischer-kaempfer-und-architekt-der-weimarer-verfassung/
Hugo Preuß photo: Wikipedia.
