German Empire restored after 1930?

In the early 1930s, Wilhelm apparently hoped that the successes of the German Nazi Party would stimulate interest in a restoration of the monarchy, with his eldest grandson as the fourth Kaiser. His second wife, Hermine, actively petitioned the Nazi government on her husband's behalf. However, Adolf Hitler, himself a veteran of the First World War, like other leading Nazis, felt nothing but scorn for the man they blamed for Germany's greatest defeat, and the petitions were ignored. Though he played host to Hermann Göring at Doorn on at least one occasion, Wilhelm grew to mistrust Hitler. Hearing of the murder of the wife of former Chancellor Schleicher, he said "We have ceased to live under the rule of law and everyone must be prepared for the possibility that the Nazis will push their way in and put them up against the wall!"[66] Wilhelm was also appalled at the Kristallnacht of 9–10 November 1938, saying "I have just made my views clear to Auwi [Wilhelm's fourth son] in the presence of his brothers. He had the nerve to say that he agreed with the Jewish pogroms and understood why they had come about. When I told him that any decent man would describe these actions as gangsterisms, he appeared totally indifferent. He is completely lost to our family".[67] He also stated, "For the first time, I am ashamed to be a German."[68]

Click to expand...

Athelstane said:

But almost certainly as a constitutional monarch with far more limited powers than Wilhelm II enjoyed.

Click to expand...

Carl Schwamberger said:

Restoration of the monarchy in any form would have aggravated opposition from groups outside Germany & led to lobbying for further enforcement of the Versailles Treaty. The early years of the nazis appeared safe enough that France, Belgium, Poland, ect... slid further towards impotence in dealing with German revival. Nothing is certain here, but a monarchist restoration would have been seen as a giant warning flag by the Germanophobes.

Click to expand...

Carl Schwamberger said:

Hard to say without a indepth study of French & Belgian politics. Ten years earlier the French had intervened, invading Germany in 1923 to enforce the Versailles Treaty. While the non interventionists were accendant circa 1930 it was by a relatively thin margin. One of the reasons the 1923-24 enforcement action failed is because the Franco/Belgian objective had no support from Britain, Italy, or the US. If the Monarchist restoration was flagrant enough and accompanied by other violations then at least British support for another intervention would be forth coming. On the US side there was little sympathy for monarchy, either from Hoover or Roosevelt. It was US orginated loans that helped keep the Weinmar government afloat. A monarchist restoration would have had its support from the US reduced or ended, as the nazi government did in 1934.

Click to expand...

Arcvalons said:

I read somwhere that Churchill after WWI advocated to keep the monarchies in Germany, Austria, and Turkey intact for stability reasons and to prevent extremists from taking over.

Click to expand...

jamhaw said:

That was more benefit of hindsight than anything, but I doubt he would have opposed a monarchical restoration all that much. Ideologically they would be more congenial than the Nazis obviously.

Click to expand...

JLBB said:

I think Bruening claimed later that he wanted to restore the monarchy to prevent Hitler from ever becoming president. But with a grandson of Wilhelm II as monarch as both Willy and the crown prince were unacceptable. However, the plan failed due to Hindenburg wanting that Willy gets restored.

At least that's what Bruening claims. I don't think there is any proof for it though.

Click to expand...

Cook said:

In late 1931 Chancellor Bruening proposed a radical plan to prevent the Nazis from achieving power and Hitler becoming President of the Republic: his plan was to restore the Hohenzollern throne.

At the time it was believed that Hindenburg would not run again for the presidency in 1933. Without Hindenburg in the race, Hitler would almost certainly be elected president. Even if Hindenburg could be persuaded to run and he won, his great age meant that it would be very unlikely that he would serve out his full term as president; consequently another presidential election would be likely in only a few years, Hitler would only have to be patient for a short while.

Bruening plan to prevent this was to cancel the 1933 presidential elections and extend Hindenburg’s term in office indefinitely. To do so was rather surprisingly, entirely constitutional; all it required as a two thirds vote in both the Reichstag and the Reichsrat, and this Bruening had already managed to negotiate. He had the support of the Social Democrats (reluctantly, but anything to stop Hitler), the centre parties and was confident of enough loyalty to Hindenburg from the right to swing it. Once election was cancelled, Bruening would propose that the parliament proclaim a monarchy with Hindenburg named as regent, to be succeeded by one of Crown Prince Wilhelm’s sons when he died.

Bruening was confident that a constitutional monarchy modeled on the British example would spell the end to the Nazi Party’s political momentum. All he now needed was the agreement of Hindenburg and the Weimer Republic would pass into the pages of history; not to be replaced by National Socialist Revolution, but by Hohenzollern Restoration.

And here’s where Bruening’s plan came unstuck. It wasn’t that Hindenburg was opposed to a restoration; it was that he wanted the restoration to be literally that; Hindenburg would only accept the exiled Wilhelm II returning to the throne. Worse, he wanted it to be a full restoration; a resumption of the absolute monarchy of 1914. The aging Field Marshal was already beginning to slip into senility and when Bruening explained that the Social Democrats had only very reluctantly accepted the return of the monarchy on condition that it was a constitutional monarchy, and that it must not be either Wilhelm II or his son, he was incensed and ended the discussion and there the whole plan died.

So perhaps with just a little more planning Bruening can win over Hindenburg? He’d already managed to persuade the staunchly republican Social Democrats that a Hohenzollern, while not perfect was far better than a Hitler, so finding a means of convincing the Field Marshal is hardly a long stretch. What he needed to do was persuade Hindenburg that this plan was the only way to stop ‘that Austrian Corporal’ from ever sitting in the president’s chair and that honour didn’t demand the return of the exiled Kaiser, just one of his line.

Taking the old Kaiser into his confidence probably would have been enough; a letter from Wilhelm II to Hindenburg supporting Bruening’s plan for the sake of Germany’s future, while at the same time renouncing any claim to the throne for himself in favour of his grandson, would probably have been enough to do it. If Wilhelm were aware that this was the only way for the Hohenzollerns to ever return to the throne of Germany, he would have jumped at the chance. If Bruening had presented his plan to Hindenburg with all the pieces already in place, including the vital endorsement of the old Kaiser, the old man would have grudgingly accepted it.

1933 would have seen the end of the German Republic, the declaration of the Regency, and the return to Germany of Prince Louis Ferdinand from America. A supporter of constitutional monarchy and staunch opponent of the Nazis, Louis could be expected to win over the Social Democrats, and consequently the support of all but the Nazis and the Communists.

The question then is, would this really derail the Nazi juggernaut or would the Regency give them sufficient time to seize power?

Click to expand...

Kovalenko said:

Allow me to quote an earlier post which fits this thread quite nicely (be prepared for text, the explanation is quite long).

Click to expand...