I know that this chapter is old already, but I'd like to ask, what territorial claims did the majority of the SPD wish to pursue? I'd also like a source as proof. I hope it's not too much of a hassle.
Not at all!

Generally speaking the SPD was the most restrained of the interwar political parties, mainly focusing on Danzig and Austria with some voices also pushing for the Sudetenland, but otherwise quite restrained regarding the West. You can see this in their support for the Locarno Treaty, which affirmed Germany's Western border, while also leaving the East for negotiation, albeit in the form of arbitration (Foreign Minister Stresemann seeking to abandon Alsace and Eupen-Malmedy in exchange for future arbitrated gains in the East). As far as I have understood it from subtext, while the exact desires varied between leadership, there WAS an overall consensus that the current border with Poland was still to be negotiated.


On top of that, the SPD was one of the biggest supports of a future Anschluss with Austria, with a member of the Austrian SPD becoming the leader of the short-lived Republic of German-Austria in 1918. The SPD was a big support of ethnic nationalism in the sense of a cultural union, with the SPD in Austria opposing the idea of Austrian as its own identity. Paul Löbe, a major German SPD politician who has appeared in my story, was head of the Austro-German League which pushed for future union of the two nations.




Additionally, the original first draft of the Weimar Republic constitution--mostly written by the SPD and their allies--described Austria as "an integral part of the German Reich". In Austria, the Social Democratic Chancellor Karl Renner (1870-1950) declared in parliament: "We are one tribe and one community of destiny." (The Wikipedia page also cites the original constitution as mentioning the Sudetenland being absorbed into the adjacent German states, but I could not find mention of this in other writings.)



Last but not least, many SPD members were advocates of regaining their old colonies, albeit far less than in the Conservative circles. Many within their number, however, saw colonies as something to be run with a level of autonomy and respect for the people living there, rather than a top-down enforcement, to the point that one of the most famous German-Africans, Martin Dibobe, advocated for a maintaining of German rule under the condition of autonomy and life-improvement in German Kamerun (Camaroon).



Yes I am aware that many of these links are Wikipedia and not as reputable as some. However, the overall information I have seen repeated in many documents and on many sites is that there were very few parties in 1920's/30's Germany which outright opposed border revision, at the very least because it would be political suicide to do so. Ranging from simple union with Austria all the way to regaining the 1914 borders and more--they mostly differed in their methods and long-term goals.
 
Not at all!

Generally speaking the SPD was the most restrained of the interwar political parties, mainly focusing on Danzig and Austria with some voices also pushing for the Sudetenland, but otherwise quite restrained regarding the West. You can see this in their support for the Locarno Treaty, which affirmed Germany's Western border, while also leaving the East for negotiation, albeit in the form of arbitration (Foreign Minister Stresemann seeking to abandon Alsace and Eupen-Malmedy in exchange for future arbitrated gains in the East). As far as I have understood it from subtext, while the exact desires varied between leadership, there WAS an overall consensus that the current border with Poland was still to be negotiated.


On top of that, the SPD was one of the biggest supports of a future Anschluss with Austria, with a member of the Austrian SPD becoming the leader of the short-lived Republic of German-Austria in 1918. The SPD was a big support of ethnic nationalism in the sense of a cultural union, with the SPD in Austria opposing the idea of Austrian as its own identity. Paul Löbe, a major German SPD politician who has appeared in my story, was head of the Austro-German League which pushed for future union of the two nations.




Additionally, the original first draft of the Weimar Republic constitution--mostly written by the SPD and their allies--described Austria as "an integral part of the German Reich". In Austria, the Social Democratic Chancellor Karl Renner (1870-1950) declared in parliament: "We are one tribe and one community of destiny." (The Wikipedia page also cites the original constitution as mentioning the Sudetenland being absorbed into the adjacent German states, but I could not find mention of this in other writings.)



Last but not least, many SPD members were advocates of regaining their old colonies, albeit far less than in the Conservative circles. Many within their number, however, saw colonies as something to be run with a level of autonomy and respect for the people living there, rather than a top-down enforcement, to the point that one of the most famous German-Africans, Martin Dibobe, advocated for a maintaining of German rule under the condition of autonomy and life-improvement in German Kamerun (Camaroon).



Yes I am aware that many of these links are Wikipedia and not as reputable as some. However, the overall information I have seen repeated in many documents and on many sites is that there were very few parties in 1920's/30's Germany which outright opposed border revision, at the very least because it would be political suicide to do so. Ranging from simple union with Austria all the way to regaining the 1914 borders and more--they mostly differed in their methods and long-term goals.
Thanks for the links.
 
what he said
So, basically, the SPD was (generally) attempting to establish Greater Germany without causing a war? This'd be an interesting thing for a potential KPD-SPD union to focus on, a kind of socialist state that uses nationalist lingo to justify it's internationalist policies. Sort of like what Stalin did during World War II, but Germanized.
 
So, basically, the SPD was (generally) attempting to establish Greater Germany without causing a war? This'd be an interesting thing for a potential KPD-SPD union to focus on, a kind of socialist state that uses nationalist lingo to justify it's internationalist policies. Sort of like what Stalin did during World War II, but Germanized.
Generally the SPD focused on a peaceful, Western-friendly Germany which would regain its status as a Great Power and, via arbitration, eventually regain Austria and certain other strategic territories in the East. However, the SPD was not a wholly-pacificistic party, and if push came to shove I could certainly see an SPD-led Germany going to war with Poland or Italy over territorial claims, albeit only reluctantly.

Currently for the SPD-KPD party, territorial expansion isn't much of a talking point because they are too focused on dealing with the issues in Germany proper. The other issue is that, with the rise of far-Right governance in Austria and the decay of the detente with France, the idea of international arbitration solving their border disputes has largely become unlikely. Their peak was certainly in the 20s when both Austria and Germany had SPD leaders which pushed for union.
 
Not at all!

Generally speaking the SPD was the most restrained of the interwar political parties, mainly focusing on Danzig and Austria with some voices also pushing for the Sudetenland, but otherwise quite restrained regarding the West. You can see this in their support for the Locarno Treaty, which affirmed Germany's Western border, while also leaving the East for negotiation, albeit in the form of arbitration (Foreign Minister Stresemann seeking to abandon Alsace and Eupen-Malmedy in exchange for future arbitrated gains in the East). As far as I have understood it from subtext, while the exact desires varied between leadership, there WAS an overall consensus that the current border with Poland was still to be negotiated.


On top of that, the SPD was one of the biggest supports of a future Anschluss with Austria, with a member of the Austrian SPD becoming the leader of the short-lived Republic of German-Austria in 1918. The SPD was a big support of ethnic nationalism in the sense of a cultural union, with the SPD in Austria opposing the idea of Austrian as its own identity. Paul Löbe, a major German SPD politician who has appeared in my story, was head of the Austro-German League which pushed for future union of the two nations.




Additionally, the original first draft of the Weimar Republic constitution--mostly written by the SPD and their allies--described Austria as "an integral part of the German Reich". In Austria, the Social Democratic Chancellor Karl Renner (1870-1950) declared in parliament: "We are one tribe and one community of destiny." (The Wikipedia page also cites the original constitution as mentioning the Sudetenland being absorbed into the adjacent German states, but I could not find mention of this in other writings.)



Last but not least, many SPD members were advocates of regaining their old colonies, albeit far less than in the Conservative circles. Many within their number, however, saw colonies as something to be run with a level of autonomy and respect for the people living there, rather than a top-down enforcement, to the point that one of the most famous German-Africans, Martin Dibobe, advocated for a maintaining of German rule under the condition of autonomy and life-improvement in German Kamerun (Camaroon).



Yes I am aware that many of these links are Wikipedia and not as reputable as some. However, the overall information I have seen repeated in many documents and on many sites is that there were very few parties in 1920's/30's Germany which outright opposed border revision, at the very least because it would be political suicide to do so. Ranging from simple union with Austria all the way to regaining the 1914 borders and more--they mostly differed in their methods and long-term goals.
Never apologize for utilizing Wikipedia for you are not at fault for the reputation that idiots have assigned to its greatness 3:
 
Wikipedia should be the start of the journey not the end. Same for Aronow and Red.
Same. Wikipedia is good only if you need to do some superficial learning about things.

For proper ones, read their references and citations.
The problem I always have is how much I get from subtext and bits and pieces in other articles which I then sort of mentally compile and glean. For example, the bit about Alsace's general opinion towards Germany was based on 2 or 3 papers I read which all address the issue slightly differently. Or a lot of the personalities, which are based on a compilation of stuff which of course makes it hard to prove why they mightve made one choice or another.

Wikipedia is good for pointing in the right direction. Generally I use it to narrow down my searches or help link related topics, which I then pursue on separate sites. But those I rarely collect links for because it is often about snippets and... well, frankly, this is always going to be fiction, not a scholarly piece, and there is only so much that such things can truly inform alternate decisions.
 
Top