That said, I am still not sure quite how far the ideology will go and what level of support it would gain. It can, as you state, gain support from a pretty broad spectrum but at the same time it is a rather fringe ideological framework to begin with. While Richthofen and other war heroes should draw in people, the foundational figures in the ideology are more a bunch of intellectuals caught up in a romanticisation of the past.
I think the biggest strength of the ideology is the fact that it is kind of vague, and that its practical implementations could look different depending on where the focus lies. It‘s kind of like ‚communism‘ in this regard, since the vision of how exactly a communist society would look like has never really been agreed upon, even to this day. I think this is one of the reasons why communism was so successful in the 20th century - people could basically project their own wishes and desires into this imaginary future society. However, there are a number of policies that all communist movements had in common wherever they came to power, with the nationalization of the means of production (especially the major industries) being the most famous of course.
Consequently, there would need to be a number of core proposals as part of of the official program of the German Liberty Party as well. Obviously, it‘s impossible to
literally return to medieval feudalism, but certain aspects of it could certainly be translated into the 20th century. The kind of ‚soviet’-like political hierarchy i mentioned earlier could be something that fits into this framework, especially if combined with a strict fiscal hierarchy, meaning that direct taxation is restricted to cities, towns and municipalities, while the German states can only raise revenue by taxing their cities and municipalities, and the federal government in turn can only do so by taxing the states. This would basically mirror the feudal hierarchy of the High Middle Ages, where the King/Emperor could only tax and rule over his direct vassals, but not his vassal‘s vassals, while those vassals could in turn only tax and rule over their own direct vassals and so on (at least in theory).
Another proposal could be the abolition of civil marriage, meaning that weddings can only be performed under the auspices of the Christian denominations couples belong to, and not by government officials. I could see something like this being proposed, not due to some kind of Christian fundamentalism, but as a means to remove the influence of the state (perceived as secular and materialist) from the institution of marriage. IOTL this is still the case in Israel for example (interestingly, based on laws inherited from the Ottomans), where marriage and divorce are under the jurisdiction of the Chief Rabbinate.
Another big question is economics, of course. Obviously, ‚German Liberty‘ doesn‘t sound like something that would endorse any kind of socialism, but i doubt ‚capitalism‘ as such is something that would be endorsed either (though private property would certainly be supported). If political decentralization is a core idea of this movement, then economical decentralization might be another. If taxes (including corporate taxes) are restricted to the local level, then large corporations that operate on a national or international level naturally wouldn‘t be taxed on a national level. In fact, corperations as such wouldn’t be taxed at all - it would be their local branches/factories/offices that would be taxed instead (or rather, the incomes those local branches brings in), which means tax revenue is much more spread out compared to centralized tax systems. Basically, municipalities would regard those local branches/factories/offices as their own corporations, and probably wouldn‘t care about the overall corperation those branches belong to at all. In fact, a more radical proposal would be to break up large corperations entirely into their local parts, and to prevent the formation of such entities in the first place, thus creating an economy based on small and medium sized businesses - though something like this would probably be a bit too alienating for certain circles, and might be restricted to the ‚left‘ wing of the movement, similar to the Strasser wing of the NSDAP IOTL. Also, if cities and municipalities have total fiscal autonomy, then they would also be able to support/privilege their local economy to a certain extent - they could implement a sales tax from which the products of local businesses would be exempt, for example.
But this economics talk reminds me: how exactly is the economy in Red Russia being run? Is it centrally planned, with five year plans similar to OTL? Or do different regions and localities have their own ‚plans‘? Or is it a kind of mixed economy?
Also, are there any major differences between the Russian and Italian regimes at this point? I‘m not sure why, but for some reason i‘m under the impression that the Italian communists are more comparable to OTL communists.