AHC: Nazi rise without WWI or Depression

[jetpack]

The world's time travelers have discovered that no matter what they do to change the past, Hitler is leader of Germany in 1936. Shockingly, even if WWI and the Great Depression doesn't happen, somehow the Nazi party forms and becomes prominent. In our timeline, radicalism grew due to the Great Depression, and there was anger in Germany over the loss of WWI and the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. In other timelines, the Nazis take power for other reasons, but why?

How WWI and the Great Depression are averted is a separate question. If you can come up with an answer for those along the way, that's great, but I'm more concerned with alternate reasons for the Nazi party to form and take over Germany.

This is motivated by my attempts to fill in the gaps of the Chrononauts timeline, where Hitler always presides over the 1936 Olympics (sometimes getting assassinated then.) Making sense of published work gives us some interesting puzzles.

A couple things to clarify the situation:

• POD is 1912
• There can be a war between 1914 and 1918, just not a "World War". There are German submarine patrols that nearly attack the Lusitania. Wilson campaigns to keep the US out of war. Derelict mines in the ocean years later.
• There is a "mild recession" in 1930. It can be more severe in Germany.

You can have fanciful explanations. Does the senile Kaiser appoint Hitler as his chancellor? Is there a coup during the Recession? Is there more Communist sentiment in or near Germany? Is some prominent Jewish person involved in a scandal that outrages German radicals?

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Impossible. The Nazis were a specific response to the loss of a brutal long world war, a communist uprising at the end and civil war, Ludendorff's excuse about why Germany loss to deflect blame from him (stabbed in the back myth), the rise of the USSR, and several other factors. Without all of that AND the Great Depression in a specific sequence the Nazis never come to power; in fact IOTL it still is highly unlikely that they came to power and it was only via a weird combination of events that Hitler became chancellor.

 

[Lalli]

NDSAP was extremist populist party. Such parties not rise to power if economy is good or leastly OK and country is stable. Just losing war not be enough.

 

[Michel Van]

That not gonna work.
Without OTL World War one and great Depression: Nazi never rise to power.
Hitler never got in DAP, the Nazi party never got such popularity.

It was German lost of World War 1, The abolishment of German Empire and lost of Colonies and Treaty of Versailles.
The resulting Hyperinflation of German Mark and great Depression fueled anger of the German People,
Anger on WW1 winners, on german politician, On Communist, on Jews
So the Germans voted partly out of anger, partly believing there new Savior Hitler

That Adolf Hitler who become biggest mass murder in History....

 

[jetpack]

Is there another way to create a bad enough level of crisis in Germany? Italy wasn't in as bad of a shape as Germany when its Fascist party was formed. Spain's fascist party arose during a period of instability started by dethroning the king.

Can there be an anti-monarchist movement that removes the kaiser in the '20s or '30s, leading to a power vacuum? Can there be runaway inflation in Germany without a worldwide Great Depression?

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Is there another way to create a bad enough level of crisis in Germany? Italy wasn't in as bad of a shape as Germany when its Fascist party was formed. Spain's fascist party arose during a period of instability started by dethroning the king.

Can there be an anti-monarchist movement that removes the kaiser in the '20s or '30s, leading to a power vacuum? Can there be runaway inflation in Germany without a worldwide Great Depression?

The anti-monarchist movement was only going to come from the left, while the center and right would be more interested in constitutional reforms to empower the Reichstag. Basically without WW1 a Great Depression situation is impossible, it was the result of the MASSIVE distortions created by WW1. Hyperinflation was the result of the ToV after the damage of WW1. Effectively a far right movement like the Nazis was a fairly unique movement that could only happen and come to power with the specific time line of events from 1914 on. The whole Sonderweg thesis that Nazi Germany was the inherent destination of the Kaiserreich has been debunked, it the was the product of a unique set of circumstances following one after the other, despite the antecedents being present in pre-WW1 Germany; there is no reason it had to go that way and by all rights shouldn't have, but it did because the right sequence of events lined up just right (or rather very wrong).

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

The Fascist party appeared in Italy just because of the insatisfaction caused by the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye and because of the fear caused by the Russian Revolution among the industrialist and the bankers.

In Spain, Jose Antonio's Falange was a minor thing and Gil-Robles' CEDA was the result of the radicalization of the Left during the early times of the Second Republic.

Thus, you need in Germany something quite similar to what actually gave strenght to the NSDAP: the Great War and the Depression.

 

[jetpack]

My thanks to all of you for helping educate me on the rise of Fascism in each country. I've been thinking a lot about what you've been saying, and I think I might be approaching a solution.

The Fascist party appeared in Italy just because of the insatisfaction caused by the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye and because of the fear caused by the Russian Revolution among the industrialist and the bankers.

The Italians didn't need to be on the wrong side of the Treaty of Versailles to be angry enough to go Fascist. They had a lesser slight from the international community. I'm confident a similar Russian Revolution can occur without WWI. This was 60 years after the Communist Manifesto, and Russia was practically still feudalistic.

In Spain, Jose Antonio's Falange was a minor thing and Gil-Robles' CEDA was the result of the radicalization of the Left during the early times of the Second Republic.

The way I see it, Spain was in an unstable position ever since its first monarchy was replaced with a republic, and that paved the way for the leftists and the CEDA to vie for power.

I think if I can get anyone to replace the German monarchy between 1912 and 1935, I can handwave the rise of Nazism from there. As one example scenario, if Germany loses a not-quite-world war, and then a coalition of republicans and socialists blame the monarchy for the bad state the country's in. They depose the Kaiser. Later, the radical right grows, blaming everything on a Communist Jewish conspiracy.

So my question is: Do you think it's possible for the German monarchy to be overthrown anytime between 1912 and 1935 without it triggering or being caused by a world war?

 

[Deleted member 1487]

So my question is: Do you think it's possible for the German monarchy to be overthrown anytime between 1912 and 1935 without it triggering or being caused by a world war?

Absolutely not. Without a Great Depression, which cannot be blamed on the monarchy, its just not going to happen and the military without WW1 will defeat any Communist uprising, which even at its peak of popularity and the nadir of the German army the communists couldn't beat the German army in 1918-19. Even in 1932 the KPD was much less popular than the far right.
So without a world war you're not getting the monarchy and without WW1 and the resulting aftermath you're not getting the Nazis.

 

[jetpack]

And I don't suppose it would be easy to get Wilhelm II or any other royal to facilitate the Nazi rise to power. The Nazis wouldn't exactly buddy up to the royal family.

This discussion is approaching its end. If you're someone reading this after this thread is retired, and you have a harebrained scheme that's just crazy enough to work, you can send it to me in a private message or post your thoughts on the Chrononauts thread.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

Not really possible as such. The OTL rise of Hitler and the Nazis was possible only through a series of events which included

World War I, which -
- traumatized Germany with defeat and huge loss of life
- brought down the German monarchy, which was a check on political extremism
- crippled the German economy with its enormous costs (financed by fiat money, leading to hyperinflation in the 1920s)
- overthrew the Russian monarchy and brought the revolutionary Bolsheviks to power, energizing violent radicals everywhere and frightening many people into supporting reactionary suppression

and the Great Depression, which was seen as an economic crisis of near-existential magnitude that the existing German political system could not handle.

Take away WW I, Germany is much stabler all around, and there is no Red Menace. Take away the Depression, and there is no emergency for people to turn to Hitler to fix.

However... Even without those events, there were currents in Wilhelmine Germany toward Nazi goals. Anti-semitism was rife, though there was no violence. Cod-Darwinist ideas about the necessity of conquest, German racial superiority, and the elimination of the "biologically unfit" were already widespread. (I have read that when the Nazis took power, German doctors were already eager to carry out the "euthanasia" campaign; all the Nazis did was give the go-ahead.)

Thus it seems remotely possible that by the 1930s, Germany might drift into an authoritarian state where Hitlerian ideas were in power, and even maybe Hitler himself. Wilhelm lived to 1940, IIRC. Perhaps if he were not in exile, he might die sooner, and perhaps his heir would be too liberal for the growing faction of Nazi-type thinkers, who might turn to Hitler as the True Leader to displace the wimp monarch.

 

[jetpack]

Take away WW I, Germany is much stabler all around, and there is no Red Menace.

I think the Russian revolution could have happened without WWI. Could you persuade me that it's not plausible?

Thus it seems remotely possible that by the 1930s, Germany might drift into an authoritarian state where Hitlerian ideas were in power, and even maybe Hitler himself. Wilhelm lived to 1940, IIRC. Perhaps if he were not in exile, he might die sooner, and perhaps his heir would be too liberal for the growing faction of Nazi-type thinkers, who might turn to Hitler as the True Leader to displace the wimp monarch.

There we go! The first harebrained scheme! Thanks. It would be a different kind of Nazi party. Like Lalli said, the Nazis were a populist extremist party, and in this case, their ideas were already embraced at the top.

 

[jetpack]

The question is whether the forts give the Russians enough time to finish mobilizing their 3 armies:

Either you're making a point that's over my head, or you posted on the wrong thread.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Either you're making a point that's over my head, or you posted on the wrong thread.

Posted to the wrong thread, sorry.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

I think the Russian revolution could have happened without WWI. Could you persuade me that it's not plausible?

No. And that's a good point - though an actual Bolshevik Revolution is harder. That is, seizure of power in Russia by a political faction that part of the world "revolutionary" movement. Overthrow of the monarchy would not in itself be that. The French Republic was created that way, but it was not "revolutionary", but the Republic put down the outright revolutionaries of the Commune. The Portuguese monarchy was abolished with no great to-do; the 1930 fall of the Spanish monarchy was likewise "un-radical". The Republic did not become openly "radical" till after the military rebellion, and never went all the way. (It has been noted that the Spanish Civil War began with a rebellion of the army of the Republic against the government for being too dominated by Communists, and ended with a rebellion of the army of the Republic against the government for being too dominated by Communists.)

The most probable "revolution" in Russia would be the overthrow of Nicholas II by a center-right faction ("liberals", in the 19th century meaning), and the abolition of the monarchy because the Romanovs were basically useless. A tranche of "bourgeois" reforms would follow - establishment of a ruling parliament, curbing of the aristocracy, partial disestablishment of the Church, perhaps emancipation of the Jews or adoption of the Gregorian calendar.

To terrify Germans, so that they would turn to Hitler for protection against the Reds, the Revolution would have to be controlled by radical Socialists like Lenin. (Per the OP, he's dead, so is Trotsky, but there were others.)

That might happen if the Empire turned to extreme repression, generating increased anger in the population and destroying the liberals (while the hard-line radicals survive underground). As in Nicaragua, Cuba, and Iran, the radical group could gain power as the leaders of a reform/revolution coalition, then do a self-coup to take sole power.

 

[jetpack]

The most probable "revolution" in Russia would be the overthrow of Nicholas II by a center-right faction ("liberals", in the 19th century meaning), and the abolition of the monarchy because the Romanovs were basically useless.

Why do you say a more centrist overthrow is more likely than a more radical one? I would think that in Russia the revolution would belong to whatever intellectual group is willing to use their guns.

To terrify Germans, so that they would turn to Hitler for protection against the Reds, the Revolution would have to be controlled by radical Socialists like Lenin. (Per the OP, he's dead, so is Trotsky, but there were others.)

I'm not aware of anything I wrote in the OP impacting Lenin and Trotsky's deaths. Are you saying it would be hard to arrange a radical revolution in Russia before Lenin's expected death in 1924? Trotsky lived to 1940, so it's easy to work him in.

That might happen if the Empire turned to extreme repression, generating increased anger in the population and destroying the liberals (while the hard-line radicals survive underground). As in Nicaragua, Cuba, and Iran, the radical group could gain power as the leaders of a reform/revolution coalition, then do a self-coup to take sole power.

That's really cool. I need Russia to be communist at some point, (for reasons discussed in this thread and others) but I was hoping they'd get there through a different path than OTL. I like this one.

 

[NoMommsen]

Some thought on political parties :

Without WW I as bad as it became later no political reforms, the two-rounds one-man-one-electoral-district system would stay - for the Reichstag.

Beside the SPD no other party had anything equal to a 'professional' party machinery. They made up more like 'clubs of personality', depending on donations or their personal wealth.
That would be changed only slowly after some more thoughts about the 'success' of the SPD. Such party machineries would just start to be build up in a TTL without WW I ... late 20's, beginning 30's IMHO.

About a kind of 'Nazi'-party ... in the 1912 Reichstag there were 3 of them (even though at a downwards development at that moment in terms of seats):
Deutsche Reformpartei (German Reform Party), Christlich-Soziale Partei (Christian Social Party) and Deutsch-Soziale Partei (German Social Party)

At that time the 'völkische' movement was still a young political element, but growing (interrupted by WW I, since the military censors rendered them a bit too belligerent). And ofc still suffering of the problem typical to them - fragmentation due to too many 'prophets'.
But ... well, they were all orbiting around the Pan-German League and the Reichshammerbund (later in OTL becomming the Deutschvölkischer Schutz- und Trutzbund, biggest and quite influential völkisch organization in early Weimar time).

Beside antisemitism of the less radical kind, that was widespread in the world (not only Russia, Poland and Germany) without the call for progroms and similar 'uncivilized' methods they had already the concept of the 'Volksgemeinschaft' as a social model against the liberal (manchaster)capitalism as well as socialism.

That might be a starting point for this TL. "Just" get them the right Non-Hitler 'drummer' - and unifier, he was.

 

[Axeman]

The only way I could see is if there is a war where Germany totally crushes all of its enemies, and then "loses" the peace. Perhaps to bring in the racial element of nazism have it blamed on non-germans in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in addition to jews.

 

[Perkeo]

I can see no Nazis with WWI and the great depression, but not vice-versa.

People need to be angry to support radicals, and to be very angry to support Nazis.

The worst I can see a moderate right-wing dictatorship, and even that is quite unlikely. Germany had a solid long-term trend towards a two-party system with SPD and political Catholizism, maybe with a national-conservative third party, but someone like Hitler certainly won't be competitive against Social Democracy, Liberalism and Aristrocracy.