Communist Germany: 1920

Arctofire

Banned
Hi guys, just to let you know I'm an avid fan of Red's, A Revolutionary Timeline, and I am really interested in trying out doing my own timeline. I would like this thread to be one that people continually add to, so we can have a collaborative approach to making this alternate history just like Jello did with Reds.

Reds fantastically highlights the issues with the American labor movement back in the late 19th-early 20th centuries. The fact of the matter is that the American left had huge potential, but it was hindered due to it's division, isolation, and poor tactics. The AFL and the IWW were deeply divided, and many syndicalists refused even to participate in elections, which held back the growth of the Socialist Party of America. If Debs and DeLeon had however merged their organisations, the history of America could be extremely different. It's a great piece not only for it's well researched content, but also the lessons that it can teach us today on how to build an effective socialist movement in the United States.

However, what I was thinking is doing a much more obvious alternate history, which is there being a communist revolution in Germany. I don't know if anybody remembers me writing a post on What if the Spartacist Revolt Succeeded?, but a lot of people highlighted some very good points on how the Spartacist Revolt was kind of like the July Days, and perhaps would have been crushed in a similar way to how the Paris Commune was. So I have revised my thoughts, and so that instead of the POD being that the 1919 uprising was successful, simply that Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebnecht escape from the Freikorps instead of being murdered like they were in our timeline.

Luxemburg and Liebnecht were highly competent figures, who had a high amount of respect amongst the German communist movement. One of the biggest issues after their death was that the KPD lacked many experienced leadership and it was uncertain who would take their places. This lead to the split between the Communist Party and the Communist Worker's Party, and the division in the Communist movement, misguided ultra leftist tactics, and lack of leadership is what led to the failure of the Red Rising the following year.

The Kapp Putsch and the response to it was absolutely groundbreaking. Virtually the entire country went on strike against military dictatorship, so that they were completely squandered. Ebert was deeply unpopular, everybody knew how he'd sent out the freikorps to murder revolutionaries. In the aftermath of the coup, the working class had had enough of boishwar government, and could see clearly the incompetency and betrayal of the SPD. The Red Rising in the Ruhr Region was a huge uprising, which had a real chance of being successful, even so much that a militia of 80,000+ men was formed in the height of the struggle. The reason for the failure was the lack of coordinated leadership, and the division in the left. The Communist Worker's Party refused to enter into reformist trade unions, and would not compete in elections, the same was true of the Free German Worker's Union. This led to isolation from the masses, who at this time were very much still supporting the USPD.

But Luxemburg had a commitment to democracy, and understood that in order for a revolution to be successful, one had to secure the support of the whole country, and this is why she rightly pointed out that the 1919 revolt would be a disaster, which it would have been even if they'd taken control of Berlin. If she had given clear leadership to the KPD, they would have followed a unified strategy and been a more attractive force to the working class, taking over from the USPD and would have easily have been able to defeat the Freikorps. Not only that, but a successful Ruhr Rising would have immediately, if coordinated effectively, been met with support in Berlin, and a most (almost all of present day borders) of Germany would have been under Red control.

No, it wouldn't have been a brief scuffle, there would have been a civil war and the French attempting to invade again. But you must remember, that after WW1, the populations of France and Britain were exhausted. Mothers had lost their sons, lovers had been separated by death, many survivors knew the horror of the trenches. In our timeline, there was extreme opposition to involvement in the Russian Civil War, especially in Britain, because nobody wanted to resume the war. If Britain and France were about to get involved in a much bigger scale war, and one which would essentially have been a resumption of WW1, there would have been such an outcry, that in order to stop revolutions in their own countries, they would have been forced to retreat. I can imagine in Britain, Labour coming to power in 1922 due to their anti war platform, and the labour right wing led by MacDonald being the capitalist's only leverage.

Therefore, despite the war being violent, it won't not as devastating as the Russian Civil War was. The majority of the German population were literate proletarians, not as easily swayed as peasants with promises of land reform, even though there was a German peasantry. It also had extremely productive and mechanised farm land, meaning famine was far less likely than it was in Russia, which literally only had 1 railway in the entire country. The worker's also would be far more educated, questioning, and equipped to run society unlike peasants, who were only interested in their own personal gain in the form of land. Through the strong will of the population, and support of Russia, who in this timeline focus more on the Polish campaign than the Caucasus, lead to both Germany and Poland becoming communist countries. This would mean bureaucracy would not form to the same extent as it did in Russia, as there would be no need to impose red control on the populace, as the communists would be able to deliver on their programme. The workers would be the masters of their own control.

By 1923, Germany would be split between the Worker's Republic of Germany, led by Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebnecht, and the Kingdom of Prussia, which would be separated from the rest of Germany by Poland like it was in our timeline as a part of Germany, and with a strongly conservative population, would most likely have had the monarchy restored and a military dictatorship imposed.

Soviet Russia would have a major, industrialised country as their ally in this timeline. They could transport aid in the form of food to attempt to minimise the effect of famine initially. They could also have been major importer of Russian grain in exchange for machinery, helping Russia develop. I can imagine a communist democracy like Germany would encourage Russia to make reforms to it's political system after the civil war, perhaps meaning the CPSU splits into the right opposition Buhkrarinites and the left opposition Trotskyists
 
So Germany is mostly Communist now what happens next?

How does this effect the Biennio Rosso? If things escalate to the point of revolution and open civil war then that's another potential Communist country. If all of Italy goes Red what happens to their colonies?

Another thing to consider is Austria. It had a strong socialist movement, was politically unstable in the 20s and had plenty of pan-Germanists who would support unification with Germany regardless of the regime in charge. A Red Anchluss is only a matter of time, especially if Italy, or at least Northern Italy, is Communist too.

The sudden expansion of Communism is going to trigger some sort of geopolitical reaction. True many people were exhausted after the last war and it would be costly to start another one but Europe would be facing a major shakeup. My instinct is that some sort of compromise will arise where the Entente powers recognise the new Communist governments in Germany and Italy in exchange for significant concessions, such as the Germans having to pay even more reparations and more stringent arms limitations, whilst the allies begin making moves towards limited rearmament and forming a bloc to contain further revolutionary expansion.
 
One thing to consider is that Germany has a big peasant population, with little support for the left among them. Also look at the total % of the vote won by left wing parties in the 1920 elections, a little over 40%, and much of that for the SPD. In 1921 when mega state Prussia voted for its landtag, left wing parties still got about that same amount, so support levels were stagnating, with no sign of a huge surge in electoral support for the left. I'm thinking a German civil war ends much differently than the Russian one does, due to a much higher anti-communist support level in Germany than in Russia.
 
Another thing to consider is that the Polish-Soviet War is still ongoing and the Battle of Warsaw is still several months away. Depending on how quickly Red Germany is able to consolidate they might have an impact on the outcome of that war, either through direct military intervention or due to the Polish military having to redirect troops away from the front to guard the border just in case the Germans attack. If the Soviets are able to overrun Poland and link up with their German comrades that's a pretty significant state-of-affairs. Not only does this guarantee their military security but it also means a much more economically stronger Red Bloc with access to the more developed parts of Poland.

If you really want to wank the Reds find some way for the Hungarian Soviet Republic to hold out for a couple of years and they can join in the fun too.

That being said if the Soviets and Germans were able to link up that might be able to frighten the rest of Europe into launching a full-scale invasion.
 

Arctofire

Banned
So Germany is mostly Communist now what happens next?

How does this effect the Biennio Rosso? If things escalate to the point of revolution and open civil war then that's another potential Communist country. If all of Italy goes Red what happens to their colonies?

Another thing to consider is Austria. It had a strong socialist movement, was politically unstable in the 20s and had plenty of pan-Germanists who would support unification with Germany regardless of the regime in charge. A Red Anchluss is only a matter of time, especially if Italy, or at least Northern Italy, is Communist too.

The sudden expansion of Communism is going to trigger some sort of geopolitical reaction. True many people were exhausted after the last war and it would be costly to start another one but Europe would be facing a major shakeup. My instinct is that some sort of compromise will arise where the Entente powers recognise the new Communist governments in Germany and Italy in exchange for significant concessions, such as the Germans having to pay even more reparations and more stringent arms limitations, whilst the allies begin making moves towards limited rearmament and forming a bloc to contain further revolutionary expansion.

Well I think the Cold War is forwarded 20 years. In our timeline, the British and French capitalists naturally hated communism and supported fascist counter revolution anywhere it showed it's face, however it was done with a hint of subtlety. For example, in the Spanish Civil War, they officially remained neutral, but the British allowed Franco to use their military bases. In this timeline however, they would be much more avert with their support for fascism, and would actively seek to arm fascist organisations and perhaps even set up dictatorships in their own countries. I think I can see the Spanish Civil War escalating into WW2, with it starting revolutionary wars in France and henceforth German support for the revolutionaries through invasion.

I'm not sure about Italy. Yes, there was a huge revolutionary opportunity in the Bienno Rosso, but the Italian Socialist Party was ineffective during the times of struggle, and this was one of the most left wing parties in Europe which hadn't supported the war, making it's betrayal a huge surprise to many on the left. The Communist Party of Italy could have provided leadership, but it was also ineffective due to it's ultra left attitude instituted by Bordiga and it's refusal to participate in elections, reformist trade unions, and therefore acted as a radical fringe group. Now potentially, if Gramsci had assumed the leadership and highlighted the problems with their strategy, Italy could have turned red, but I personally think that is a different scenario. Unlike the Spartacists, the PCI was very inexperienced, making this mistake a probable one due to their inexperience in revolutionary struggle. Also, Germany is going to be so occupied with securing itself that I don't think Italy will get too much attention. Let's say that in this timeline Mussolini still comes to power.

Hungary was very isolated, and it suffered from the same issue as Italy in that the leadership was very inexperienced. Not only was it a revolution from above and not bellow (they assumed the capitalist state apparatus and collaborated with social democrats,) but they did not adequately address the needs of the peasants and the national question (capturing Hungarian ethnic territory outside their official borders which had been lost during the war). This led to enthusiasm dying down, especially amongst the peasantry and middle classes, and the social democrats of course stabbing them in the back making way of Horthy. Also, the Romanian forces proved to be too much for it, especially since at it's time, it was surrounded by hostile states. Both 1919 and 1956 prove that a red Hungary cannot survive in isolation if it is surrounded by a sea of counter revolution. Again, I think this is another scenario, because they'll have to hold out a whole year before Germany comes to their aid, and to do that, we need another POD.

Anchulus, it will happen eventually. Marx called for a greater Germany, and pan-germanism was originally not a far right ideology, but a left wing one. However, I don't think Germany will have the military strength to do it at this point. It will probably happen later on once it's regained it's strength.

But yes, with a much higher priority from the Russian's and an eastwards move from Germany, I believe the Soviet's would win the Polish-Soviet war with the help of red Germany. If they didn't, Germany would be extremely isolated, and wouldn't be able to trade freely with Russia. So, for the sake of the scenario, let's say Poland goes communist as well.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure an early Cold War is on the cards. For one the bourgeois powers were no where near as unified at this time than they were after WW2. The US is still isolationist, the colonial powers are still strong and in competition with each other and within the British ruling classes there was a strong movement who wanted to realign British geopolitics towards an isolationist, Empire focused, direction. The extent to which they would be willing to unify against the Communist threat depends heavily on how successful the spread of Communism is.

If we go by the original scenario where its just the Soviets and a rump Germany that go red then I don't think that, in and of itself, would be enough. The majority of Europe is still capitalist and the Reds would still be in a position of weakness, especially given that the British and French would likely use their position of strength to impose further Versailles style concessions from Germany. The great powers won't like the new regimes but they are hardly existential threats and if the Communists are able to democratise and avoid the excesses of Stalinism it will go some way to legitimising them in the eyes of intellectuals and bourgeois moderates making it harder to justify aggressive actions against them. France would probably be the most aggressive, given that they are right on the border and have a lot of bad memories of German aggression and I could see them forming an alliance with Fascist Italy whilst Britain, not really having the stomach or means for sudden rearmament and confrontation, would likely stay on the sidelines and continue the same foreign policy of the past 400 years namely propping up the smaller powers and balancing the great powers against each other to prevent any single one of them from dominating Europe. If the Poles end up sandwiched between Red Germany and the Soviets I could see them being more successful in building an Intermarium Federation out of the various Central European countries also sandwiched between them. The Americans will probably grumble at the rising red tide but ultimately they didn't regard European affairs as any of their business probably wouldn't get involved.

On the other hand if the Reds are completely successful, taking all of Germany overrunning Poland, absorbing Austria and taking Italy that would be a different kettle of fish with Europe sharply divided into pro and anti Communist blocs, although I think it would be more like a revived Napoleonic Wars or an early WW2 than an early Cold War.

There's also the fact that, without weapons of mass destruction capable of ensuring mutually assured destruction, the logic of the Cold War wouldn't play out and the various powers would just jump to open hostilities and war instead of the protracted stalemate of OTL. You might be able to achieve MAD with chemical weapons as there were people at the time who feared that poison gas could be used to effectively destroy whole civilisations, in Last and First Man Britain is depopulated because of repeated aerial gas bombing campaigns, or you could wank nuclear physics to get an earlier bomb.
 

Arctofire

Banned
I'm not sure an early Cold War is on the cards. For one the bourgeois powers were no where near as unified at this time than they were after WW2. The US is still isolationist, the colonial powers are still strong and in competition with each other and within the British ruling classes there was a strong movement who wanted to realign British geopolitics towards an isolationist, Empire focused, direction. The extent to which they would be willing to unify against the Communist threat depends heavily on how successful the spread of Communism is.

If we go by the original scenario where its just the Soviets and a rump Germany that go red then I don't think that, in and of itself, would be enough. The majority of Europe is still capitalist and the Reds would still be in a position of weakness, especially given that the British and French would likely use their position of strength to impose further Versailles style concessions from Germany. The great powers won't like the new regimes but they are hardly existential threats and if the Communists are able to democratise and avoid the excesses of Stalinism it will go some way to legitimising them in the eyes of intellectuals and bourgeois moderates making it harder to justify aggressive actions against them. France would probably be the most aggressive, given that they are right on the border and have a lot of bad memories of German aggression and I could see them forming an alliance with Fascist Italy whilst Britain, not really having the stomach or means for sudden rearmament and confrontation, would likely stay on the sidelines and continue the same foreign policy of the past 400 years namely propping up the smaller powers and balancing the great powers against each other to prevent any single one of them from dominating Europe. If the Poles end up sandwiched between Red Germany and the Soviets I could see them being more successful in building an Intermarium Federation out of the various Central European countries also sandwiched between them. The Americans will probably grumble at the rising red tide but ultimately they didn't regard European affairs as any of their business probably wouldn't get involved.

On the other hand if the Reds are completely successful, taking all of Germany overrunning Poland, absorbing Austria and taking Italy that would be a different kettle of fish with Europe sharply divided into pro and anti Communist blocs, although I think it would be more like a revived Napoleonic Wars or an early WW2 than an early Cold War.

There's also the fact that, without weapons of mass destruction capable of ensuring mutually assured destruction, the logic of the Cold War wouldn't play out and the various powers would just jump to open hostilities and war instead of the protracted stalemate of OTL. You might be able to achieve MAD with chemical weapons as there were people at the time who feared that poison gas could be used to effectively destroy whole civilisations, in Last and First Man Britain is depopulated because of repeated aerial gas bombing campaigns, or you could wank nuclear physics to get an earlier bomb.

These are all good points you've made. When I say 'cold war' I don't mean that in the sense that it would be 'exactly' like the Cold War in our timeline with WMD's etcetra. But you have to remember that in our timeline, they only had east Germany, so it on it's own wasn't as threatening, even though they had other client states to make up for it. The fact that the whole of Germany is under red control, a country with a larger population than France or Britain and a military and industrial powerhouse, might make up for the fact that they don't have as many countries and bringing the red scare level to about equal.

I think if they'd struggle to impose Versailles style concessions because communist Germany would flat out refuse, that being a key part of the KPD's programme. What will they do? You do highlight a great point that intellectuals would likely admire this democratic communist ideal which would make entering into another war with Germany basically impossible simply because the populace won't stand for it. I can't see the French being able to get much out of Germany, and this will mean relations are icy cold between the two countries, with possibly a trade embargo.

Poland is communist, but Hungary and Italy aren't. This gives Germany and Russia a key trading route.

Yes, and WW2 will be more like the Napoleonic wars. I can imagine the proletariat of non communist countries being quite pleased at the thought at the thought of a German invasion and they would be seen as liberators.

I made a map of all the communist countries in 1950 in this timeline. Different countries are different shades of red to signify borders.
Map 2.png
 
Yes, and WW2 will be more like the Napoleonic wars. I can imagine the proletariat of non communist countries being quite pleased at the thought at the thought of a German invasion and they would be seen as liberators.
I wouldn't be so sure. Nationalism is a very strong force and no one likes being invaded, especially by people with whom they have a long-standing enmity, even if the invaders claim to be liberators. Wars of revolutionary conquest are seldom met with open arms, revolutionary defeatists tend to be in the minority, and such invasions are more likely to galvanise support for the existing regime and discredit native revolutionaries. The Polish proletariat didn't rise up in support of the Red Army on either of the occasions that they entered Poland for example.
 

Arctofire

Banned
I wouldn't be so sure. Nationalism is a very strong force and no one likes being invaded, especially by people with whom they have a long-standing enmity, even if the invaders claim to be liberators. Wars of revolutionary conquest are seldom met with open arms, revolutionary defeatists tend to be in the minority, and such invasions are more likely to galvanise support for the existing regime and discredit native revolutionaries. The Polish proletariat didn't rise up in support of the Red Army on either of the occasions that they entered Poland for example.

It will be more like assistance to an already happening revolution. In the 1930's France will be in revolutionary turmoil, the same with Britain. The Germans will simply provide assistance to a native movement.
 
Top