Life in the Weimar Republic

Describe the average day of any person in 1965 Germany in which the Weimar Republic has survived since the 1920's. What kind of jobs are there? Are the cities crowded? Any entertainment? What kind of food do people eat? Are the Germans scared of anything, expecting something? You tell me.
 
Describe the average day of any person in 1965 Germany in which the Weimar Republic has survived since the 1920's. What kind of jobs are there? Are the cities crowded? Any entertainment? What kind of food do people eat? Are the Germans scared of anything, expecting something? You tell me.

Probably not that different than OTL West Germany in the early 70's, maybe. A little more conservative, more people going to church every Sunday.
 
Difficult. Some of the social trends of the '20s and early '30s have to my knowledge never recovered.
More details about this timeline, please.
 
Probably not that different than OTL West Germany in the early 70's, maybe. A little more conservative, more people going to church every Sunday.

I could see it being more liberal; Wemiar Germany had a bit of a gay rights movement, as well as as a mini sexual revolution. Doesn't have to matter in the grand scheme of things, but it shouldn't be discounted.
 
Difficult. Some of the social trends of the '20s and early '30s have to my knowledge never recovered.
More details about this timeline, please.

Why should I give you the details? You tell me what the place is like, if its cause of some big war, explain the war, if its cause of peace, explain it. No big deal.
 
Alright. Then this assignment goes to my "write something of moderate to long length when there is time" folder.
 
Alright. Then this assignment goes to my "write something of moderate to long length when there is time" folder.

Its not even that. If you think a war occurs in Europe without the nazi's mention it and then say what the nation is like. You do not have to create this massive thing.
 
I think that war occurs anyway. Stalin wanted to get into the Baltics and probably take a bite out of Poland.

However, without Hitler pushing things to a boiling point is Stalin going to have the guts to go after the Baltics?

I think that he probably would. If Hitler doesn't to power, then I think that you're still going to have political instability in Germany. When Stalin decides that no-one will be able to keep him from expanding in the East, he swings into action and builds up troops along the Baltics' border. Then forces annexation of the Baltics. This is going to upset people in the West, and probably creates a crisis in the East. Poland will freak out. Really, really, freak out. Germany might press its luck now and try to get some of the Polish Corridor back, using the implicit threat of an alliance with the Soviets out as motivating factor for the Poles. Or it might try and expand "soft" influence by arranging a defensive alliance with Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Using the Soviet expansion as an excuse the Germans could unveil their violations of the Versailles Treaty and expand its arms programs. Rather than be seen as a threat to its neighbors Germany is the only power that has both the will and capacity to defend Europe against the Soviets.

The Soviet expansion is going to end up stabilizing politics in Germany. The new German posture as the lynch-pin of the Warsaw Pact (Germany, Poland, Romania), ends up propelling a center-right coalition to a stable hold on the German government.

The Soviets don't expand much beyond the Baltics. A failed invasion of Finland (1940-2) ends up as a proxy war between the newly reinvigorated German arms industry and the Soviet Union. German "volunteers"- mostly air units are sent in '41- and are seen as convincing the Soviets to end their attack.

WWII doesn't happen. The Japanese still launch their invasion of China. The Americans, without the war in Europe, are unable to cut off oil, so the Japanese never face the end of their imperial ambitions via lack of resources. Instead Japanese imperial ambitions go to China to die. The Japanese are more successful, but are unable to ever really win. Because of more Japanese focus on China, the Nationalists take even more of a beating. The Soviets became more involved in the Sino-Japanese War, building the Chinese Communist Party up in the process. The Soviets get a feel of how to build up a revolutionary movement, and now have a blueprint for how to do it. The Japanese face growing resistance are ultimately forced to withdraw from China in '51.

Soviets start backing nascent nationalist movements across the West's imperial holdings. The British and French have more manpower, and have not been exhausted by WWII, so they can stand up to growing independence movements more easily. This leads to a much bloodier situation as the Algerian war progresses. Everything that OTL was seen as a communist conspiracy really ends up becoming one. The Soviets, without the massive losses and stresses from WWII, are much more willing to engage in a match of wills with the British and French.

The Americans have a tougher time getting out of the Depression. Without WWII and the GI Bill the economic transformation that created modern America never happens. What the alternative America is isn't really clear, but it doesn't look like OTL for sure.

Weimar Germany in the 1960's is the economic powerhouse of Europe. The British and French have been plagued by political instability stemming from their increasing difficult commitments in their imperial holdings. Germany dominates central Europe with its economic strength and military might. German troops, as part of the Warsaw Pact, are still stationed in Romania and Poland. Plans for a European free trade zone between the Warsaw Pact and other central European countries. Germany's economic growth has attracted workers from across Europe, mainly Yugosalvs and other southern Europeans.
 
Last edited:
I think that war occurs anyway. Stalin wanted to get into the Baltics and probably take a bite out of Poland.

However, without Hitler pushing things to a boiling point is Stalin going to have the guts to go after the Baltics?

I think that he probably would.

Why? And what of Austria?

WWII doesn't happen. The Japanese still launch their invasion of China. The Americans, without the war in Europe, are unable to cut off oil, so the Japanese never face the end of their imperial ambitions via lack of resources.

Hrm. It's not like Britain was really happy about it; they proposed a blockade of Japan as early as 1937, with American support. If anything, with a Weimar state you might see a more forceful role in the east.

I can see this taking a nasty turn. The disarmament conferences of the early 1930s are more successful with Germany as a democratic state, and so here's a limited European disarmament.

Stalin doesn't build up the Red Army to OTL levels. But he does build it up, and when the Japanese get cocky in 37... ouch.

This causes a terror in Europe, which rapidly rearms. Hilarity ensues when Stalin sees this as signs of a preemptive strike.
 
Why? And what of Austria?

Germany and Austria might unite, but I feel like its something that would happen a little farther down the road. Maybe with the Soviet aggression of the late 30's/early 40's, while the Germans form the Warsaw Pact, they also create some kind of closer association with Austria, maybe a much closer military alliance, ala NATO, interchangable mlitary equitment, a combined General Staff

The reason I thought the Soviets would start getting involved in the Baltics is that by the late 30's/early 40's the Soviets have achieved major industrial gains. Their military has also seen a major build-up, and Stalin would be interested in getting some return on his military investment. Retaking the only parts of Imperial Russia to get away during the Civil War would seem to be a major objective. It would prove Soviet strength, and put Europe on notice that the Soviets are back in the game.

Also, if the whole Soviets build up/Europeans freak out-build-up scenario happens, the Soviets move into the Baltics could be seen as a pre-emptive strike, trying to take away a part of what Stalin may see as the West's front against the USSR.

Hrm. It's not like Britain was really happy about it; they proposed a blockade of Japan as early as 1937, with American support. If anything, with a Weimar state you might see a more forceful role in the east.

I can see where you're coming from with this. Without the rising tension in Europe, then Japan is unlikely to make the very ambitious gamble on a Chinese offensive. The British and Americans make it clear that they don't want to see more Japanese aggression, and threaten to cut off oil if it continues. Since the British don't want to see aggression and Roosevelt is a Sinophile, this could work.

I can see this taking a nasty turn. The disarmament conferences of the early 1930s are more successful with Germany as a democratic state, and so here's a limited European disarmament.

Stalin doesn't build up the Red Army to OTL levels. But he does build it up, and when the Japanese get cocky in 37... ouch.

This causes a terror in Europe, which rapidly rearms. Hilarity ensues when Stalin sees this as signs of a preemptive strike.

So when the Japanese back down after the Anglo-Americans make their concerns known, the Soviets and Europeans start going mano-e-mano on the Polish border?
 
Top