PC: Nazis without Communism

It's something of a cliché that the Nazis rose to power, at least in part, due to the fear of Communism which lead to many people supporting them as a bulwark against revolution. Certainly on a geopolitical level this is true as many supported appeasement as a means of creating a counterweight to the USSR. By extension it is commonly held that, without the Bolshevik Revolution, the Nazis wouldn't have come to power.

I would argue, however, that even in the face of a failed or stillborn Bolshevik Revolution there is still a good chance that the Nazis could still come to power. The main reason for this is that without the Bolshevik Revolution the Socialist and Social Democratic parties of Europe would be more unified and larger, due to them not experiencing the splits that occurred with the establishment of the 3rd International, and would still retain the radicals who IOTL formed the various Communist parties. Should those radicals within those parties succeed in gaining influence over the membership and party machinery, say in the aftermath of the Great Depression, it seems to me that the powers-that-be would find that a pretty terrifying prospect and might be willing to, grudgingly, throw their support behind fascists and other far-right political movements to keep them from taking power.

Another factor that could, depending on how things play out, affect the rise of Fascism in Germany is how the absence of the Bolshevik Revolution plays out in Eastern Europe, particularly Russia and Poland. Whilst there are too many variables to list all the possible outcomes I personally think that it's still likely that Russia could face some sort of civil war, due to the various separatist movements in the Russian Empire and the weakness of the Provisional Government. The aftermath of such a war could easily result in a militarised and reunified Russian Empire or possibly the success of the Intermarium project, which depended on weakening Germany and Russia, either of which could present the Nazis with a ready Slavic Hordes narrative.

Another factor to consider with regards to a Russian civil war without a prior Bolshevik revolution is that the Weimar government, dominated by the SPD in its early years, might be open to allowing political dissidents and refugees fleeing from the war to settle in Germany, which would provide the Nazis with amply "evidence" that the SPD were in league with dangerous radicals and wanted to flood Germany with Jews and Slavs.

In addition, the various other factors that served the Nazis and far-right in Germany would likely still be in effect without the Bolshevik Revolution: the stab-in-the-back myth, the humiliation of the Treaty of Versailles, widespread and latent antisemitism, an anti-democratic conservative establishment in the judiciary, military and civil service and the Great Depression.
 
If Russia had been at Versailles, it wouldn't have been the same treaty. The Russians probably wouldn't have supported the Polish corridor as making the post-Versailles "Poland" too powerful and might have even supported the rump Austria being incorporated into Germany on the basis that it might allow them a freer hand in the Balkans. Secondly, if the Russians had been part of the global economy, the Great Depression would have played out considerably differently to OTL. Thirdly, if the Russians had been committed to enforcing TTL version of Versailles as well as Britain and France, the Nazis couldn't have got away with nearly as much. Fourthly, if Russia hadn't been subjected to war communism and the Stalinist purges it would have been militarily and economically stronger than OTL.
 
If Russia had been at Versailles, it wouldn't have been the same treaty. The Russians probably wouldn't have supported the Polish corridor as making the post-Versailles "Poland" too powerful and might have even supported the rump Austria being incorporated into Germany on the basis that it might allow them a freer hand in the Balkans. Secondly, if the Russians had been part of the global economy, the Great Depression would have played out considerably differently to OTL. Thirdly, if the Russians had been committed to enforcing TTL version of Versailles as well as Britain and France, the Nazis couldn't have got away with nearly as much. Fourthly, if Russia hadn't been subjected to war communism and the Stalinist purges it would have been militarily and economically stronger than OTL.
Firstly, that assumes that the Russians would be at the table or would have a strong voice. The reason why the Bolsheviks were able to come to power in the first place is that they were the only ones promising to make peace with Germany. In addition the Russian Army was at the end of their tether and would not have been able to keep up the fight for much longer. If the Provisional Government is going to survive it is going to have to come to terms with Germany, which means renouncing vast amounts of territory in the West, sullying themselves with their own stab-in-the-back myth and likely setting themselves up for a civil war over opening the can on nationalism and being seen as traitors. The alternative is to keep fighting until the army collapses and they have harsh terms imposed on them or they get overthrow by someone willing to go to the table. Either way by the time Versailles comes around they likely won't be in a condition to dictate terms.

Secondly all your arguments that Russia would be stronger don't exactly work against the possibility that the Nazis would still rise as a strong and powerful Slavic Empire to the East is exactly the sort of bogeyman that they would use to justify themselves. It might even help them on a geopolitical front. Britain and France might not fear this alt-Russia the same way they did the USSR but concerns over the balance of power would probably lead to, at least Britain, supporting a stronger Germany as a counterweight to Russia. Keeping Europe divided and at each others' throats has literally been British foreign policy for centuries.
 

Deleted member 94680

It's something of a cliché that the Nazis rose to power, at least in part, due to the fear of Communism which lead to many people supporting them as a bulwark against revolution.

It's not a cliché if it's true.

Certainly on a geopolitical level this is true as many supported appeasement as a means of creating a counterweight to the USSR. By extension it is commonly held that, without the Bolshevik Revolution, the Nazis wouldn't have come to power.

Where is this commonly held? The most common reason i have heard - outside of "Germans are bad"/"the Junkers were proto-Nazis"/"it was all down to Hitler's magnetism" - was reaction against the diktat of Versailles.

I would argue, however, that even in the face of a failed or stillborn Bolshevik Revolution there is still a good chance that the Nazis could still come to power. The main reason for this is that without the Bolshevik Revolution the Socialist and Social Democratic parties of Europe would be more unified and larger, due to them not experiencing the splits that occurred with the establishment of the 3rd International, and would still retain the radicals who IOTL formed the various Communist parties. Should those radicals within those parties succeed in gaining influence over the membership and party machinery, say in the aftermath of the Great Depression, it seems to me that the powers-that-be would find that a pretty terrifying prospect and might be willing to, grudgingly, throw their support behind fascists and other far-right political movements to keep them from taking power.

Like, say, in Germany where the Social Democrats were the largest political party and had been for several years?

Another factor to consider with regards to a Russian civil war without a prior Bolshevik revolution is that the Weimar government, dominated by the SPD in its early years, might be open to allowing political dissidents and refugees fleeing from the war to settle in Germany, which would provide the Nazis with amply "evidence" that the SPD were in league with dangerous radicals and wanted to flood Germany with Jews and Slavs.

An interesting notion - but even without a Bolshevik revolution (which requires quite the POD, given how long the Bolsheviks had been opposed to the Tsarist regime) wouldn't this be the kind of thing the Nazis would try OTL? Or is it dependent on the alt-SDP dominating Wiemar? Did Luxemburg or Liebknecht propose anything like this OTL?

In addition, the various other factors that served the Nazis and far-right in Germany would likely still be in effect without the Bolshevik Revolution: the stab-in-the-back myth, the humiliation of the Treaty of Versailles, widespread and latent antisemitism, an anti-democratic conservative establishment in the judiciary, military and civil service and the Great Depression.

These are all factors that served the Nazis in their rise to power, but - IMHO - Versailles is the main one. Otherwise, three of the four you've listed would prevent the Nazis gaining power rather than help them. IMO the Heer was the only real 'power' OTL that would prevent the Nazis gaining power, their alignment with Hitler was the decisive factor in the Nazis obtaining the Machtergreifung.
 
Firstly, that assumes that the Russians would be at the table or would have a strong voice. The reason why the Bolsheviks were able to come to power in the first place is that they were the only ones promising to make peace with Germany. In addition the Russian Army was at the end of their tether and would not have been able to keep up the fight for much longer. If the Provisional Government is going to survive it is going to have to come to terms with Germany, which means renouncing vast amounts of territory in the West, sullying themselves with their own stab-in-the-back myth and likely setting themselves up for a civil war over opening the can on nationalism and being seen as traitors. The alternative is to keep fighting until the army collapses and they have harsh terms imposed on them or they get overthrow by someone willing to go to the table. Either way by the time Versailles comes around they likely won't be in a condition to dictate terms.

Secondly all your arguments that Russia would be stronger don't exactly work against the possibility that the Nazis would still rise as a strong and powerful Slavic Empire to the East is exactly the sort of bogeyman that they would use to justify themselves. It might even help them on a geopolitical front. Britain and France might not fear this alt-Russia the same way they did the USSR but concerns over the balance of power would probably lead to, at least Britain, supporting a stronger Germany as a counterweight to Russia. Keeping Europe divided and at each others' throats has literally been British foreign policy for centuries.
You do make some good points but I think the best chance of a non-Communist Russia would have been either the Kornilov "coup" succeeding or the Provisional Government making a separate peace on slightly better terms than Brest-Litovsk. In the former case Russia would have been at the table at Versailles. In the latter case, the blockade of the Central Powers just got a lot more porous. Because Russia could re-enter the war Germany wouldn't be able to free up as many troops as it did for the Ludendorff offensive and probably stays on the defensive 1917. By 1918 the demobilised Russians have grain and potatoes to sell and America Britain and France have to contemplate three or four more years of war with Germany and Austria. So the likelihood of a peace deal as harsh as Versailles isn't great. They need to offer a peace deal with something in it for the Central Powers.
The other issue is that OTL right wing industrialists like Flick, Krupp and Thyssen rescued the Nazis from bankruptcy in the early 1930s as a bulwark against Communism and the Soviet Union. In any TL where Russia is a White "managed democracy " or dictatorship or a liberal democracy these chaps will be making shed loads of money selling them machine tools and steel and won't be in any mood to bankroll a Drang nach Osten.
 
If the Bolshevik Revolution fails, the mainstream right in Germany is probably less imperiled. Between this and stronger social democrats, there is not a space for the Nazis to fill.
 
If the Bolshevik Revolution fails, the mainstream right in Germany is probably less imperiled. Between this and stronger social democrats, there is not a space for the Nazis to fill.
But without the split between the Social Democrats and Communists wouldn't the Social Democrats be both more radical and larger?
 
Which is also part of why the mainstream right and center parties will be stronger.
Surely the prospect of a Social Democratic Party that is much larger, thus cannot be as watered down through coalition, and with a far more radical streak, could serve as a source of existential anxiety for the far-right especially if the radicals were to take control of the party?

I'd argue that the split within the SPD following the Bolshevik revolution greatly strengthened the centre as it allowed the SPD to present itself as part of the established status quo of acceptable politics whilst the Communists could be safely pushed to the side and ignored. The fact that the Communists and SPD hated each other and refused to work together even in the face of rising fascism probably did a lot to soften the image of the SPD.
 
Surely the prospect of a Social Democratic Party that is much larger, thus cannot be as watered down through coalition, and with a far more radical streak, could serve as a source of existential anxiety for the far-right especially if the radicals were to take control of the party?

I'd argue that the split within the SPD following the Bolshevik revolution greatly strengthened the centre as it allowed the SPD to present itself as part of the established status quo of acceptable politics whilst the Communists could be safely pushed to the side and ignored. The fact that the Communists and SPD hated each other and refused to work together even in the face of rising fascism probably did a lot to soften the image of the SPD.
Conversely, the inability of the mainstream right to beat back a seemingly unstoppable Communist advance after 1917 helped the Nazis.
 
You do make some good points but I think the best chance of a non-Communist Russia would have been either the Kornilov "coup" succeeding or the Provisional Government making a separate peace on slightly better terms than Brest-Litovsk. In the former case Russia would have been at the table at Versailles. ...

If the Russians are at Versailles the Germans are liable to lose their portions of 'Poland' & a fair number of German displaced persons are liable to be crowding the cities of 1920s Germany. The narrative of the lost provinces is going to rival that of the French Alsace Lorraine angst. Worse if the loss includes all or part of Prussia. It won't have much traction with the Krupp crowd, but a Slavic menace, which the nazis used anyway, can be played up to attract votes (and Marks) from the disgruntled middle class & laborers.
 
I would make the distinction between Nazism as such, and some kind of German fascism or right-wing authoritarianism; the former absolutely did depend on anti-Bolshevik anxieties to come to power, as otherwise there’s absolutely no way in hell the German aristocracy and elites were going to cooperate with a movement as anti-capitalist as the National Socialist German Worker’s Party.
 
Top