The Anglo-Saxon Social Model

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by Rattigan, Dec 17, 2018.

Loading...
  1. Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    As with all these things (and I think I use this phrase a lot so apologies if this is annoying), I think it depends on what you mean by 'left wing.' TTL UK certainly has a different class settlement and a more generous proto-welfare state but it's important not to equate that with one or more of its parties being fully fledged Keynesians. It's worth saying that OTL Keynesianism as a doctrine wasn't really worked out by 1929-30 and that's no different ITTL.

    Also, I've tried to make TTL's equivalent of the Great Depression, at its root, more explicitly a crisis of lender confidence and the currency (although it obviously has knock on effects for industry and employment not all that different from OTL), so it doesn't seem to politicians and bankers that this is just something which can be ridden out like 1919-21 with an increased budget deficit which will float away once growth returns. I think this explains better why some Labour figures were able to reconcile themselves to welfare cuts in an attempt to reach a balanced budget: that the crisis went to the core of the UK as a major creditor nation and the standing of the pound internationally. Hence why the paramount concern for MacDonald and Snowden in September 1930 is avoiding a devaluation of sterling (and why McKenna's and Keynes' views on the gold standard are going to become important further down the line): it's not a case of them being randomly cruel but them being stuck in a fiscal situation where deflationary tactics are the only way out they can see. Obviously, Keynes is currently a Liberal MP so query how long this orthodoxy will remain intact.
     
  2. Threadmarks: Grand Coalition/Second MacDonald Ministry (1930-1934)

    Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    The Doctor's Mandate: The Grand Coalition Responds to the Great Depression, 1930-34

    MacDonald immediately offered his resignation to the King but found it refused. Instead, George V, who believed that an election would only cause further uncertainty, urged him to see what kind of majority he could construct. After discussions with his own MPs had reached an impasse, MacDonald turned to the Liberals and Conservatives. Although neither Simon or Baldwin (the Liberal and Conservative leaders, respectively) had whipped their MPs to vote for the emergency budget because they did not feel that they could politically prop up a failed Labour government, they were sympathetic to MacDonald’s deflationary aims and had privately urged their MPs to vote with Snowden’s programme. As it was, many of their MPs had voted for the budget and both could say to MacDonald, with some plausibility, that they could bring their MPs in line behind an emergency budget on substantially the same basis as September 1930, on the condition that they were rewarded with ministerial posts. MacDonald was nervous about this proposal but, convinced by the direness of the fiscal situation, agreed to sound out his loyalists. Eventually he managed to convince 36 MPs to come with him and the so-called ‘Grand Coalition’ was formed in October 1930.

    1930.JPG
    A brief breakdown of the parties involved in the Grand Coalition

    The reasons for the choices made by 36 Labour MPs who chose to stick with MacDonald remain something of a mystery. While many of them belonged to the right of the party, many (notably Snowden) had begun their careers firmly in the utopian socialist camp. Similarly, there was no obvious class dimension to the choices: while the Earl de la Warr chose to go with MacDonald, other upper class Labour MPs and peers like Harold Nicholson and Lord Westminster stayed with the official Labour Party (indeed, in 1930 Lord Westminster donated Grosvenor House to Labour to act as their new headquarters); similarly, working class trades unionist MPs appeared in both MacDonald’s National Labour (James Henry Thomas) and Henderson’s Labour (J.R. Clynes).

    When the emergency budget returned to the Commons in October 1930, John Maynard Keynes organised a rebellion of 33 Liberal MPs but this did not prove to be enough to stop the Grand Coalition passing their budget with relative ease. The budget instituted a cut in welfare payments and for all government workers, along with a suite of tax rises. However, although these cuts went some way to calming the financial markets, they did nothing to stem the rise in unemployment and poverty, which were soon approaching figures closer to the beginning of the Edwardian Period. In 1931 and 1932, the government announced a series of further welfare cuts to be made on the recommendation of the Geddes Commission, a notionally independent (but, in practice, made up of Grand Coalition loyalists chaired by Sir Eric Geddes) committee to look into government spending. The so-called ‘Geddes Axe’ became a widespread metaphor for the government as a whole and the Conservatives in particular (Geddes was a Conservative MP and the party was known to be most enthusiastically in favour of fiscal retrenchment).

    However, the various cuts could not, because of the level of unemployment, produce a completely balanced budget and so therefore failed to stem speculative attacks on the pound, which were driven by concerns about the underlying health of the British banking industry and depletion of British gold reserves. Eventually, the independent MacMillan Report appeared in November 1932, recommending suspending the pound’s participation in the gold standard and a managed float of the currency. Although Snowden was initially reluctant to abandon gold (it was, after all, one of the main reasons behind the formation of the Grand Coalition) but eventually consented to doing so in the budget of March 1933. Despite initial concerns about inflation, these fears were allayed by an increase in the Bank of England’s base rate. This increase, combined with a carefully managed exchange rate float, gave a boost to British exports without putting stress on international finance or the politics of the Commonwealth and the Empire.

    However, while the Grand Coalition had, on its own terms, governed the country reasonably well in a fiscal sense (the way that the suspension of the gold standard was handled, in particular, has been well regarded by economic historians), the same could not be said of the political context. Although unemployment had dropped from its peak of around 20% of the workforce in the middle of 1931, it remained stubbornly high especially across areas of heavy industry. The recovery which was edging into existence following the suspension of the gold standard was not proceeding fast enough to replace the Geddes Axe. The widespread poverty and the impression that the Grand Coalition didn’t care about its citizens threatened to completely break down the Edwardian class and political settlement, in which people had accepted a degree of class-based inequality in return for the vote, a liberal (and often Liberal) and paternalistic welfare state and increasing standards of living.

    A particular target for protestors were the Romanov family, who, since their exile from Russia in 1918, had been living a quiet life in Anmer Hall in Norfolk. In 1932, the former Tsar and Tsarina were jostled on their way to the cinema and, a year later, protestors booed and disrupted proceedings at the funeral of their son, Alexei. Meanwhile, members of the TUC were becoming more and more militant, slowly slipping out of Bevin’s control. They shifted their demands away from the corporatism proposed by Bevin and the rest of the Labour party and towards direct confrontation.

    At the same time, the Grand Coalition was coming apart at the seams as pressure was put on the internal politics of the Liberals by the return to prominence of David Lloyd George. He had continued to be a party grandee since he had left Downing Street and was even invited to join the Grand Coalition in 1930, but was prevented by ill health. As such, internal opposition to the government’s policies largely devolved to Keynes and his clique, who urged a more expansionary fiscal policy but lacked the big names to challenge the government. When Lloyd George returned to health in late 1933, however, this changed. Together, he and Keynes authored the pamphlet ‘We Can Conquer Unemployment’ in January 1934, setting out their economic plans modelled on the ‘New Deal’ programme being pursued by the American government at the time.

    With the trades unions becoming increasingly militant and cracks emerging in the Grand Coalition, 1934 promised to be another year where events moved very quickly.
     
    Wolfman217, Cool-Eh, Adamant and 15 others like this.
  3. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    If you start giving bread and circuses, you should hope you never have to close the tap.

    Now, it's a breaking point. Seeing that the end result is a solid social democratic UK and not a socialist republic of Britain, I would imagine the "new deal liberals" and the labour rebels manage to form a government and start the machine back up?
     
    Salvador79 likes this.
  4. Drunkrobot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Location:
    Wales, Unfortunately
    Keynes: You're late.

    Lloyd George: A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to.
     
  5. DAv Middle Class... sorry

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Location:
    England
    Just read through this TL and it's been really quite good indeed. Plenty of back and forths along the political scale and it sounds like the next election is going to see a major upheaval in some of the party's fortunes. And this is just the UK, plenty of other places that're likely doing worse as well.
     
    Rattigan likes this.
  6. Kammada Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Since we're into (pseudo-)Tolkien quotes now, I wonder what would be Tolkien's fate in this timeline?
     
    Adamant likes this.
  7. Drunkrobot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Location:
    Wales, Unfortunately
    With a less painful war (for Britain, anyway), he probably doesn't become nearly the sole survivor of his old group of friends, but I think he admitted the war taught him to respect those who were from a lower class than he, it's possible that not going through such an experience leaves him in something of an ivory tower.
     
    ShortsBelfast likes this.
  8. Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    That's an interesting question. I had put some thought into how TTL culture diverges but that's mainly focused on the second half of the 20th century. I also considered doing an update in the future about poets like Wilfred Owen and Rupert Brooke reaching their maturity but I'd personally not thought about Tolkein. My suspicion is that, by this stage ITTL, he would've been teaching at Pembroke as in OTL and working on his preparatory ideas for The Hobbit and LOTR, although what his different history means for their contents I'm not quite sure. I suspect that his idealisation of rural England would remain but maybe some of the imagery of the sieges of the Hornburg and Minas Tirith might lose their heat with him having not fought in the trenches... Possibly also the central role of Sam.
     
    ShortsBelfast likes this.
  9. Kammada Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    So I take that he didn't volunteer for the army, as IOTL, or if he did, he never saw the trench warfare, right? This may have some ramifications concerning his earlier writings, too (*The Fall of Gondolin* and the matter of the Elder Days in general will probably be less dark).
     
  10. Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    There was a recruitment drive when the UK entered in 1917 and quite a high level of patriotic fervour but I think that would probably mean that any action he did see would have been as a reservist or as part of the army of occupation after the armistice and before the Paris Treaty was signed. In that case, I imagine that travelling through the blasted landscapes of Belgium on his way to occupying the left bank of the Rhine would have made quite a profound impression, albeit not quite as strong as having fought there (obviously).
     
  11. ShortsBelfast Events, dear boy, events

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    He was not "nearly the only survivor" from his pre-war group of friends. He was literally the only survivor and he was very conscious of that. The Dead Marches and the whole Land of Mordor are very much derived from his wartime experience. Apparently he had a very traumatic time in the trenches and the sight of a team of workmen digging up part of Oxford High Street in the 1930s sent him into a fugue. I suspect that Hobbit holes may be also a subconscious attempt to cope with his fears and mental scars through transforming something frightening and traumatic into something welcoming and comfortable.
     
  12. Threadmarks: General Strike of 1934

    Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    A Brilliant Failure: The Fall of the Grand Coalition
    _53509098_003005662-2.jpg
    Doing Their Bit: A military tank deployed to the streets of London in 1934 to help with transportation

    Quite what caused the sudden explosion of 1934 is hard to tell and, in truth, it was probably the result of many factors coming to a head. By this time, Labour and the conciliatory wing of the TUC (personified in the figure of Ernest Bevin) had lost control of the union movement in favour of more militant elements which were heavily influenced and infiltrated by the Communist Party of Great Britain. Similarly, the Grand Coalition now faced a problem on its own benches, with Lloyd George and the Keynesians openly speaking out against official government policy and getting a favourable hearing from many sections of the press. At the same time, while the economy was recovering after the hit of the 1929-30 crashes, economic growth hadn’t bounced back and most people weren’t feeling the so-called recovery in their pockets. With the government (if not everyone on their backbenches) committed to continued deflationary policies regardless of the social consequences, perhaps it is the case that people simply began to reach the end of their tether.

    The first signs of trouble began on 6 February 1934, when coal miners in the Rhondda walked out in protest at the lowering of wages. When strikers surrounded and attempted to lock out non-striking pits in the region the following day, riots broke out. In response, Baldwin, as Home Secretary, ordered military units to be sent to the Rhondda to aid the local police. Over four nights of rioting, one miner was killed before order was imposed. On 10 February, the commander of the Curragh Barracks in Ireland, Owen Duffy, sounded out his officers about their feelings on the rumours that they would be deployed to disperse striking dockers in Dublin and Belfast (who had walked out in solidarity with the striking miners). The vast majority of officers (both Protestant and Catholic) threatened to resign or accept dismissal in the event of any such orders and the story was reported in the press as a mutiny. The cabinet hurriedly issued a statement saying that there had been a misunderstanding and that the British Army would not be used anymore against striking workers but the damage had been done.

    Emboldened by the Curragh incident, in April 1934 workers in shipyards and mines across the country began a further series of wildcat strikes which rapidly developed into a full general strike. Although he was privately against it, Bevin helped to organise the strike but its disorganised and sudden nature, egged on by hotheads in the movement, meant that the TUC was wildly unprepared for it. Fortunately, at least from the point of view of some in the TUC, so too was the government and fuel stocks rapidly dwindled and infrastructure ground to a halt once railway workers walked out in solidarity a few days later. The government deployed the military to the streets to help with transportation in the absence of civilian workers but this move backfired when it brought up memories of the so called ‘Rhondda Massacres’ only a few months earlier.

    In June, Lloyd George finally made his move. In a meeting of Liberal MPs at the Reform Club, he urged them to withdraw from the Grand Coalition. All but Simon and 40 of his loyalists agreed and the Liberals announced their withdrawal from government the following day, with Lloyd George being chosen as their leader by acclamation in the Commons. Suddenly, the government was without a majority again (even though Simon and his allies stayed on the government benches as ‘Liberal Nationals’) and it faced another budgetary showdown, in the form of the autumn statement, in three months time. For those months, all sides commenced a series of shadow maneuvers in preparation for the showdown. The general strike wound down over the course of July as striking workers ran out of money and food, with the government and the union movement both being widely discredited (although it did re-empower the Bevinite moderate faction within the TUC and over the next three years they conducted a purge of the more radical and communist-influenced factions).

    When the day arrived in September, it was soon clear that the Grand Coalition had failed to peel off enough of Lloyd George’s Liberals and the statement went down to a defeat by 291 votes to 424. This time, there could be no question of MacDonald reconstituting his coalition and the King accepted his resignation. Parliament was dissolved and an election was called for November.
     
    Wolfman217, Cool-Eh, Nyvis and 20 others like this.
  13. Salvador79 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    How is that purge in the unions exactly going on?
    (btw, speaking of communists, can we have a very quick overview of what happened in the Soviet Union and/or Comintern?)
    Elections?
    I'm rooting for a Keynesian Liberal-Labour British New Deal coalition!

    btw: excellent updates!
     
    ert44444 and Ski like this.
  14. Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    It basically involves Bevin and his allies doing checkups on everyone in the union hierarchy and sacking them if there's any communist affiliation, so as you can imagine it's taking a bit of a while.

    As for future Lib-Lab relations, remember that the two parties fell out over the 1929 election and the Grand Coalition...
     
    Salvador79 likes this.
  15. Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    Oh, I forgot to say above that an update covering Russia 1920-35 will be coming up next week.
     
    Kammada, ShortsBelfast and Salvador79 like this.
  16. Threadmarks: The General Election of 1934

    Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    The Return of the King: The General Election of 1934
    1934.JPG
    * The number of Labour MPs elected in 1929
    ** The number of Liberal MPs who had remained in government after Lloyd George withdrew the party from the Grand Coalition in June
    *** The number of Liberal MPs elected in 1929
    **** The number of Labour MPs who had followed MacDonald into coalition in 1930 and remained there until 1934

    The 1934 election can perhaps be understood on three levels, all of which are true at once. On the first, surface, level, the night was a straightforward landslide for the Liberals, with them sweeping up over 150 seats from a mix of the Conservatives and Labour. On this reading, the Conservatives suffered worst of the two losers, losing over 100 seats and being more firmly ensconced in third place. Labour too had a bad night, losing 43 seats and dropping below 200 MPs in the Commons, but this was perhaps obscured by the Conservatives’ disastrous evening.

    But then, on the second level, the election can be viewed not as a ringing endorsement of the Liberals so much as a denunciation of the two groups - the trades unions and the Grand Coalition - which were seen to have failed to pilot the country out of the crises of 1929-30 and into a fresh one in 1934. On that reading, what was notable was the collapse in fortunes of those Labour and Liberal MPs who stayed with the Grand Coalition over the course of 1934 and campaigned as National Labour and Liberal Nationals, respectively. These two proto-parties went, respectively, from 36 MPs to 10 (who would drift back into Labour over the next few years) and from 41 MPs to 13 (where they would remain as a strange lifeless caucus caught between the Conservatives and the Liberals and largely mistrusted by both).

    Underneath that is another reading which emphasises how this election served as yet another demonstration of how finely balanced the British political scene was. It is true that the Liberals won their biggest victory since their win in 1905 but those two ‘landslides’ were not the same. In the first place, the Labour vote was split not only between the main party and MacDonald’s grouping but between the main party and the Communist Party of Great Britain, which sought to mobilise the now-expelled radical wing of the TUC into a party political breakthrough. Although the CPGB won only 9 seats in this election, it was a notable advance on their previous total of 3 and is believed to have contributed to a split in the Labour vote which let in the Liberals in at least a dozen seats and possibly more. Indeed, after all of this, with a divided Labour Party and a Conservative Party which was losing trust as a potential party of government, the Liberals could only gain a majority of 21 seats. For a party which had campaigned on a transformative economic programme, it was not necessarily encouraging.

    Nonetheless, it was clear that something big had happened over that night in November. Lloyd George strode through the famous black doors of Number 10 once more on 14 November and big changes began to be announced immediately. Over the rest of November, Lloyd George’s cabinet took shape, much of which had a distinctly old-fashioned look to it. Among the veterans of Lloyd George’s last cabinet to return were Winston Churchill as Home Secretary. Keynes was appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer with his first task being to deliver an emergency budget which was penciled in for 22 December.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2019
  17. Threadmarks: German Politics, 1918-1935

    Rattigan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Brooklyn
    Okay so today we begin a little tour around various countries of the world. These updates will take us up to 1935ish in each case, after which I'll do an update covering the progress of Lloyd George's New Deal and then a couple of updates (2-3, I've not decided) covering international diplomacy which will take us up to the end of everybody's favourite Low Dishonest Decade. I've also got an update for sporting and cultural developments but haven't decided where to fit that in yet.

    We're going to begin with Germany. Shout out to @ShortsBelfast for his/her help with this one. They came up with all the good ideas but rest assured that all the bad ones are mine.

    * * *
    Blood and Iron: Germany, 1918-1935
    Weimar.jpg Freikorps.jpg
    The two faces of German military government: soldiers distribute welfare to the poor in the form of food (top) and militia march during a crackdown on political opponents (bottom)


    When Wilhelm II was overthrown in a palace coup on 3 July 1918, it was with the understanding that Germany needed to adopt a democratic constitution in order to get as good a peace as possible out of the Entente. To this end, the so-called ‘Frankfurt Constitution’ was drawn up in consultation between the army and representatives of the three main parties of the pre-war Reichstag: the Social Democrats (SPD), Centre and the National Liberal Party. The constitution established universal suffrage at age 25 and instituted a system of proportional representation, all the while stripping the hereditary aristocracy and the monarchy of most of their de jure powers. In the first elections held under this constitution, in September 1918, the ‘Frankfurt Coalition’ of the SPD, Centre and the German People’s Party (DVP - a reconstituted National Liberal Party) together won just over 75% of the vote. Although those three parties were not really natural bedfellows in a policy sense, they were united in a shared commitment to the defence of the new constitution. Max von Baden, now in the DVP, continued as Chancellor in a coalition, with the mandate to secure as good a peace as he could.

    However, this fragile coalition could not survive contact with the actual terms of the Paris Treaty. In the first elections after signing the peace, in February 1920, the Frankfurt Coalition, particularly the DVP and the Centre, were hammered. Von Baden was unceremoniously removed from the Chancellery and replaced by Friedrich Ebert of the SPD. For the next three years (aside from von Baden returning for a three week tenure in April 1920 and Wilhelm Marx between May 1921 and February 1922), Ebert served as chancellor at the head of an unstable coalition of various socialist and Catholic social parties that collapsed when Ebert lost elections in October 1923.

    During this time, the political chaos (Ebert reconstituted his coalition five times in his tenure) was mirrored on the economic front. Germany had funded its expenditure in the Great War by taking out loans from British bankers with future war reparations from defeated opponents being earmarked for repayment. Combined with the war reparations (of which the equivalent of £1,000,000,000 was to be paid back over the first ten years), this placed severe restrictions on the German state’s financial capacities. The government’s policy of adopting cheap money resulted in a collapse in the value of the Mark, resulting in hyperinflation and further political turmoil. This was only compounded by the persistent violence on the border with Poland-Slovakia and terrorist activities by far left and far right groups. Over the course of his tenure, Ebert was increasingly reliant on the army and the paramilitary Freikorps (at this point effectively an extension of the army) to keep order.

    The October 1923 elections were won by a coalition of rightist parties and industrialist Alfred Hugenberg took power on a policy platform explicitly hostile to democracy. In August 1924, Hugenberg negotiated a deal with the army and the Freikorps which resulted in General Erich Ludendorff becoming Chancellor in what amounted to a coup. The army took an increasingly strong grip on political matters, outright banning almost all parties outside Hugenberg’s right-wing coalition and flooding the Reichstag with officers and military men in elections in October 1924. German democracy was from then on effectively a dead letter, with a military government, with a few notable civilians in the cabinet, ruling by decree. This coalition shared a three pronged ideology based on (i) a repudiation of the Paris Treaty, (ii) a commitment to “completing the task of German unification” and (iii) an interpretation of Germany’s defeat in the Great War which emphasised a ‘stab in the back’ by socialists at home and international bankers abroad, not coincidentally the most prominent of whom were Jewish. (Albeit that each of these planks were expressed more on the level of rhetoric to begin with.)

    Ludendorff’s ‘unusual’ views about Norse mysticism saw him quietly shuffled out of the Chancellery in March 1925. He was replaced by General Max Bauer but the policy platform remained the same. The international agreements of the Churchill Plan and the Locarno Pact gave the government some economic breathing room and the finance ministry, headed by the civilian Gustav Stresemann, used this opportunity to fundamentally revamp the German economy. Largely financed by British capital provided under the tenets of the Churchill Plan, the Stresemann Programme launched a new currency, pegged to sterling, and initiated a vast programme of industrial investment which effectively turned Germany into a command economy. Key to this was the widespread mechanisation and automation of factory work, to replace the men lost in the Great War. During this period Germany improved its relations with the Soviet Union and also reached a tentative peace with Poland. Relations were also normalised with Bavaria and Austria, although full unification would have been a flagrant breach of the Paris Treaty and neither side was willing to push that too far. With the economy improving in these five years, the army kept the political scene pliant through judicious distribution of largesse to allies and periodic clampdowns on opponents and semi-official pogroms against Jews and other undesirables.

    However, Germany was seriously rocked by the economic crises of 1929-30, something which was exacerbated by the deaths of Bauer and Stresemann in May and October 1929, respectively. Reliant as the economy had been on British credit, Germany was particularly badly hit by the freezing up of British banks over the course of 1929-31. Unemployment in Germany’s remaining private factories skyrocketed and investor confidence collapsed and there were widespread bank runs. Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord and Hermann Ehrhardt came and went from the Chancellery over the next four years, neither proving capable of getting control of the situation. Wilhelm Groener replaced Ehrhardt in March 1933 and initiated a programme of deficit spending combined with territorial expansion.

    This final consideration animated a fresh round of talks with King Rupprecht about Bavaria returning to the German fold. Rupprecht had been wary of such a move before, notably because it would have been in clear violation of the Paris Treaty. However, with Groener’s government now instituting rearmament (as part of their deficit spending), also in violation of the Treaty, and facing no repercussions, the calculations suddenly changed. The catalyst for the deal was the victory of the National Socialist Bavarian Workers’ Party (NSBAP) in the May 1934 elections, which brought to power Gregor Strasser as Bavarian Chancellor. Rupprecht was unnerved by the NSBAP not only because of their revolutionary workers’ rhetoric but also by their aggressive entho-nationalist ideology. As a result, he quietly gave his consent to the Bavarian military launching a coup against the civilian government in July 1934, which was subsequently supported by the deployment of German troops. Bavaria rejoined the German Empire five days later. The League of Nations, meanwhile, did nothing.

    Chancellors of Germany
    1. Prince Maximilian von Baden; German Democratic Party; July 1918 - February 1920
    2. Friedrich Ebert; Social Democrat; February 1920 - April 1920
    3. Prince Maximilian von Baden; German Democratic Party; April 1920
    4. Friedrich Ebert; Social Democrat Party; April 1920 - May 1921
    5. Wilhelm Marx; Centre Party; May 1921 - February 1922
    6. Friedrich Ebert; Social Democrat Party; February 1922 - October 1923
    7. Alfred Hugenberg; National People’s Party; October 1923 - August 1924
    8. Erich Ludendorff; army; August 1924 - March 1925
    9. Max Bauer; army; March 1925 - May 1929
    10. Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord; army; May 1929 - July 1932
    11. Hermann Ehrhardt; army; July 1932 - March 1933
    12. Wilhelm Groener; army; March 1933 - present
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019
  18. Salvador79 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    How did Ludendorff ban all those Parties without Triggering General strikes and The like? The Nazis did it by simply Interning and torturing to death so many leftists that The Rest was too scared. Acting The Same way does not look like what your Military Junta could have achieved or even wanted.
     
    Nyvis likes this.
  19. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    The Nazis also did it quite a bit later and after having taken a large popular and street presence. The military here doesn't have that. They have tons of freikorps though, so any attempt at uprising against their takeover would be bloody. But I don't see it happening peacefully, yeah.
     
    Salvador79 likes this.
  20. Salvador79 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2015
    True, but an all-out Freikorps vs worker guards (Rotfrontkämpferbund, Reichsbanner and that would be only The start) civil war is an entirely different beast, and so is going to be The resulting regime.
     
Loading...