The Europe of the Generals

Reader mode

Anchises

Banned
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-world-without-ww2.446561/#post-17226628

This is my "discussion" thread for stuff/idea that I want to discuss with more knowledgeable people. I mean ITTL is seriously butterflying away from OTL really fast. The world in the 30s is going to be different. The world in the 40s is going to be unrecognizable. And we don't have to talk about the 50s.

So all the people who posted in this thread so far are very welcome there with input. This is going to be a slow TL, I am rather lazy :p but your input and criticism is very welcome. As you see I am willing to rewrite stuff for more "realism". No Nazis and WW2 is rather difficult territory AH wise. Butterflies the size of skyscrapers but close enough to us to not allow the same creative license that earlier PODs allow. What I am trying to say: I would very much like it if you help me shaping this TL.

@NoMommsen special thanks for your input, the info you gave me (and I haven't forgotten Strasser but I would like to clarify your position: do you think he wasn't as National Bolshevist as people claim today?)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NoMommsen said:
Well agree with most of your thoughts, esp. what might go around on polish debating tables.

However, having read most of the published documents of the german foreign office of the 30ies, esp. the early thirties, the german-italian diplomatic relations were ... very important for the german foreign office. The germans often acted rather servile towards Mussolini - what he somewhat ... liked :rolleyes:.
That continuing ITTL would lead to the german diplomats letting Austria at that moments drop like a too hot potato, esp. as there would now some wanted Nazis be around in the Alps-republic. The german diplomacy and politics would try to march in lockstep with Mussolini regarding Austria ... hoping for his support on the disarmament conference.

Not to forget : Mussolini never "liked" Hitler, esp. not in the early 30ies and was at the tim in question atm rather anti-Hitler-Germany.
Another reason for discontent between Germany and Italy removed early on.
Click to expand...

thezerech said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "unlikely alliances" and by your point on the Pan Germanists. There is no way a Schleicher regime would push for Anschluss like the IIIrd Reich did. If anything, imo, Dolfuß represents a potential ally for Schleicher, who I think would be willing to accept an independent Austria in return for economic and diplomatic cooperation. Dolfuß always maintained the German nature of Austria while remaining uncompromising on her independence. In this scenario I think Schleicher would look to Austria as a model to what his regime should/could look like if he wants to establish something more lasting than a temporary junta that will eventually lapse into a restoration of the Empire. Cooperation with Austria means cooperation with Italy and that, by '36, when the Invasion of Abyssinia occurs, could be very interesting to see if they line up similarly to OTL.

Something else that is interesting is how Germany would continue to support China rather than Japan, which could lead to some interesting things going on in the Orient.

Overall I am really enjoying this TL so far and look forward to reading the rest of it. Subscribed!
Click to expand...

German-Italian relations initially will be as you describe. Germany needs Mussolini's support and Austria won't be "Anschlussed" in 1938. However in the long run I think Austria is going to join the Reich. Mussolini's Italy was deeply rotten and without WW2 his weakness might not become apparent as early as IOTL but he will fuck up and "his" Italy will be exposed as a paper tiger. Germany on the other hand is bound to become stronger and at some point this imbalance will change the dynamic of German-Italian relationships rather...drastically.

And Dollfuß and his Austria won't serve as a model for von Schleicher, that is not how I understand the man. Schleicher was less...dogmatic, more a flexible schemer. And neither the Catholicism nor the Isolationism are really applicable to von Schleicher's mindset. Some elements of Austro Fascism will serve as an inspiration but model is too strong a word imho. And without Italian backing, I don't think independent Austria is possible in the long run, not with a strong somewhat irredentist, authoritarian Germany.

jerseyguy said:
This could have positive butterflies for Southeastern Europe. I suspect that without a war, the Arrow Cross Party in Hungary and the Iron Guard can be kept farther away from the halls of power. Would Rome prefer less ideological dictators like Horthy and Antonescu as allies/proxies/puppet states over mass movements? Hopefully the more extreme fascists from otl will be limited to a role perennial opposition against whichever general is in power at the moment (analogous to the Muslim Brotherhood's influence in Egyptian politics pre-2011).

Edit: I'm really enjoying this TL so far! The way different autocracies/authoritarian movements interact with each other in an under-appreciated area of political science, this TL is a good way to explore those kinds of interactions. Alternate history for political science is what science fiction is for STEM.
Click to expand...

Well lets just say we have enough butterflies to relegate the extreme fascists to more peripheral roles.

And I agree, interaction between different authoritarians is really interesting. This is going to be major focus ITTL because Europe will be more authoritarian and more independent than IOTL.

And your statement about Generals being in power not only in Germany but many other European countries was... inspirational. Originally the title was meant to convey the huge influence German generals would have on Europe but having Generals in power in many different European countries is interesting and probably makes sense in the larger frame of the TL.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Anchises said:
...
@NoMommsen special thanks for your input, the info you gave me (and I haven't forgotten Strasser but I would like to clarify your position: do you think he wasn't as National Bolshevist as people claim today?)
...
Click to expand...
No, Gregor Strasser was not the National Bolshevist. This was his brother Otto Strasser, Gregor often gets confused with.

Unfortunatly Gregor Strasser left much lesser 'records' than Otto Strasser ... nöt at least due to Gregors early dead düring the 'Röhm-Putsch'.
Lots of what was contemporary published in newspapers and other public periodicals with the 'signature' of Gregor was actually from Otto, esp. of the more 'radical' content. Otto was kinda 'hiding' behind his brother Gregors posotion within the party.
The reason for the split between the two in 1930.

Gregors position was much less ideological than Ottos or the other party-economists like Gottfried Feder i.e.. Best descrition that comes to my mind :
late Rathenau state controlled corporatism with deficit spending (then named 'productive credit creation') for small and intermediate buisness (the so-called 'Mittelstand') as well as improving consumers positions not at least for exactly that reason : to consume ... combined some antisemitic propaganda​
In formulating his economical program for 1932 he worked together with centrists (Brüing), SPD-men and Worker-unionists of socialist heritage as well as liberal and catholic. ... though mostly by his ... 'co-workers.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
@FillyofDelphi THX for the links :)

@Seandineen Well, no, at least regarding the brazilian variant, as linked above.
Gregor Strasser was still a ... "fan" of centralisation and central governing, though if convenient through local/regional structures.

And both cases, austrian as well as esp. brazilian, differ from Gregor Strasser in their ... religious/spiritual foundations in ideology.
Strassers "ideology" ... issomething I would rather debate he had any at all.
IMHO he was rather for pragmatism, painted with a somewhat similar 'pragmatic' antisemitism (as so many at that time all over the world). And in this he had 'concluded', that the former ways of economy - beside in paerts the Rathenau-example - died not work anymore.
 

jerseyguy

Anchises said:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-world-without-ww2.446561/#post-17226628

Well lets just say we have enough butterflies to relegate the extreme fascists to more peripheral roles.

And I agree, interaction between different authoritarians is really interesting. This is going to be major focus ITTL because Europe will be more authoritarian and more independent than IOTL.

And your statement about Generals being in power not only in Germany but many other European countries was... inspirational. Originally the title was meant to convey the huge influence German generals would have on Europe but having Generals in power in many different European countries is interesting and probably makes sense in the larger frame of the TL.
Click to expand...
It's a bit much to make a conclusive judgement based on only one historical source, but I got the sense that fascism in a sense requires democracy reading this book. In Fascists, the Michael Mann comes to the conclusion that fascists movements are more likely to take power in unstable and/or limited franchise democracies like Germany and Italy.

In more autocratic/hybrid regimes like interwar Hungary and Romania, the authorities suppressed pretty much all political activity or mass movements. In this kind of situation, the fascists would hang around for much longer, but they'd be highly unlikely to take the reins of power. The Arrow Cross or the Legion of the Archangel Michael would be more of a persistent irritant or a useful proxy for foreign powers. If another country wants to fund terrorism or just raise hell and create chaos, they could use minor fascist movements the way Arab powers support Hamas as an anti-Israel force
 

Attachments

  • fascists by michael mann.jpg
    fascists by michael mann.jpg
    7.5 KB · Views: 65

Anchises

Banned
NoMommsen said:
No, Gregor Strasser was not the National Bolshevist. This was his brother Otto Strasser, Gregor often gets confused with.

Unfortunatly Gregor Strasser left much lesser 'records' than Otto Strasser ... nöt at least due to Gregors early dead düring the 'Röhm-Putsch'.
Lots of what was contemporary published in newspapers and other public periodicals with the 'signature' of Gregor was actually from Otto, esp. of the more 'radical' content. Otto was kinda 'hiding' behind his brother Gregors posotion within the party.
The reason for the split between the two in 1930.

Gregors position was much less ideological than Ottos or the other party-economists like Gottfried Feder i.e.. Best descrition that comes to my mind :
late Rathenau state controlled corporatism with deficit spending (then named 'productive credit creation') for small and intermediate buisness (the so-called 'Mittelstand') as well as improving consumers positions not at least for exactly that reason : to consume ... combined some antisemitic propaganda​
In formulating his economical program for 1932 he worked together with centrists (Brüing), SPD-men and Worker-unionists of socialist heritage as well as liberal and catholic. ... though mostly by his ... 'co-workers.
Click to expand...

NoMommsen said:
@FillyofDelphi THX for the links :)

@Seandineen Well, no, at least regarding the brazilian variant, as linked above.
Gregor Strasser was still a ... "fan" of centralisation and central governing, though if convenient through local/regional structures.

And both cases, austrian as well as esp. brazilian, differ from Gregor Strasser in their ... religious/spiritual foundations in ideology.
Strassers "ideology" ... issomething I would rather debate he had any at all.
IMHO he was rather for pragmatism, painted with a somewhat similar 'pragmatic' antisemitism (as so many at that time all over the world). And in this he had 'concluded', that the former ways of economy - beside in paerts the Rathenau-example - died not work anymore.
Click to expand...

Thanks! That is really good to know and plays very well into what I had planned for him.

Von Schleicher was a proponent of the Querfront-Konzept, so Strasser is going to recieve a minister post in the next update.
Either directly Arbeitsminister or Reichskommisar für Arbeitsbeschaffung.

The General Plan is a "Kabinett der Nationalen Einheit", including right wing SPD, DNVP, NPD and Zentrum politicians. Maybe someone for the DDP.

I think Schleicher is a shrewd politician, so he is actually going to try to create a broad political basis for his Regime.

I was thinking that the immediate political steps would be:

1. Von Schleicher would resist the immediate pressure to leave the conference. GB was offering Germany a 200.000 man Reichswehr, this is ofc unacceptable. The conference won't fly as planned, especially the nonsensical distinction between offensive and defensive weapons.

I think that von Schleicher would aim at establishing an informal agreement with GB, because France will be hellbent on the 100.000 man Reichswehr.

400.000 men until 1939/1940, without the limitation of Versailles. General Staff, independent Luftwaffe, tanks etc. In turn von Schleicher would probably greatly limit naval rearmament.

2. A massive "Konjunkturprogramm", that is connected to the "Tiefenrüstung" of the Reichswehr. Military production, military building, Autobahnprogramm and a massive Investment to modernize the Reichsbahn (Prussian Generals will quickly recognize how important a resilient train system is, IOTL the Wehrmacht greatly suffered because the Reichsbahn was underfunded).

What do you think about that? Somewhat realistic? Your knowledge of the interwar years seems to be much greater than mine.

jerseyguy said:
It's a bit much to make a conclusive judgement based on only one historical source, but I got the sense that fascism in a sense requires democracy reading this book. In Fascists, the Michael Mann comes to the conclusion that fascists movements are more likely to take power in unstable and/or limited franchise democracies like Germany and Italy.

In more autocratic/hybrid regimes like interwar Hungary and Romania, the authorities suppressed pretty much all political activity or mass movements. In this kind of situation, the fascists would hang around for much longer, but they'd be highly unlikely to take the reins of power. The Arrow Cross or the Legion of the Archangel Michael would be more of a persistent irritant or a useful proxy for foreign powers. If another country wants to fund terrorism or just raise hell and create chaos, they could use minor fascist movements the way Arab powers support Hamas as an anti-Israel force
Click to expand...

I would somewhat agree. Fascism as a popular mass movement is mostly going to happen in democracies or as the result of a Revolution.

More authoritarian regimes will probably experience crypto-fascist military dictatorships.

You won't have people screaming for a Führer if the state already is autocratic and centralized.

This is why Weimar is so interesting. At the end it was basically a Presidential Dictatorship but the long period of Democracy gave the NSDAP time to grow.

Then in tge economic crisis, these grown NSDAP structures were quickly able to morph into a massive protest party.

Due to the elements of Presidential Dictatorship elements, the balance could have tipped the other way, into a military/reactionary elite takeover. Basically what I am describing in this TL.
 

Seandineen

Would the other right wing non national socialist movements attempt to create German labor front style movements to buy off the right sort of workers?
 
H.Flashman(VC)

H.Flashman(VC)

Anchises said:
Tohuwabohu: The Schleicher Putsch ​
Handbuch der Großdeutschen Geschichte, Kapitel 67: Kurt von Schleicher und der Beginn der Diktatur (2004)
Click to expand...
Don't want to pollute to much with my nitpicking. I'm no native speaker but my feeling says immediately der Anfang.
Googling gave me confirmation:
Wobei wir beim feinen Unterschied zwischen "Beginn" und "Anfang" und "beginnen" und "anfangen" wären. "Anfang" bedeutet so etwas wie der Ursprung von allem, ohne dass schon direkt eine Handlung erfolgt. Man könnte es gleichsetzen mit "Entstehung".
Click to expand...
I'm following your TL with interest.
 

Anchises

Banned
Seandineen said:
Would the other right wing non national socialist movements attempt to create German labor front style movements to buy off the right sort of workers?
Click to expand...

ITTL von Schleicher is going to radically change the Republic.

My current idea after a "period of National Emergency" is a de facto Presidential Dictatorship with democratic elements.

The Reichspräsident will be elected directly and is going to have a similiar ammount of power to the Kaiser.

No Reichskanzler and a Reichstag (parliament) with similiar powers to what it had during the Kaiserreich.

So after the "emergency" parties will be allowed but the President is going to have the authority to ban "radical" parties (*Communists cough cough*).

The NSDAP or its heir will be lead by Strasser. This means that the party will heavily target workers. So I doubt that the other nationalist parties would make serious efforts to contest the right wing worker voter base.

Imho woing the middle class, soldiers, bureaucrats and Industrialists seems far more "worth it" (in terms of electoral success) and in line with the history of other nationalist German parties.
 

Anchises

Banned
H.Flashman(VC) said:
Don't want to pollute to much with my nitpicking. I'm no native speaker but my feeling says immediately der Anfang.
Googling gave me confirmation:

I'm following your TL with interest.
Click to expand...

As a native speaker its pretty much interchangable in my experience.

German Wikipedia even redirects seach queries from Beginn to Anfang.

As a reference: http://m.bpb.de/geschichte/national...tionalsozialismus/39544/machtergreifung?p=all

And the quote you posted pretty much states that there doesn't have to be an "action" for an Anfang. But here Schleicher's dictatorship begins with killing Hitler and using the Reichswehr which is a (pretty big) action.

"Entstehung/Anfang der Diktatur" imho would be appropriate if we are talking about the deeper underlying factors that lead to the dictatorship. Beginn seems more appropriate here because it describes the immediate actions that lead to the dictatorship.

Imho, and that is just my personal taste, Beginn has a more "educated" ring to it.

And I am very happy that you follow my TL! :)

I hope my "klugscheißen" hasn't scared you off or offended you.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Seandineen said:
Would the other right wing non national socialist movements attempt to create German labor front style movements to buy off the right sort of workers?
Click to expand...
Problem with these "other right wing non national socialist movements" aside the nazi off-springs like the organizations of Otto Strasser and/or Walther Stennes - and/or their combination - they did not have any interest at all on workers or their issues.
The Nazis 'interest' in them and propagandistical use/abuse was something the other right-wingers were IOTL extremly suspicious about.

Alone for that reason any post-Hitler Nat-Soz-Greghor-Strasser organisation would/could monopolize (and most likely will) its 'grip' on the workers.
Not only Gregor Strasser held rather close contact with the trade unions - via some intermediates - also Streicher did in his attempts to form his "Querfront".


So IMHO ITTL the trade unions would get for their ... 'participation' or at least keeping-calm some 'goodies' and keep on going for some time ... only to be finally replaced by something like the OTL Labor Front under the leadership of one of Strassers 'closer' guys.
 
iVC

iVC

Donor
I was hoping this is would be a thread about "C&C Generals" Europe. :)

Alas, my wishes!
 

Deleted member 14881

I can see Von Schliecher trying and waiting a long time to get back to the Polish corridor if Austria and the Sudetenland is unviable.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top