WI: Kurt Schumacher was elected Chancellor in 1949?

[Susano]

As is painting Adenauer as fascistoid...sorry. I don't particularly like the man either but that is taking things a bit too far.

The man collabrated with and sheltered Nazis, and quite much of the social reactionarism of the 50s is his doing. Sometimes you need to call a spade a spade. This goes beyond disagreeing with the other side of the political spectrum - Adenauer was in large parts outside the democratic spectrum, and such people get no respect from me.

Adenauer was paternalistic and autocratic

I.e., fascistoid.

Its futile to discuss if Schumacher was a fanatic or not. He surly did his best at his times to alienate all other parties and social groups outside his own party (for an example, he called the Catholic Church the 5. Occupation Power).

Hah. A strategically unintelligent remark, but really damn fitting.

The only other party, which could still oin this coalition would the the Center-Party (leftwing catholic).

Was it really? Left-catholic, I mean. Its a honest question - in Weimar they pretty much were the CDU equivalent, if more restricted to Catholics, while these days its a fundamentalist splinter party. I dont know how they were immidatly post-war, but unless they experienced a really strong, temporary leftwards sling just then it seems odd to me to call them leftwing...

Even if we give the SPD 8 seats more, that they have the same number of seats like the CDU/CSU in OTL, it still would be just 191 seats

I think its realistic that the SPD could gain more seats than CDU/CSU. However, probably not enough to make up the difference, especially if we discount the Zentrum.

Some years ago I read a book, a collection of articels and essays by a leftwing journalist/writer/intellectual/whatever. I don´t remember the Name of the author, but what made the book interstting, was, that it included essay about the leading west-german politicals shortly BEFORE the first Bundestagswahl. The Author expected a great coalition with an SPD-chancellor. He showed great respect for Schumacher but he also thought, that it would be impossible for Schumacher to become chancellor in such a coalition. The Author disliked Adenauer, because he saw him as a reactioner, but he expected him to become the first Bundespräsident.
And as perfect choice for chancellor he saw Carlo Schmidt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Schmid_(German_politician).
I think its a plausibel scenario, if the Spd would be stronger then CDU/CSU.
How would Bundespräsident Adenauer and Bundeskanzler Carlo Schmidt lead the new Federal Republic (naturally Adenauer would try to steal as many competence away from the Bundeskanzler as possible)

Heh. I can understand the man. As my sig shows I myself have great respect for Schumacher, but a chancellorship by him seems increasingly unlikely. And Schmid is a good politican. Hm, if the SPD is forced to compromise on the person of Schumacher, could they in turn force the CDU to compromise on the person of Adenauer? God knows there were many very more moderate and likeable CDU politicans at that time...

 

[freivolk]

I think history has proven, that democracy doesn´t need socialism. And that socialism needs GULAGS to exist.
If Schumacher thought otherwise, then he wasn´t just a fanatic but also a fool.
But I hope its possible that we can discuss this thread, without turning it in a flamewar.

If anti-catholic biases can keep beside, its obvious that the original center-party had a right and a left wing, mostly because she was restricted by confession, but not by class. The Center-party included all classes, from catholic aristocrats to catholic workers. Catholic unions existed at this time. Somebody joked about them as "Herzjesu-Sozialisten". After 1945 most catholics went to the CDU, which was now open for catholics and protestants. The left wing of the Center-Party lived on in the at this time very powerful CDU-Sozialausschüssen. But in Nordrhein-Westfalen there was an attempt to recreate the old catholic Centre-party. Her voters and members mostly came from the left wing of the original Center-party.

Na, haben wir was gelernt!

I think there is no real reason, why the CDU should to exclude Adenauer, because he didn´t make such a jackass out himself like Schuhmacher. (There was joke at this time, that the CDU should pay Schuhmacher money, because he drove voters away from the SPD with his crazy foam-for-the-mouth attacks at the other partys). Even with a stronger SPD the CDU still would have the option to form a rightwing coalition, so it would be good idea, if the CDU chose the option of a great coalition, to get the most vocal supporter of the right-coalition option in the boat. Politic works this way.

Would a great coalition be a better alternative for the new german Democracy. Would it bring more Denazification, more social liberties. I assume not. Lets look to Austria, governd for the first 20 years from a ÖVP/SPÖ coalition. I think we all know how good Denazification worked in Austria. In the end all partys, including the SPD, would have to win the former Nazis as voter. After all we speak her about several million potential voters, and a huge part of the german elite. And the end things could actually go a lot worse. In Austria both great partys from the beginning controlled 80-90% of the electorat. The rest of the Voters went to the rightwing FPÖ. But in Germany the great party only reached 60% in the beginning. Much room for a real big rightwing party. In the end I think nothing better could happend to Germany as the chancellorship of Konrad Adenauer.
And for EBIL ADENAUER SURPRESSING SOCIAL LIBERTIES: Social conservatism was dominat in all western societys in the Fifties. My personal opinion is, democracy worked even better with this.

 

[Lord Insane]

I think history has proven, that democracy doesn´t need socialism.

The first part of Schumacher's sentence says that democracy requires *nationalism*. Taken as a whole, it says socialism requires democracy, and that democracy requires nationalism - it does not say, however, that socialism is required for democracy.

 

[Susano]

I think history has proven, that democracy doesn´t need socialism. And that socialism needs GULAGS to exist.

Why dont you go to America and join the Tea Party? Thats just idiotically ridicolous statement, especially coming from a German (or generally, European) who oughta know the goddamn terminology. Question: Whats the main leftwing party of France called? Why, the Socialist Party of course. Of course neither they nor Schumacher meant East Bloc socialism. Schumacher detested communism as just another totlaitarian regime. In which he was right of course, but that doesnt reflect on socialism (i.e. west european socialism or social democracy or whatever you want to call it - but socialism is a valid name for it, too)

But I hope its possible that we can discuss this thread, without turning it in a flamewar.

Oh thats rich coming from the person who started to let it slip down that road!

If anti-catholic biases can keep beside, its obvious that the original center-party had a right and a left wing, mostly because she was restricted by confession, but not by class. The Center-party included all classes, from catholic aristocrats to catholic workers.

And thats all requirement needed to be called leftwing? That makes it a Volkspartei, nothing more, though of course its obvious that Weimar had to few of those and hence that did make the Zentrum something special. Now of course I know about the Zentrums left wing, but the whole party was never truely leftwing - it had quite a reactionary wing to compensate for the leftwingers, too. And seeing as (usually - Weimar of course had quite some fluctuations in elections...) the other big party at the time was the SPD, which definitly was more leftist, I would all in all classify the Zentrum as having been centre-right. And as said, in modern days the (still existing) Zentrum are fundamentalists, basically. So, how exactly would the 49 Zentrum be leftwing? Indeed it seems to me especially the leftwing would join the CDU first. Now, you talked about NRW - was the entire Zentrum support in 49 NRW? In that case, as a symptom of local variations it could well be of course that Z in 49 is leftwing. I just dont understand how else this could be.

I think there is no real reason, why the CDU should to exclude Adenauer, because he didn´t make such a jackass out himself like Schuhmacher. (There was joke at this time, that the CDU should pay Schuhmacher money, because he drove voters away from the SPD with his crazy foam-for-the-mouth attacks at the other partys). Even with a stronger SPD the CDU still would have the option to form a rightwing coalition, so it would be good idea, if the CDU chose the option of a great coalition, to get the most vocal supporter of the right-coalition option in the boat. Politic works this way.

An under Adenauer, they would form a rightwing government. As you say, politics work that way - it includes internal wing fights inside the parties. So, no Adenauer might even be a requirement for that Great Coalition. In any case, Adenauer needs of course to be represented - but hardly as Federal President, that is despite its mere ceremoniality such a cenrtal function that it requires a more moderate politican. Of course, Adenauer would end up being minister.

Would a great coalition be a better alternative for the new german Democracy. Would it bring more Denazification, more social liberties.

Surely not if Adenauer has anything to do with it...

And for EBIL ADENAUER SURPRESSING SOCIAL LIBERTIES: Social conservatism was dominat in all western societys in the Fifties. My personal opinion is, democracy worked even better with this.

True, and large parts of course is due to the Nazis, but if one looks which heights were already reached in the 20s... more to the point, though, Adenauer very much was a supporter of several "social conservative" laws. And lets not use polite phrases like that and spill out what that means: Wifes under the control of their husbands, religious outcasting, old boys networks in politics, administration and police... yes, all so very democratic.

 

[oberdada]

To really make Schumacher chancellor, we would have to get stronger Social Democrats in the 1949 election.

Adding the Sahr would give us a couple of votes, the Western part of Berlin even more (What if the Berlin members who were not allowed where given an informal voting right, as a gentlemans agreement)

The Western allies might not led the KPD compete (I don't think that would mean 5,7 % more for the Social democrats but probably 3 to 4%)

The allies could have stopped Erhards move to end fixed prizes in 1948 making the introduction of the D-Mark less sucsessful)

 

[freivolk]

To really make Schumacher chancellor, we would have to get stronger Social Democrats in the 1949 election.

Adding the Sahr would give us a couple of votes, the Western part of Berlin even more (What if the Berlin members who were not allowed where given an informal voting right, as a gentlemans agreement)

)

The Saar was "black" at this time. The Christliche Volkspartei (CVP) got 55%.
Berlin sended 19 non-voting members in the Bundestag. 10 SPD, 5 CDU, 5 FDP. Even if they could vote, it wouldn´t be enough.

 

[maverick]

It now occurs to me that Schumacher was a dead man anyways.

This whole conversation is quite interesting, but I want to add a new question:

What if Schumacher wasn't a dying man? What if he had fled the country ala Willie Brandt did (although Brandt was just a kid then, not the leader of Germany's second biggest party) and was a healthy man in the 1940s? Would that have made him less crazy/bitter/dead or whatever is necessary for him to be a viable candidate in 1949?

 

[freivolk]

It now occurs to me that Schumacher was a dead man anyways.

This whole conversation is quite interesting, but I want to add a new question:

What if Schumacher wasn't a dying man? What if he had fled the country ala Willie Brandt did (although Brandt was just a kid then, not the leader of Germany's second biggest party) and was a healthy man in the 1940s? Would that have made him less crazy/bitter/dead or whatever is necessary for him to be a viable candidate in 1949?

I think it could made a big differnce. His time in the KZ made Schumacher after the war practicly untouchable as leader of the SPD, but even without it he was a strong charakter and a impressiv narrator and I think he would still dominate the SPD. But he would propably be prepared to compromise more and use more tactical finesse instead the Hammer of Partsdiciplin. Maybe he would make decisions which would better the position for the SPD in 1949.
In 1947 the british and american occupation zones, were united to the so called Bizone. An german economic counsil for the Bizone with 5 directors was formed. Because the SPD didn´t got the position director for economics, Schuhmacher decided that the SPD would take no director post and would become opposition. CDU/CSU and FDP took over all director post and later Ludwig Ehrhard became director fór economics. Some Historians say, the decision for Adenauers later goverment was already mad in this moment.