Without Ludendorff, would Bethmann-Hollweg still have to resign in 1917?

In 1917, Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg had to resign. With his course of integrating the SPD in the so-called "Burgfrieden" and his rejection of radical annexionism, he had made enemies on the right side of the political spectrum, especially the powerful (de facto) military dictator Erich Ludendorff, who had e.g. referred to his approval of the abolition of the three-class suffrage in Prussia as "kowtowing before the revolution".

Let's say Ludendorff dies in 1914 and another OHL takes control after the resignation of Falkenhayn in 1916. Would they still put pressure on the chancellor?
 

NoMommsen

Donor
most likely ... : YES

Before being fired - more or less against the wishes of Kaiser Bill, who 'stood at his side' as long as feeled possible - Bethmann-Hollweg had managed to be ... 'disliked' by almost everybody mainly because he never really took a stand. He always maneuvered around making 'true' decisions, like :
-allowing 'deputies of the workers' participating in regulating exemptions from front-service but still not recognizing the trade unions officially
-like the half-harted 'peace-offers' 1916 and 1917
-like holding Poland - though decided to give it some form of independence/autonomy already in 1914 - in kind of a 'limbo' not to hinder an eventually possible/hioped for negotiated peace with Russia
-like never formulating officialy war aims​
That way he didn't make friends but lost the few he had in not deciideing anything when decision - whichever - were needed and asked for from everybody. ... regardless whoever might have lead the OHL.
 
Top