WI 1918 German revolution

[hongi]

To give a communist revolution a credible chance of success you would need to alter the opinion of much if not all of the non-Communist German population. As it was, the numbers were so heavily stacked against them that the Communists would not have a realistic chance of success.

The same is true of the Russian Empire is it not?

[Thanas]

To give a communist revolution a credible chance of success you would need to alter the opinion of much if not all of the non-Communist German population. As it was, the numbers were so heavily stacked against them that the Communists would not have a realistic chance of success.

It does not mean you have to replace people with drones. Communists did not really command the opinion of every citizen in the Russian Empire too. It was a swarm of circumstances and smart strategies that brought them up. Could such circumstances appear in Germany? Who knows. The casualties could have been more severe; the economy in a worse shape than in real life. Some labor-pacifying laws in effect, plus something that could serve as a focal point for anti-government action (like the deaths of people during the coronation of Nicky). I do not see a change in circumstances as replacement of the people with some other people.

The prospect of a communist takeover was dead the minute Bismarck introduced the social security laws and the left shifted from the radical communists to the parliamentary SPD. To allow a communist revolution without turning people into mindless drones would require changing fourty years of history.

And I will use the word drone as I have always used it. I refuse to let anybody - the US, you - redefine the usage of a word.

[K. A. Pital]

The prospect of a communist takeover was dead the minute Bismarck introduced the social security laws and the left shifted from the radical communists to the parliamentary SPD. To allow a communist revolution without turning people into mindless drones would require changing fourty years of history.

And I will use the word drone as I have always used it. I refuse to let anybody - the US, you - redefine the usage of a word.

You are free to use whatever slang definitions you want when insulting people. But don't get hot over me saying that humans are not drones: when put in certain circumstances, they make certain choices, which are not set in stone no matter how much you would like that. "Fourty years of history" (more like thirty, actually) are not some sort of monolith: the OP never specified what changes have been made to history so that this happened. Maybe no social security laws were ever put in place. That is what constitutes a change in circumstances which does not require replacing people with some other people, but rather altering the political landscape of Germany so that eventually, things play out differently. "The left shifted" to the SPD - what if the SPD collapsed? What if Bismarck's Anti-Socialist Laws actually succeded in crushing the SPD and denaturalizing its members - thus paving the way for a more radical resistance forming abroad? What if, Wilhelm I was really killed by the assassins like Alexander II, making the persecution of the left more severe?

Besides, it is not as if the socialist-communist split was a set affair in the 1910s. It was in the making, but the borders were far less clear than they are now, when any SD party is just a simple capitalist political party like any other.

[Thanas]

The prospect of a communist takeover was dead the minute Bismarck introduced the social security laws and the left shifted from the radical communists to the parliamentary SPD. To allow a communist revolution without turning people into mindless drones would require changing fourty years of history.

And I will use the word drone as I have always used it. I refuse to let anybody - the US, you - redefine the usage of a word.

You are free to use whatever slang definitions you want when insulting people. But don't get hot over me saying that humans are not drones: when put in certain circumstances, they make certain choices, which are not set in stone no matter how much you would like that. "Fourty years of history" (more like thirty, actually) are not some sort of monolith: the OP never specified what changes have been made to history so that this happened. Maybe no social security laws were ever put in place.

Then the SPD would have won a parliamentary majority, or the conservative socially liberal party would have enacted them. With even companies like Krupp pushing for and subsidizing worker health care and social nets, this is a certainty to have happened. I mean Krupp - whatever you might say about him - and others were part of the socially conscious capitalists, which for some reasons did not flourish elsewhere - as in Russia.

That is what constitutes a change in circumstances which does not require replacing people with some other people, but rather altering the political landscape of Germany so that eventually, things play out differently. "The left shifted" to the SPD - what if the SPD collapsed?

It would have been replaced by another party, or just simply the voters would have shifted to the Zentrumspartei.

What if Bismarck's Anti-Socialist Laws actually succeded in crushing the SPD and denaturalizing its members - thus paving the way for a more radical resistance forming abroad?

Not possible unless you give Bismarck powers he never had, like telepathy and the ability to kill people with his mind.

What if, Wilhelm I was really killed by the assassins like Alexander II, making the persecution of the left more severe?

Still wouldn't undo the social security laws. If anything, given how Wilhelm I was universally beloved, this would undo the left, thus turning more and more people away from the left.

Besides, it is not as if the socialist-communist split was a set affair in the 1910s. It was in the making, but the borders were far less clear than they are now, when any SD party is just a simple capitalist political party like any other.

Sure, but the split is bound to occur at the very least when one wing starts planning for open insurrection.

[K. A. Pital]

Then the SPD would have won a parliamentary majority, or the conservative socially liberal party would have enacted them. With even companies like Krupp pushing for and subsidizing worker health care and social nets, this is a certainty to have happened. I mean Krupp - whatever you might say about him - and others were part of the socially conscious capitalists, which for some reasons did not flourish elsewhere - as in Russia.

I know. But socially conscious capitalists aren't the only ones, and the left wing got enough people to start uprisings IRL even though clearly with the social security laws their power base was weakened. Besides, if the SPD is not there or is different, it is too much of a change to seriously be saying what kind of legislation could be enacted. Hence my view that it would be an unpredictable historic timeline with very different events and no firm "point of divergence" so typical for AH threads.

[Thanas]

Then the SPD would have won a parliamentary majority, or the conservative socially liberal party would have enacted them. With even companies like Krupp pushing for and subsidizing worker health care and social nets, this is a certainty to have happened. I mean Krupp - whatever you might say about him - and others were part of the socially conscious capitalists, which for some reasons did not flourish elsewhere - as in Russia.

I know. But socially conscious capitalists aren't the only ones,

Yeah, but they are the only one who had a lot of success due to the shortage of labour in Germany. Workers could afford to switch employers. Without having a more massive influx of workers from elsewhere (and where are they coming from, considering the east was already tapped, which is why we got so many Germans with former polish names in the Ruhr area) I can't see this changing.

and the left wing got enough people to start uprisings IRL even though clearly with the social security laws their power base was weakened.

Yeah but it took Versailles, inflation and widespread hunger and the failure of the moderate forces for that to happen - and even then the uprisings had very little effect.

Besides, if the SPD is not there or is different, it is too much of a change to seriously be saying what kind of legislation could be enacted. Hence my view that it would be an unpredictable historic timeline with very different events and no firm "point of divergence" so typical for AH threads.

On that I would agree, with one caveat. There already is a SPD replacement, which had lots of success - the Zentrumspartei, while conservative, had a lot of similar views when it came to the social politics. So I don't see much changing there.

Honestly, the only way a communist revolution would happen is if Germany would not industrialize and remain stuck with unproductive manufacturing, leading to social problems and widespread privation. But to stop that from happening, you need to take Silesia and the Ruhr area as well as the ports of Northern Germany away. Which will not happen without Prussia never existing, at which point your point of divergence probably starts with a resounding defeat for Frederick the Great, but that would mean a hugely powerful Austria that probably does not lose to Napoleon, so now you got a massive Greater Germany already which will industrialize anyway, so....

The world would have to be very different for centuries.

[K. A. Pital]

Industrialization is no panacea for privation, especially early industrialization which had absolutely horrendous labor standards, ever-rising working time, ridiculous rewards for even the most dangerous occupations, like mining, and lots of work accidents resulting in loss of life or limb. A partial industrialization is actually the most conducive environment for revolutions, as the early XX century has shown. It does not need to be a complete failure: just a smaller success and with a less extensive social safety program.

[Thanas]

Industrialization is no panacea for privation, especially early industrialization which had absolutely horrendous labor standards, ever-rising working time, ridiculous rewards for even the most dangerous occupations, like mining, and lots of work accidents resulting in loss of life or limb. A partial industrialization is actually the most conducive environment for revolutions, as the early XX century has shown. It does not need to be a complete failure: just a smaller success and with a less extensive social safety program.

Yeah but no chance of that happening in German, not with Prussia determined to catch up to France.