Anti-Prussian feeling amongst Bavarians had been noted as early as 1915, so who knows, maybe the Wittelsbachs will do a Savoy on the Hohenzollerns. Maybe the Württembergs and Wettins will join as well.
Germany fights to the bitter end in ww1, no ww2?
- Thread starter Silver01
- Start date
Anti-Prussian feeling amongst Bavarians had been noted as early as 1915, so who knows, maybe the Wittelsbachs will do a Savoy on the Hohenzollerns. Maybe the Württembergs and Wettins will join as well.
by 1919 the red scare had started.
Sacco & Vanzetti: The Red Scare of 1919–1920
Learn about how the Red Scare influenced the Sacco & Vanzetti case.
The nascent USSR in 1919 is nothing like the 'victorious occupying eastern and central Europe' USSR of 1944/5.
I suspect that whatever is left of Germany after being fought across and after any surrender and peace will end up being propped up because I suspect it will basically become a client state of the Entente. And I also suspect we will still see Poland and Czechoslovakia, the Balkan states, chopping up the Ottoman empire etc being formed becuase AH will definitely be done in this ATL.
How long all this lasts though is another matter
They didn't like the idea of communism and certainly not the idea of communism spreading to their own working classes, but that that still doesn't mean in 1919 Germany isn't the bigger problem (if nothing else fear of a defeated Germany going communist!), and as pointed out they don't even know how Russia will end up since it's in a civil warby 1919 the red scare had started.
Sacco & Vanzetti: The Red Scare of 1919–1920
Learn about how the Red Scare influenced the Sacco & Vanzetti case.www.mass.gov
Last edited:
You may have a point there. But then consider an ATL where Germany doesn't have the "stab in the back" myth, so (mostly) economic issues remain (because OTL ToV terms still got applied). Germany goes hard-left instead of hard-right (the Communists were one of the main political parties before the Nazis took absolute power and crushed them), and now Lenin potentially has a really big army at his command ...
Semi-related question: if the Allies do drive to Berlin in WWI, do they stay to "supervise" and work on the reconstruction (like they did in WWII)? Or do they impose terms and withdraw? I suspect the latter.
Just one point to add.
The entente warplans for 1919 had offensives spearheaded by literally 1000s of tanks (up for the 100s assembled for late 1918 attacks - e.g. 500+ for Amiens attack). The Germans had no effective answer to this (their planned AT weapons for 1919 could only penetrate the FT-17 - light french tanks from 1917, produced in thousands in France and copied by the US - frontal armor at 200 m).
The entente warplans for 1919 had offensives spearheaded by literally 1000s of tanks (up for the 100s assembled for late 1918 attacks - e.g. 500+ for Amiens attack). The Germans had no effective answer to this (their planned AT weapons for 1919 could only penetrate the FT-17 - light french tanks from 1917, produced in thousands in France and copied by the US - frontal armor at 200 m).
Presence or absence of a stab-in-the-back myth would have made little or no difference. What brought Hitler to power was the depression, not the myth. The myth had been equally current in the 1920s, but the Nazi vote then had been negligible. .
At least the stab and November criminals do not exist so I don't know how he would blame the Jews but how about the reasoning that Germany got crushed harder in WW1 and a new war would be a harder sell
The Germans would only go for round 2 if they thought they could win. The stab in the back myth convinced a lot of them that round 2 would be different.
Moral was low and there was a revolution going on.
How was Germany supposed to fight on?
The WWII measures to keep the fight going until the end ere lessons learned from WWI.
The Wehrmacht and the Nazis knew better than to believe that backstab myth themselves and prepared.
In 1918 many German soldiers managed to get "lost" and travelled behind the lines claiming to want to get back to their command and could get away with that.
In 1944/45 potential deserters were simply shot.
How was Germany supposed to fight on?
The WWII measures to keep the fight going until the end ere lessons learned from WWI.
The Wehrmacht and the Nazis knew better than to believe that backstab myth themselves and prepared.
In 1918 many German soldiers managed to get "lost" and travelled behind the lines claiming to want to get back to their command and could get away with that.
In 1944/45 potential deserters were simply shot.
I agree, i feel like Germany might fall into civil war if they cling on. Wasn't food running out?
The food blockade was leading to serious food shortages in Germany and this continued even after the cease-fire.
Food and the First World War in Germany – Everyday Lives in War
everydaylivesinwar.herts.ac.uk
It was a hard sell anyway. Most of the generals were opposed to invading Poland as being too risky, and Goebbels noted in his diary the air of gloom and doom among the civvies when war broke out (and also when it had appeared imminent a year earlier) much to his disgust.
As previously noted, the stab in the back legend was already current in the 1920s, but gave the Nazis no traction whatsoever . Only the depression did that. The legend is just a red herring. And after all, the Germans had pressed on to Paris in 1870, but that did nothing to stop the French from dreaming of revenge.
See above. They "went for round 2" because Hitler insisted. He was popular because he had achieved so much *without* war. Most Germans were acutely worried by the prospect (and still more the outbreak) of war , until the easy victory over France convinced them that der Fuhrer knew what he was doing.
and why in a world would it not be a harder sale if so how do we avoid ww2 with germany not wanting revenge
You have to either
a) avert the Depression so that the Nazis don't come to power.
b} get rid of Hitler in favour of someone who is content with the scrapping of the Treaty of Versailles and not interested in a wider career of conquest.
As to "Germany wanting revenge", it depends what you mean by "revenge". If you just mean getting the peace treaty drastically revised, that is something which a defeated power virtually *always* wants if they see any realistic chance of getting it. Nothing anyone does, in 1918 or any other year, is going to change *that*. But with different German leadership it might have been obtained without a major war.
Wolf of Badenoch
Donor
Absolutely! I have Munich based friends whose granparents believe that things were so bad that Bavaria might have looked for independance.The food blockade was leading to serious food shortages in Germany and this continued even after the cease-fire.
Food and the First World War in Germany – Everyday Lives in War
Bored Young Man
Banned
Now that's an interesting pod, German independence coming from a technicality over the blockade-especially if the other Germany sees them as a traitor: no need for a myth it's Bavarian and it didn't want to commit national suicide for a lost war.
Germany fighting to the bitter end would lead to several possible butterflies.
What's the effect on the Spanish flu (or the effect of the flu on the war)? The second wave in the winter of 1918-1919 was the deadliest. I would think that in the trenches it can spread fairly easy and will probably have a greater effect in the German trenches and homefront, due to them having less food available.
With the Entente in Berlin, will the peace treaty be harser or less harsh?
Will the longer war and Germany fighting to the end mean that the Entente will enforce the treaty better or longer? In OTL it was seen as harsh, will that be the same here?
Will Mussolini still rise in Italy? If he does, will it be at the same time?
Will Hitler still survive the war, and if he does, will he still join the NSDAP? If he does, will there still be a putsch in 1924? Will he write Mein Kampf?
Will there be a massive inflation in Germany in the 1920s?
Will the great depression happen in the same timeframe (there will most likely be one, but it could be delayed by a few years)?
What's the effect on the Spanish flu (or the effect of the flu on the war)? The second wave in the winter of 1918-1919 was the deadliest. I would think that in the trenches it can spread fairly easy and will probably have a greater effect in the German trenches and homefront, due to them having less food available.
With the Entente in Berlin, will the peace treaty be harser or less harsh?
Will the longer war and Germany fighting to the end mean that the Entente will enforce the treaty better or longer? In OTL it was seen as harsh, will that be the same here?
Will Mussolini still rise in Italy? If he does, will it be at the same time?
Will Hitler still survive the war, and if he does, will he still join the NSDAP? If he does, will there still be a putsch in 1924? Will he write Mein Kampf?
Will there be a massive inflation in Germany in the 1920s?
Will the great depression happen in the same timeframe (there will most likely be one, but it could be delayed by a few years)?
The problem with this scenario is that by November 1918 the German army was collapsing. Large parts of thr German Army's administrative tail had started to melt away. They asked for the armistice because they had no real alternatives. Give it another 4 to 6 weeks of steady allied advancing against ever weaker opposition and the allies would have been over the boarder at multiple points with thr pens full of German POW's. They would have to fight through to Berlin as there wouldn't have been a German Army left to resist.
I don't think this changes a great deal. Hitler would continue to use the stabbed on the back myth emphasising even more than OTL the Navies "communist inspired" mutiny and the chaos of the left v right German civil war of 1919. Hitler's rise was a direct result of the great depression.
A possible outcome might be the partition of Germany into several smaller states. I recall it was discussed as an option during the war. Thr Franco-German boarder might have ended up on the river Rhine.
Did Germany in 1918 actually have the capacity to wage the type of defensive campaign that Germany historically did in early 1945 ?
My understanding is that the food supply for Germany in WW 2 was generally better than for Germany in WW1 and many of the last ditch forces in 1945 were raised by the Nazi party (or by entities other than the Wermacht (sp ?)
So I am bit dubious that Germany in late 1918 could have replicated what Germany did in 1945 vis a vis raising large formations of boys, old men and others to fight.
I expect they could have done something but it might not have been enough to avoid subsequent second guessing along the lines of “if only the authorities had looted more food so the population wasn’t as hungry and been willing to draft young boys, old men and arm them with hastily made but marginally serviceable weapons we might have won”
I’m not convinced the historical Germany in 1918 could have or would have done what the Nazis did in 1945.