What is the largest that Germany can realistically become?

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,973
#21
Assassination is extremely risky, though. If you fail, you get hanged--as the July 20th conspirators discovered in real life.
The point is that of those in position of power and influence who in the German Empire is going to hand over unlimited power to the Reichstag and possibly the socialists? Just changing the Kaiser's attitude , is that enough to accomplish wholesale reform fundamentally changing German society and removing power from very powerful groups within German society who will not oppose such changes?

Hanged by who? The Amry? the Police? the Courts? These are the groups that would be lining up to support a coup against a radically reforming Kaiser. Look at the attitude those pretty much same people took against right wing coupers, compared to left wing coupers post ww1. Was Hitler in any dnager of being hanged for his failed putsch?

Bismark with the support of all the existisng privileged power groups, against the Kaiser, Socialists and a few liberals how do you see it playing out?
 
Likes: Futurist

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,973
#22
Fine, but who appoints the chancellor? Would it be Weimar type constitution with a powerful president elected by a limited franchise? Would voters be limited by class or perhaps by property given this is now the 20th century? In this case we no longer have a constitutional monarchy.
NO the definition of constitutional monarchy is not that actual government is elected by widespread sufferage, merely the the powers of the soverign are constrianed by a constitution.. Voters in many countries were limited by welath at this time You know like Britain.

some 409% of male sin Britain had no voting rights until after ww1.
Suffrage - Wikipedia
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,973
#23
I've read on alternatehistory.com that L was only able to amass so much power due to the fact that it was wartime. That allowed him to use the 1851 Prussian Siege Law, but when the war would be over, this law would apparently no longer be applicable.
The Amry was efefci8vely running things after the war and chose to pass power to a democratic government so it would take all the blame for peace.
The Kaiser consented to go once the Army told him he was finished. The Kaiser was sidelined duringteh war by teh Amry. The Army had more power.
Teh Amry was effectively runnig the economy and decision making during the war and increasing;y so. The war was required for it to acquire so much power so quickly,
but in the advent of a successful war the Army's standing and power would have been pretty much unchallenged.

High command declares martial law theta the siege law is still in effect, are the police, the courts, the army, the civil service going to come out in protest. The only possible opposition is a general strike by the socialists and unions.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
13,495
SoCal
#24
The Amry was efefci8vely running things after the war and chose to pass power to a democratic government so it would take all the blame for peace.
The Kaiser consented to go once the Army told him he was finished. The Kaiser was sidelined duringteh war by teh Amry. The Army had more power.
Teh Amry was effectively runnig the economy and decision making during the war and increasing;y so. The war was required for it to acquire so much power so quickly,
but in the advent of a successful war the Army's standing and power would have been pretty much unchallenged.

High command declares martial law theta the siege law is still in effect, are the police, the courts, the army, the civil service going to come out in protest. The only possible opposition is a general strike by the socialists and unions.
Couldn't the Kaiser have fired H & L during WWI if he wanted to, though? I mean, didn't H & L offer their resignations from time to time to pressure the Kaiser into doing something? If so, what if the Kaiser simply accepted their resignations?

As for a general strike, can't it be effective? After all, didn't a general strike cause the 1920 Kapp Putsch to fail?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
13,495
SoCal
#25
BTW, how many non-Germans do you think Germany can rule without it imploding? After all, it successfully managed to rule the Poles in its eastern territories for over a century and only lost these territories after it was defeated in WWI.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
2,591
Las Vegas, NV USA
#26
NO the definition of constitutional monarchy is not that actual government is elected by widespread sufferage, merely the the powers of the soverign are constrianed by a constitution.. Voters in many countries were limited by welath at this time You know like Britain.

some 409% of male sin Britain had no voting rights until after ww1.
Suffrage - Wikipedia
My question is how democracy might be limited by L after disbanding the Junta. I know what a constitutional monarchy is. I said the Kaiser's power ended in 1914 but he remains as the nominal head of state. He no longer appoints the chancellor but would give assent to the Junta's choice. Once the Junta is dissolved you suggested L still would want a limited democracy. If Germany remains a monarchy with the Kaiser as nominal head of state, who appoints the chancellor? If Germany becomes republic then the elected president would do so. There would be no aristocracy in a republic but you still could have limited democracy by restricting the franchise. With the monarch as head of state and the Junta disbanded, who de facto appoints the chancellor? Would L allow the legislature chosen by a limited franchise choose the chancellor?

BTW, the Platonic self sustaining senate you suggested is not a democracy at all. Plato wasn't keen on democracy
 
Last edited:

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,973
#28
Couldn't the Kaiser have fired H & L during WWI if he wanted to, though? I mean, didn't H & L offer their resignations from time to time to pressure the Kaiser into doing something? If so, what if the Kaiser simply accepted their resignations?
A post war showdown of power, The Kaiser might be simply informed he had lost the support of the amry rather offered resignations.by 1918 no one was taking the Kaiser very seriously. But in this context of teh Amry/ H& L seeking to impose a less demoratic form, why would the Kaiser oppose them? He inherent socialists views?

As for a general strike, can't it be effective? After all, didn't a general strike cause the 1920 Kapp Putsch to fail?
In a Wiemar republic,/Germany lost ww1 environment. Not the same situation.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
13,495
SoCal
#29
A post war showdown of power, The Kaiser might be simply informed he had lost the support of the amry rather offered resignations.by 1918 no one was taking the Kaiser very seriously. But in this context of teh Amry/ H& L seeking to impose a less demoratic form, why would the Kaiser oppose them? He inherent socialists views?
The Kaiser might oppose them for fearing of massive social unrest. After all, he did oppose Bismarck's plan to crush the SPD back in 1890.

Also, would the entire German military have supported telling the German Kaiser to abdicate if Germany wins the war? Can't the Kaiser recruit some loyalists from his military?

In a Wiemar republic,/Germany lost ww1 environment. Not the same situation.
The German Army remained a powerful force in Weimar Germany, though.
 

Similar History Discussions