Holding Out for a Hero: Gustav Stresemann Survives

[Tellus]

Very nice timeline. I am very surprised that a Germany doing this well never found a way to recover it's 1913 borders in the East, though. Accepting Versailles' eastern borders or even settling for Danzig and a tiny corridor in the long run for a successful Germany is highly unlikely. Just as the Soviets victorious moved Poland westwards, Germany would most likely have found a way to reclaim everything they lost in the east and compensate the Poles eastwards. Warsaw did a bit too well in what I read here, but no biggie.

[seraphim74]

Originally posted by Atlantic Friend

The land access issue would be easy to settle for a German nation which is precisely demanding a German corridor to Danzig, I'd think. A Polish corridor through Lithuania (and perhaps a little bit of Eastern Prussia) could be opened just as its Western counterpart is opened in Danzig.

Perhaps, but there are still communication issues. Water route (Vistula) was still important at that time, and much closer to Polish industrial centres. There is much easier to transport goods from Silesia or Warsaw to Danzig/Gdańsk than to Memel. Also railway network was much better developed in western Poland than in Vilnius region. And finally, there is a matter of Polish national pride.

Originally posted by Tellus

Very nice timeline. I am very surprised that a Germany doing this well never found a way to recover it's 1913 borders in the East, though. Accepting Versailles' eastern borders or even settling for Danzig and a tiny corridor in the long run for a successful Germany is highly unlikely. Just as the Soviets victorious moved Poland westwards, Germany would most likely have found a way to reclaim everything they lost in the east and compensate the Poles eastwards. Warsaw did a bit too well in what I read here, but no biggie. Today 12:17 PM

German eastern border from 1914 is pretty much impossible without the war. No Polish goverment would ever give those land up without a fight. We're talking about best developed parts of Poland, including Great Poland, also historical birthplace of Polish state, part of Silesia with industry and mines Poland desperately needed, port of Gdynia, one of the greatest Polish investments ever and milions of Poles. Loosing Danzig/Gdańsk and allowing for exterritorial passage through the Corridor were painful, but mostly for Polish pride. With economical guarantees for Poland in Danzig and already working port of Gdynia it was not a disaster. Just painful kick for ruling Sanacja and militarists.
Oh, and as far as moving Poland eastwards - where to, exactly? Because that big thing called Soviet Union with very unpleasant Red Army seems to be there.

[I Blame Communism]

(Back in the cafe.)

Originally Posted by Glen

1) Hindenberg appointing Stresemann chancellor (note that appointing Hitler chancellor was also low probability).

IIRC, Stresemann steals Bruenning's spot, not Hitler's.

Originally Posted by Glen

2) Stresemann ruling by decree (the man was chancellor before in uncertain times and did not try for this sort of power).

The mid-20s were drastically less uncertain, which is to leave aside that under the Weimar constitution it's the president who can rule by decree (and Stresemann is president when he does so, and stops after he's dispensed with all those tiresome Nazis in parliament, going on my memory again).

Originally Posted by Glen

3) France agreeing to as much as it does ITTL, Briand or no (haven't really strengthened Briand's position from what I can recall, and without this, France's shifting politics is likely to nix a lot, though on the other hand it also makes them less likely to intervene in Germany either).

What does France give up voluntarily? Nothing of Sudetenlandic proportions at any rate.

Originally Posted by Glen

4) The Nazis and far right not having enough strength to start a civil war in Germany (really the PODs are pretty late to defuse that much of their strength)...

That strength was partly illusory and retrospective. Is the SA were actually capable of standing up to the army, what happened on the Night of the Long Knives? And since the putschists are mostly the Roehm-Strasser lot, the NotLK is a fair comparison.

Originally Posted by Glen

5) ...But being strong enough to take over in Austria after being driven out of Germany (granted, Austria had some pretty nasty Nazis OTL).

As said, the disproportionate number of Nazis in Austria are receiving Italian guns.

Originally Posted by Glen

6) Hitler not playing it smart to build his power before letting the Nazis go full bore into pagan/atrocity mode.

Well, circumstances are differant. Everybody possesing common sense has reverted to "sane" crazy nationalism (Goering), and putschists behave differently from appointed governments.

Originally Posted by Glen

7) Stresemann doing everything more or less right to mitigate/end the Great Depression in Germany (granted, in some ways they did better than most IOTL).

He is Gustav Stresemann! Doubt not his wisdom!

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Tellus

Very nice timeline. I am very surprised that a Germany doing this well never found a way to recover it's 1913 borders in the East, though. Accepting Versailles' eastern borders or even settling for Danzig and a tiny corridor in the long run for a successful Germany is highly unlikely. Just as the Soviets victorious moved Poland westwards, Germany would most likely have found a way to reclaim everything they lost in the east and compensate the Poles eastwards. Warsaw did a bit too well in what I read here, but no biggie.

I echo Seraphim here. I don't think most moderate Germans even wanted Posen after a certain point. The most Germany can get is a corridor giving Poland a vaguely Duchy of Warsaw shape. Compensating Poland to the east is impractical. Even assuming the USSR curls up and dies for no reason, too many Ukrainians and Belarussians are going to do nothing for Poland's stability. It was at its ideal boundary, ethnically speaking, with every significant Poland community east of Warsaw and not too many "Ruthenes".

[Magnificate]

Originally Posted by I Blame Communism

It was at its ideal boundary, ethnically speaking, with every significant Poland community east of Warsaw and not too many "Ruthenes".

Going a little off topic here, in my opinion the border was too far east.

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Magnificate

Going a little off topic here, in my opinion the border was too far east.

Hmm? Wilno and Lviv were both Polish cities, and really the Ukrainians in Galicia and to a lesser extent Volhynia were so differant from the Dniepr valley lot that if they had actually got their autonomy Poland would probably have been a better deal for them.

[Magnificate]

This or this would be the borders I'd consider optimal.

Originally Posted by I Blame Communism

Hmm? Wilno and Lviv were both Polish cities,

True, they should stay on Polish side of the border.

and really the Ukrainians in Galicia and to a lesser extent Volhynia were so differant from the Dniepr valley lot that if they had actually got their autonomy Poland would probably have been a better deal for them.

Also true, but it would be unlikely for Polish goverment to grant Ukrainians autonomy.

The easternmost parts of the interwar Poland were almost entirely rural with little industry or inflastructure, low education and rather unfauvarable ethnic distribution. Not really that desireble, despite the fact the there indeed were Polish communities there.

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Magnificate

This or this would be the borders I'd consider optimal.

True, they should stay on Polish side of the border.

Also true, but it would be unlikely for Polish goverment to grant Ukrainians autonomy.

The easternmost parts of the interwar Poland were almost entirely rural with little industry or inflastructure, low education and rather unfauvarable ethnic distribution. Not really that desireble, despite the fact the there indeed were Polish communities there.

Your comments about the rural districts are true on consideration, however I cannot endorse those maps (aesthetically splendid as they are)! The first one I can just about accept, even if it pains me to see the Red Scourge spreading further, but as an honorary member of Ze Germans surrending Oppeln and Allenstein is more than I can stomach!

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Glen

First, let me clarify that I mean just that, low probability not low plausibility. Heck, there's things about OTL that are less probable than some of the things in your timeline. However, off the top of my head....

1) Hindenberg appointing Stresemann chancellor (note that appointing Hitler chancellor was also low probability).

Okay, but who else would you appoint? The two had a fairly good working relationship, and Stresemann has experience as chancellor. While it's true Stresemann didn't rule by decree in the 1920s, he was a less polarizing figure at the time, a less prestigious (and to the far right, infamous) figure, and frankly Germany was more... politically liberal at the time.

3) France agreeing to as much as it does ITTL, Briand or no (haven't really strengthened Briand's position from what I can recall, and without this, France's shifting politics is likely to nix a lot, though on the other hand it also makes them less likely to intervene in Germany either).

All Briand agreed to was evacuating the Rhineland a few years earlier than OTL, something that Poincare, who was much harsher on Germany, was willing to go along with. Interest waned when the franc stabilized, but if you can get Poincare onboard I am hard pressed to see who opposes it in the French legislature.

Beyond that, what did Germany really get? Military rearmament? That was recognized as a fait accompli in the early 1930s.

4) The Nazis and far right not having enough strength to start a civil war in Germany (really the PODs are pretty late to defuse that much of their strength)...

I disagree entirely. (and will note that the POD isn't that distant from Weimar World's, which skipped over the issue you now raise). The far right's boom came in 30-33, sure; but the depression was the main base for it,

5) ...But being strong enough to take over in Austria after being driven out of Germany (granted, Austria had some pretty nasty Nazis OTL).
6) Hitler not playing it smart to build his power before letting the Nazis go full bore into pagan/atrocity mode.

A couple thoughts. First, Austria had a lot of Italian involvement; and Hitler's... stability was somewhat unhinged by losing in Germany, while only the more extreme party members were willing to file him into exile. Thing Strasser, not Speer.

7) Stresemann doing everything more or less right to mitigate/end the Great Depression in Germany (granted, in some ways they did better than most IOTL).

Eh. He basically did pure Schacht. The main difference from OTL is devaulation, but that's not really radical.

Originally Posted by Tellus

Very nice timeline. I am very surprised that a Germany doing this well never found a way to recover it's 1913 borders in the East, though. Accepting Versailles' eastern borders or even settling for Danzig and a tiny corridor in the long run for a successful Germany is highly unlikely. Just as the Soviets victorious moved Poland westwards, Germany would most likely have found a way to reclaim everything they lost in the east and compensate the Poles eastwards. Warsaw did a bit too well in what I read here, but no biggie.

The problem is moving that border without a war. Oddly, I agree with you that without La Rocque, you could probably have gotten the French to hem and haw as the Polish-German border was moved east.

Originally Posted by seraphim74

Originally posted by Atlantic Friend


Perhaps, but there are still communication issues. Water route (Vistula) was still important at that time, and much closer to Polish industrial centres. There is much easier to transport goods from Silesia or Warsaw to Danzig/Gdańsk than to Memel. Also railway network was much better developed in western Poland than in Vilnius region. And finally, there is a matter of Polish national pride.

Actually, if it wasn't for the fact I think you would all commit suicide I have a post in mind on Hayek's critique of the German economy, and his ties to (God help us) Schumacher.

The Road from the Pyramids...

And then of course will come the revisionist historians, who emphasize Stresemann's role in propping up the right in the 1920s and write about how threats to the Weimar Republic were dramatically overstated.

[Faeelin]

The Last Liberal

“We have heard a great deal about liberalism in recent years, which is a pretty good sign that people are a little concerned about it. Just as we don’t talk much about bread and water unless we foresee scarcity, so we are apt to take liberalism for granted until it shows signs of disappearing.”

Who was Wendell Willkie? More than any other man, he represents America’s arrival on the world stage as a great power. It was not the Spanish-American War, where the United States broke the Spanish military like a twig; it was not even Versailles, where Wilson created a League of Nations and watched America remain apart from it. It was Willkie who saw the road to an American Century, based on American dreams.

Willkie’s popularity was helped as he came into office as the American economy had already begun to recover, but his first years of his administration were oddly silent, with no significant domestic legislation. In a sense this is not surprising; the president had campaigned on a platform of moderation, after all, and many of his initial moves trimmed back the excesses of the New Deal. Willkie abolished any efforts to establish a nationwide network of TV-like planning authorities, but he did not abolish the TVA itself. He redirected the WPA away from government projects, but he stepped up funding for vocational training, despite some union opposition. But the Pacific War, and Willkie’s success at keeping America out, gave him a rather unique playing field while the world was distracted. And until his death in 1946, he towered over American politics as Roosevelt had before him.

But what made him such a major figure? And what has made many historians rate him among the century's best presidents? Quite a few things, to which we will now turn.

_____________________________________________

“There is no man more opposed to racial discrimination. If I am elected president I will seek to remove all kinds of discrimination from all kinds of groups.”

-Wendell Willkie, Press Conference in 1940

Lillie Jackson stared across the desk at the President of the United States with a mix of feelings. He had come into office with so much promise, and touched the hearts of millions of blacks with his pledge to be a fierce advocate for their rights. Now it had been over a year since his inauguration, and there had been no real progress. And now his justice department was writing fierce briefs arguing that segregation was perfectly constitutional. And she knew what the cynics would say; if the blacks were so angry, they could vote Republican.

As tactfully as she could, she raised the issue. “President Willkie, the NAACP is somewhat concerned that all your promises about being a fierce advocate for civil rights have fallen by the wayside.”

The President smiled as he lit a cigar. “What do you mean? I signed that anti-lynching bill.”

“But you didn’t lobby for it.”

“I issued a statement expressing my continued support for equal treatment under the law. What more did you want?”

“Well, you promised you would desegregate Washington D.C and the federal government.”

Willkie smiled the slick smile that had made a Wall Street tycoon loved as a simple farmer from Indiana.. “Well now, I’d like nothing more than to do that. But we’re looking at getting a new budget passed, and I need the help of southern Democrats to do that.” Willkie frowned sympathetically. “But I think that plenty of Negroes will be helped along with whites by an improved WPA, no?”

Just then, one of the White House’s maids walked in, a woman who’d worked there since the first years of Roosevelt’s administration. “Mr. President, your wife said this lamp should be placed in the Oval Office, but I don’t know where.”

The President glanced at the garish thing. It couldn’t help but stick out like a sore thumb. “Do you have a less gaudy lampshade to hang on it?”

_____________________________________________

Willkie’s support for the Civil Rights movement was something of a dissapointment for his supporters at first. Although he had ran on a platform of equality, in practice for his first term he proved unwilling to push for black. He promoted an African-American colonel to the rank of brigadier general, and was willing to criticize Hollywood for its depiction of blacks as minstrels and vagabonds [1], but he was willing to make few strides towards opposing desegregation. The black community reacted to dashed expectations as one would expect, with the a march on Washington in the fall of 1942 only averted because Willkie issued an executive order ending discriminating within the federal civil service. [2].

Still, as Willkie began to earn praise for keeping America out of the Pacific War [3], and as the economy continued to boom, he became more vocal in support of civil rights. As the 1944 election approached, the north was seized by a wave of race riots that saw whites and blacks (usually blacks) dead in an explosion n of racial tension. Many sought to blame the NAACP for stirring up blacks, or white society for a history of discrimination and oppression. And Willkie, to his credit, finally stood up to the plate.

Perhaps it was the photos of lynching in American cities, something that had been on the decline. Perhaps it was scenes of strife that seemed more at home in Eastern Europe. Or perhaps Willkie had finally felt secure enough to act upon some of his promises. Willkie’s speech "With Malice Towards None, With Charity Towards All,” given in September of 1943, was a full blown statement in support of the civil rights struggle. He enumerated the rights to which all Americans are entitle: equal opportunity of education, equal opportunity to work and the same pay for the same job; the abolition of a poll tax; and equal protection under, and of, the law. He called on Americans to recognize these rights, and in essence publicly adopted the platform of the NAACP.

The reaction from the Southern Democrats within his party was one of outright horror and secession. At the Democratic convention in 1944, Southern delegates walked out when Willkie called for the adoption of desegregation as a federal plank, forming the “States Rights Democratic Party.”

I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there's not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches.-Strom Thurmond, Southern Politician

The Southern Democrats chose Thomas Bailey, the governor of Mississippi, as their candidate, and he ran on a platform that was ostensibly concerned with states rights but whose true purpose was obvious. Surprisingly, Willkie only stepped up his attacks, and became more vocal over the course of the year. While some pollsters warned he was become too concerned with civil rights, Willkie brushed those concerns aside, stating,“I don’t have to be the President, but I do have to live with myself.” With a divided Democratic Party, the GOP should have been able to seize the presidency; and perhaps against anybody but Wendell Willkie, the man whose presidency had seen the United States leave the Depression, they might have succeeded. Instead Willkie entered his second term with the Dixiecrats broken, the Republicans embarrassed, and plans to build An American Dream.


[1] In a comment at a dinner on the subject, he argued the predominantly Jewish movie studios “should be the last to be guilty of doing to another minority what had been done to them.” Willkie’s unwillingness to push them on the issue, in deference to the 1st amendment, wasn’t appreciated, for some reason.

[2] Such a march had been planned OTL against Roosevelt, and was only called off after he issued an executive order forbidding discrimination in the defense industry.

The executive order, of course, makes no mention of the military’s segregation. They have unit cohesion to worry about. (Statements about how black soldiers couldn’t fight as well became somewhat awkward after the British and French began shipping African troops to the Far East, although it didn’t stop some people from making them).

[3] Actually, this wasn’t very hard. Japan was crazy, but not THAT crazy.

I thought I'd post this as a bit part of Willkie's administration.

[Hendryk]

Originally Posted by Faeelin

The reaction from the Southern Democrats within his party was one of outright horror and secession. At the Democratic convention in 1944, Southern delegates walked out when Willkie called for the adoption of desegregation as a federal plank, forming the “States Rights Democratic Party.”

As was to be expected, Jim Crow won't go down without a fight.

Originally Posted by Faeelin

The Southern Democrats chose Thomas Bailey, the governor of Mississippi, as their candidate, and he ran on a platform that was ostensibly concerned with states rights but whose true purpose was obvious.

There are actually some people, including on this very forum, who deny that "states' right" are really an excuse to prevent social progress.

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Hendryk

There are actually some people, including on this very forum, who deny that "states' right" are really an excuse to prevent social progress.

Eh. I'm of two minds of that, as you know.

That said, I am amazed that I managed to vent some incredible bitterness using Willkie's OTL quotes.

[Neroon]

IMO A strong federal gouvernement "standardizes" for lack of a better term national moralily. It can enforce positive things on states, but also negative ones. Of course what is what depends on ones PoV.

For example if Roe VS Wade is ever overturned, then IMO the Republicans could use the slightly expanded definition of the commerce clause in present day to justify a federal anti-abortion law.

[Hendryk]

Originally Posted by Faeelin

That said, I am amazed that I managed to vent some incredible bitterness using Willkie's OTL quotes.

Recontextualizing statements that were really made in OTL is one of the fun aspects of AH. As is recontextualizing actual photos.

[Faeelin]

Okay, quick question.

The next posts will cover Latin America and American involvement there, from the Communist-supported government of Cuba to the Mexican-American trade war (also entitled OH GOD THE PAIN).

Anybody have any thoughts or comments about what's going on? Or shuould I skip over it to return to German pop culture?

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by maverick

Not sure...how much has Latin America diverged? or are you only covering the Caribbean for now?

Oh, everywhere worth a mention, I think.

[Historico]

Nice Update on the Wilkie Adminstration...Who was the Republican Nominee in this ALT '44 election?

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by maverick

Well I'd think that Brazil and Argentina are worth a mention

Well yes, but mostly I was curious if anybody had aany thoughts on what's playing out.

[Archangel]

Good update, Faeelin!
Willkie got a chance ITTL to do good things.
I hope he lives longer.

[Hashasheen]

Originally Posted by maverick

Well I'd think that Brazil and Argentina are worth a mention

Of course you would, you alfajores hogging bastard.