Part 145: History of the Reichstag, Part Eight

History of the Reichstag, Part 8

Since the Consitution was rejected in 1890, the Reichstag was able to keep selecting political parties in 1900 and 1920. It was expected that the Reichstag would retain such power far off into the future, and many people assumed...wrongly...that the Emperor may soon be obsoloted. The Great Depression and Waldemar VII put an end to such talk. This is not to say that the 1900 elections and the 1920 elections were not important at all. Far from it.

The 1900 election brought the Liberals into power for the first time in Germany, while at the same time representing the heyday of the socialist movement. However, the Liberals were a distincit minority in a heavily Conservative Germany, hated by the vast majority of the population. The Conservatives quickly became more militant and Reactionary.

The 1920 elections almost brought the Liberals into power for a second time, but instead the Unifiers (the Chrisitan Democrats) won in a 29-26 vote. As the Unifiers were Conservative, their election angered the Liberals, radicalizing them into the ideology of Anarcho-Liberalism.

As a result, these two elections played a role in further destabilizing Germany and further splintering the nation into several factions. Their national unity was severely threatened. By 1936, 59% of all Germans believed in three major extermist ideologies (28% reactionary, 23% communist, 18% anarcho-liberal). However, the Reichstag's actions after the Great Depression had a far greater effect on German society than these two elections, and hence, I won't focus on them for now. The actual breakdown of these two election results will be detailed in an appendix, to be later released on print-order.

When Waldemar VII invoked emergency powers to overthrow the Unifiers and place the Militarists into power, some members of the Reichstag complained. Peanut President said, "How dare you throw the democratic elected leadership out on their butts! " Dr. Video Games 0031 replied: "Except they weren't democratically elected. Swabia and Germany have never held a public election about anything. The people have no right to choose their leader because the schizophrenic goons decided to vote against a constituion despite being overwhelmingly liberal and democratic." Peanut President said in reply: "Whatever! They were the ruling party, they can't be thrown out! Friggin liberals living by the Roddy Piper rule book."

Think0028 commented on Dr. Video Games 0031's position: "On that note, what the hell is up with the Reichstag? We're a bunch of nobles where half desperately want power for the proletariat but dear god don't give them a constitution and the other half calls for a vicious jingoisitc party and want an absolote monarchy in the 20th century."

Crazy Joe Wilson was shocked: "Wait, the votes for the Constitution a couple decades ago failed? I've been under the impression for a while that they passed (even though they only gave powers to all land-owners). Now I'm even more confused that we've managed to have "liberal" parties in power in almost every Reichstag up to now and yet could have stopped a Constitution.

Crazy Joe Wilson, Dr. Video Games 0031, and Think0028 all supported the Constitution.

Still, there was some support for the anti-consitution movement. Peel said, "I'm pretty sastified with the outcome. " and GunnerJ said, "Just as planned..." Both GunnerJ and Peel were members of the "Enlightened Monarchy" movement that torpedoed the consitution, and suggested that at least some members of the Enlightened Monarchy movement voted against a consitution for 'entertainment purposes' as opposed to as for the 'good of the country'.

At least some people began to regret their choices. skipThings said, "I wanted to have a constituion, not this schizoprenhic liberal-reactionary-monarchy abomination, so my conscience is clean." But skipThings actually was part of the "Enlightened Monarchy" movement, and said, "Ruled by god, blessed by god" when he voted against the constituion. It is possible that skipThings may have revised his political position when he realized the failures of a consitution and sought to distance himself from his 1890 Reichstag vote.

Even after Waldemar's urusupation of the Reichstag's power during the Great Depression, the Reichstag still held much sway over the Empire. It played a major role during the Dublin Conference, and later on during the March 29th General Strike that paralyzed Germany. In fact, it was the choices conducted by the Reichstag that led to the White Terror, as Waldemar IV sought to protect his position through the use of violent repression.

But before we examine why the Reichstag voted for what it did, I want to decidate this chapter to examining the effects of those votes. One of the few flaws of the Reichstag was that its membership did not seek to gather data, but instead voted solely based on ideology. This meant the Reichstag did not adequately understand what it was actually doing.

DUBLIN CONFERENCE
The Dublin Conference was called by Iberia as a way to calm the tensions caused by the Great Depression and provide a way of hopefully promoting peace between the nations and prevent another World War. Prime Minister Azim also saw the Conference as a way to promote his foolish Iberian Disarmament Proposal (which involved having all the Great Powers agree to a cut in military spending). All the Great Powers attended the Conference, including Germany...however, most Great Powers were interested in re-asserting their own diplomatic claims rather than listening to Prime Minister Azim.

During the Dublin Conference, the Reichstag voted to:
-Reinforce its illegal and immoral claim to Italy. This reduced dissent by 2 points, helping unify Germany.
-Vote down the Iberian Disarmament Proposal without comment, in the hopes of not offending Iberia as much as publically opposing the proposal would. This slightly decreased relations with Iberia, by 25.
-Open up talks with Iberia and the League of Democracies, in the hopes of forming a Pact against the Comintern. These talks increased relations with the League of Democracies, by 50.

-Ignored the Lithuanian protests over the Iberian talks. This increased dissent by 5 points. When news leaked out to the reactionary presses, dissent was increased by a further 1 point, and the reactionaries were embarrssed and weakened severely. The talks only had a 20% chance at success though, as Iberia had to also consent to this proposed Pact. Instead, Iberia refused to even consider any sort of 'closer ties' with the Comnitern and the HRE. When word leaked out that the talks failed, dissent was increased by 1. (Had the talks been successful though, the Liberals would have been strengthened greatly. It would have gained major political influence within Germany.)

If the Dublin Conference was to bring 'peace in our time', it was a failure. Instead, tensions with the Great Powers increased heavily, as harsh words were exchanged. The Dublin Conference temporarily united Germany together against two rival Great Powers, decreasing dissent by 2.
-Iberia made veiled threats towards Germany, seeing it as a geopolitical rival in Europe. These threats decreasd dissent by 1, but these threats did more than that. It publically embarssed the Liberals, who were not only calling for an alliance with Iberia, but were publically calling for Germany to imitiate the Iberian government. The Liberals lost much political power as a result of the Iberian veiled threats...which, in retrospect, was a rather stupid move on the part of the Iberian government.
-France claimed Alscae-Lorriane. This decreased dissent by 1. The Commune of France however refrained from an extermist course of action to call for Germany to "pay for its many crimes against France". While it would please the French regime, such a speech would also destroy the growing Communist movement in Germany, and France realized that it needed to cooperate with the German Communists if it wanted to stand a chance at survival.

At the end of the Dublin Conference, the German Liberals and the German Reactionaries lost major influence, while the German Communists was unharmed due to French restraint. Dissent in Germany had increased by 5 points, and the country was slowly tearing itself apart.

MARCH 29TH GENERAL STRIKE
The Reichstag first voted to engage in talks with the strikers. They received the strikers' demands: reforms intended to turn Germany into a democracy, including the establishment of a consitution. The Reichstag voted to accept the strikers' demands, rather than engage in re- negogations in the hopes of a better deal that would involve token concessions to communists.

The argument for re-negogations was the hope that the strikers might agree to a moderate proposal that would not anger the reactionaries. However, the reactionaries was already offended by the talks to begin with. The mere act of talking to the Communists and agreeing to their demands (even if their demands were simply pension and unemployment insurance) would strengthen Communism. It shows the regime as weak and unable to defend itself. Communist riots and rebellions would actually become more likely as a result of the talks.

FRANZ VON PAPEN
Several people blamed the Reichstag's "surrender" during the General Strike for the "White Terror". The belief would be that, after the talks, the country adopted severe liberal reforms that angered the reactionaries, causing a Reactionary Blacklash. In order to keep his power, Waldemar VII was forced to cause the Terror. The facts, sadly, agree with this view, though I need to make a more nuanced addition.

Franz Von Papen, the Foreign Minister of Germany, resigned from his post after the infamous Dublin Conference, stating that Germany itself have strayed away from its conservative past. This suggested reactionary displeasure with the German monarchy already, which potentially pressured Waldemar IV to implement reactionary policies.

When Waldemar IV actually did so though, he offended the unions, causing them to call the March 29th General Strike in retailiation.
The strikes forced the government to back away from the reactionary policies, and helped to reopen the possiblity of the Backlash.


RIOTS
Each of the three major extermist ideologies (Communists, Liberals, and Reactionaries) have a potential to launch a 'riot', which can drive up dissent by 3 points, and push the country closer to civil war. At the start of the Dublin Conference, each of the three sides had a 15% chance of starting a riot, meaning there is a 38.58% chance of a riot occuring.

After the Conference, the Liberals and the Reactionaries only had a 10% chance of starting a riot, due to their weaknesses, while the Communists still operated smoothly and effectively (and keep their 15% chance). This means that there is a 31.15% chance of a riot occuring.

The Communists launched a riot in Berlin in the aftermath of the Dublin Conference. There was no other riots that occured during this time. But it could have been possible that, had the chaos in Germany continued, more riots may have been conducted. In fact, the Communists were strengthened after the General Strike, meaning they had a 20% chance of starting a riot. This means that there is a 35.2% chance of a riot occuring.

It does not really matter who actually conduct the riot...the effects are the same: Increased dissent and the chance of a civil war goes higher. So the decrease in the strength of the Liberals and the Reactionaries pardoxically made Germany more stable and could have helped delay a civil war.

RELIEVIED'S PLAN
During the debates over the General Strike, Reveilled advocated cracking down on the strikers as opposed to talking with them, fearing the possiblity of a reactionary coup. "Our only chance to save Germany is to give a moderate leadership to the reactionary right. I say this not out of a sentiment of "Maximum Hitler" nor do my words run parallel to those of "for the emperor", whatever these horrid catchphrases may mean, but as a pragmatic statement that those forces on our right which you so depise need only to lift a finger to destroy us, and so destroy Germany's only hope of moderate rule." Can Reveilled's plan work? No.

There is one major weakness in Reveilled's plan that Reveilled overlooked. The only person that could lead the reactionary right was Waldemar VII. However, Waldemar VII's position was very weak, and he could be removed from power through two ways.

The first way would be through a Reactionary Backlash. The reactionaries have already felt that Germany is not reactionary enough. Unless Germany implement reactionary reforms, there is always the possiblity that Waldemar VII will lose the support of the reactionaries. He must decide either to launch the White Terror or hand over power to Frederick
III. A Reactionary Backlash will occur eventually if the reactionary reforms aren't enacted, and will increase dissent by 10 points (though Frederick II will reduce dissent by 2 points by purusing moderatly favoring of liberalism).

The second way is through a Liberal Coup. If dissent reaches 25 points, then liberal elements of the military may seek to overthrow Waldemar VII and replace him with the liberal Frederick III.

I don't want to overestimate the chances of a coup, though. Both the liberals and the reactionaries were weakened as a result of the Dublin Conference. The Liberals were unlikely to launch a coup in the first place, and the reactionaries are unlikely to stop Frederick III as well. What is more likely is that this tension between the two forces would continue for quite some time, even if dissent is dangerously high. If the conflict turns to blows though, then neither the Liberlas nor the Reactionaries have the advantage. It may be a matter of luck to decide who wins.

If the Liberal Coup is successful, then Frederick III will implement extreme liberal policies, angering the Reactionaries. If the Liberal Coup failed, then dissent will increase by 5 points, and Germany will become even more reactionary in an attempt to crack down on the plotters.
A failed Liberal Coup may end up pleasing the Reactionaries enough to prevent the Reactionary Backlash..but also end up increasing the chances of a civil war.

CIVIL WAR
What would have happened if a civil war would have broke out?

Reveilled overtly talked about the possiblity of reactionaries attacking and killing members of the Reichstag. But the Reichstag prevented this situation from happening. The Reichstag's talks with the League of Democracies weakened the Reactionaries significantly. The Reactionaries could never recover from this public relations disaster, meaning that they could never mount a popular resistance to place Waldemar VII back onto the throne.


Yet, the Liberals were weakened significantly too, when the Iberians made its veield threats. Frederick II really was the last best hope for liberalism in Germany; there was no way the liberals could launch a popular uprising against the German State without him (due to the Iberian threats making the liberals very unpopular on the streets).

Only the Communists are the ones who are truly motiviated and radical enough to launch a prolonged rebellion against Germany. The Communists do not care about popularity or ideological strength; they have been preparing for revolution even before the liberals and reactionaries even discussed it. All the Communists want is to make Germany a communist utopia, through whatever means necessary. The fact that they also had the support of popular opinion on their side was only incidental.

The truth is that the "civil war" would end up being a war between the Communists (who would have revolted anyway as long as Germany is not communist) and the German State. While it would be a very long and destructive event, it is not as terrible or anarchical as many commenters claimed.

The reactionary memberstates of the Holy Roman Empire (Lithuania, Austria) would provide aid to the 'rightful rulers' of Germany. These states would rather prefer to aid Waldemar VII, but will more than likely provide military assistance to Frederick II. Even a liberal reformer is better than communists.

The Comintern (Union of Rome, France) would provide unconditional aid to the Worker's Union of Germany, in the hopes that such aid would destroy the German State and allow for the creation of a new communist ally in the fight against imperialism and capitalism. France would, more than likely, provide most of the military aid and support that the Worker's Union need in order to survive.

The League of Democracies would stay netrual. They would not want to provide any assistance that could empower a potential enemy. Besides, they prefer establishing liberal republics as opposed to propping up a monarchy (even a liberal one). It is ironic, therefore, that their criticism of Germany was instrumental in preventing the establishment of a liberal republic.