Turns out social democrats killing communist leaders (Spartacists), being lenient on fascists (Kapp Putsch) then using said fascists to kill communists (Freikorps and Ruhr uprisings) wasn’t a great strategy either.
So across the board the whole “building and using fascism as a controllable tool” doesn’t work out so well.
“How could those evil social democrats kill Communist leaders? It’s not like the Spartacists or Ruhr uprising were doing anything like an armed uprising against the government! Mean ol’ social fascists!”
Fucking pathetic.
They absolutely were rebelling. There were soviets and peoples republics being set up in Germany in the aftermath from WW1 and the treaty.
And the fascist Freikorps units were also doing an armed rebellion. The SPD rolled over for them then set them with military support against the KPD.
The story for the SPD is erroneously thinking they could use and control fascists to suppress communism and enable their political will.
The story for the KPD is erroneously thinking they could use and control fascists to suppress the SPD and enable their political will.
Looking at one and not the other in this historical scenario as to how the Nazis came to power is exactly how the fascists come to power.
And the fascist Freikorps units were also doing an armed rebellion.
I don’t think you understand the post-WW1 Freikorps if you think that they were ideologically fascist or rebelling as a whole. The Freikorps were a vast and varied collection of unofficial paramilitaries that weren’t even associated with one another. While generally nationalist, they ranged ideologically from conservative monarchists to staunch SPD supporters. Most Freikorps units didn’t even persist past the chaos of 1919, for fuck’s sake.
The SPD rolled over for them then set them with military support against the KPD.
The idea that the SPD ‘rolled over’ for the Freikorps (which the SPD-controlled government was instrumental in disbanding after the establishment of the Reichswehr) is… just not backed up by evidence. Have you forgotten that a core reason for the Kapp Putsch was that the Weimar government was disbanding various Freikorps units?
Keep changing what you’re arguing, and maybe you’ll come across a goalpost you like. Like claiming that Freikorps that were SPD partisans were actually fascists, because we all know that’s the ‘social fascist’ bullshit you’re pushing here. “B-both sides!”
The Freikorps were what? Largely nationalists who were SPD supporters or conservative monarchists?
Why yes. That’s kind of conveniently accurate here. Thanks for noting that prominently.
The Kapp Putsch directly led to the ruhr uprising, at which point the Freikorps were absolutely used with the Reichswehr against the communists. So the causes of the Kapp Putsch are rather overshadowed by the results and aftermath.
After 1919 the Freikorps were largely dissolved, but more importantly the ones that remained rebranded into organizations like the S.A. The architects of the Holocaust were this kind of Freikorps: like Himmler, Bormann, and Heydrich.
So really: Is it really offensive to note that empowering fascism for whatever reason is a bad idea that just empowers fascism?
Ah yes because armed uprisings against governments should be stopped by killing people…
Ah yes because armed uprisings against governments should be stopped by killing people…
… yes…?
Like, that’s the generally accepted behavior when someone is trying to kill you? You are allowed to shoot back?
Jesus Christ, what, is your opinion that the SocDems should have just laid down and died?
The fuck.
The whole historical significance of the SPD government is that when faced with rebellion from fascists and communists the SPD chose to ally with the roving bands of fascist paramilitaries (Freikorps) against the communists.
But the SPD, KPD, and NSDAP were definitely not the only active political entities at the time. Lookin’ at you DDP and DVP. The liberals and centrists really enjoy the cover of the SPD-KPD when it comes to the era when the Nazis took power.
We’re gonna get to see it again in the USA! Whee!
It’s fucking scary
Do you have communists in USA? I thought the species was extinct in the states.
The United States has modern communists, they’ve read Gramsci and decided to join civil society and change it from the inside instead of overthrowing it in a violent revolution.
They’re just not as visible as they used to be. Unfortunately the primary species anymore is the invasive Marxismus Leninismus rather than the native Marxismus Orthodoxus, which was hunted to extinction in the 1920s.
It’s really interesting how people that spout this rhetoric universally just happen to agree with fascist ideologies, or use disingenuous both sides arguments that just happen to agree with right wing trite
I don’t see the rhetoric here. It’s just what happened and the cartoon fish are funny.
“We can’t work with those dumb-sucks from the iron front; they’re too right-wing!”
Communists have a long track record of putting tyrants into power.
As do moderates who are eager to appease tyrants.
The German social democrats, the moderate party during the Weimar Republic, were the only party to vote against the enabling act (nazi takeover)
The KPD was banned from voting on the Enabling Act. If they hadn’t been, its hard to imagine they would have voted for it.
I don’t doubt that, the KDP would definitely vote against it, but my point is the “social democrats and moderates love appeasing fascists” is not true
The social democrats were the left-wing, Zentrum would have been the moderate party, and Zentrum voted for the Enabling Act.
That’s true, but in terms of Weimar politics, the social democrats were pretty moderate compared to the… other political forces
Neville Chamberlain thought he could appease nazis. Stepped off that plane waving the worthless agreement he thought he had with Hitler. Thought he could go through proper channels and meet nazis in the middle. The whole world saw how that worked out, and what irredeemable foolishness it is to try to appease fascists.
Those who appease nazis today do so with the clarity of hindsight, and know that appeasement and collaboration are one in the same. So long as Chamberlain’s folly is remembered, there will never be another Neville Chamberlain. But there can be other Vidkun Quislings.
This whole “Chamberlain appeased Hitler” meme might be trivially true. But it’s also banal, obtuse, and a confession that one has never read a history that didn’t have to be turned back in at the end of the year.
I’ve seen prominent politicians and public intellectuals shitpost the Chamberlain meme every time they’ve wanted to justify aggression or discredit diplomacy. Not to mention that Chamberlain was doing exactly what the vast majority of British citizens demanded of him. Scared as they all were after the Great War. Or the little detail that British Intelligence had produced a report saying that preventing Germany from taking Czechoslovakia militarily was “impossible”.
The whole premise is fucked. GB was in no position to dictate anything to Hitler. Would history look more kindly on impotent sabre rattling? Would Hitler have been cowed?
Revolutions hurt poor and working class people more than they hurt those in power. Violent revolutions are not something that should ever be worshipped or deliberately sought.
It took a while, but they did get half of Germany (sort of)
I mean they got GDR in the end, so… Success!
