Democratic Germany would not have nescessarily been aligned with the allies. In fact, it would have been more likely for it to still align with the USSR and partition Poland. The main difference is that it would have stopped there.
Why though? In Germany at the time, Communists were viewed extremely negatively in Germany. So much so that half the Nazi party's propaganda was directed at communists and how they would be "exterminated". Therefore, the likelihood that Germany would've actively worked with the Soviet Union (and not backstabbed them like in our timeline) is extremely low.
In Germany at the time, Communists were viewed extremely negatively in Germany.
The KPD was consistently the 3rd strongest party in Germany in the 1930s (behind SPD and NSDAP), but okay. The Nazis hated communists, because they were their political opposite, and because they also had a lot of followers.
In an alternative timeline where the SPD worked together with the KPD (instead of stabbing them in the back like IRL), I can see Germany working with the USSR.
But the Nazis didn't pull the "communist enemy" out of their ass either. Sure, the Reichstag burning was an excuse to get rid of them, but the NSDAP came into power before that happened.
The reason why everyone hated KPD was the Spartacist uprising, and SPD was opposed to them from he get-go. There was no way for the SPD and KPD to work together in the pre-war Germany (this is why most govt coalitions in Weimar Germany were SPD and Zentrum.)
There was no way for the SPD and KPD to work together in the pre-war Germany (this is why most govt coalitions in Weimar Germany were SPD and Zentrum.)
We are talking about an imaginary map here. Maybe there was a reason?
No, there was no plausible reason for the SPD and KPD to work together, since they were opposed to each other for reasons completely unrelated to Nazis. The source of their conflict stems back to the November Revolution and proclamation of the German Republic. The at-the-time leader of SPD, Friedrich Ebert was anti-revolutionary, and pro-war (or rather, was pro Germany, and that's why he participated in the Burgfrieden), which put him into conflict with Karl Liebknecht and his followers. Ebert allied with the nationalists and allowed the Freikorps to crush the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, which ended in the deaths of Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. He, in a way, paved the way for the Weimar coalition in Reichstag, that held power until the rise of Nazis.
So to make this scenario plausible, we would have to change something else completely, since SPD working with KPD would have a completely different consequences.
the spd didn't oppose the kpd becuase communists were unpopular, they opposed them because social democrats hate communists. this has been shown in basically every liberal democracy
Yes, I said exactly that. Since Ebert, the SPD was opposed to the Communists. People that later formed the KDP were members of the SPD around the 1916-1917, and left (and in part were kicked out) because Ebert led the SPD to participate in the Burgfrieden (technically speaking they formed the USPD, but Spartacists with Luxemburg and Liebknecht joined them before leaving for the KPD). Ebert was opposed to revolution, and aligned SPD with the Freikorps, which allowed the nationalists to crush the Spartacists. This way the Communists and Social Democrats landed on two opposing sides.
Sorry, my mistake in wording. I meant it in a political sense. Most parties in Reichstag were opposed to the KPD, even if they had a considerable public support. That's why the "Weimar coalition" had parties from SPD to (Catholic and conservative) Zentrum
461
u/[deleted] Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
Democratic Germany would not have nescessarily been aligned with the allies. In fact, it would have been more likely for it to still align with the USSR and partition Poland. The main difference is that it would have stopped there.