The most "consequential" man you've never heard of...

[DZR]

The subject of NPG postcard number 6567 "Ulrich Graf von Brockdorff-Rantzau"

According to Wikipedia, this man was "instrumental in facilitating the passage of the Bolsheviks Vladimir Lenin and Karl Radek across Germany in a sealed train in 1917" with the purpose of bringing about the collapse of the Russian monarchy and knocking Russia out of the war. Obviously the consequences for humanity were far more catastrophic than he ever imagined - very nearly destroying his own nation within the following quarter century.

[Don D.]

I think Hitler had more of a hand in that.

[DZR]

Certainly without Hitler there wouldn't have been the devastation of 1939-1945, but my point is that without a communist revolution in Russia - would there have been a Hitler? I think not. If we accept that History is an endless cycle of cause and effect, actions and consequences, then von Brockdorff-Rantzau's actions were of profound consequence.

[Don D.]

I think you could put the framers of the Treaty of Versialles into the same category. They basically caused the overthrow of a stable sitting government and instituted an experiment in democracy building while at the same time creating an unstable environment for it.

[Mike Dwyer]

I think you could put the framers of the Treaty of Versialles into the same category. They basically caused the overthrow of a stable sitting government and instituted an experiment in democracy building while at the same time creating an unstable environment for it.

I agree. The imperial German government was trying to feel out the allies for peace, but were repelled by the insistance of the UK and US that the Kaiser had to go. Perhaps if there'd been a little bit more compromise and the imperial government had continued after the wars end, Herr Hitler would have never had the opportunity to rise to power.

[ekhunter]

I agree. The imperial German government was trying to feel out the allies for peace, but were repelled by the insistance of the UK and US that the Kaiser had to go. Perhaps if there'd been a little bit more compromise and the imperial government had continued after the wars end, Herr Hitler would have never had the opportunity to rise to power.

I agree with you on the above statement, and the Treaty was definately too harsh with repartions and the excetance of full blame on Germany parts. A very humiliating Treaty that came back to bite France in the butt. I believe that the Treaty helped give rise to Hitler's power, and if not for the economic and political enviornment in post war Germany, then Hitler would have remained a homeless artist. Imagine this also, what would Europe look like today if Hitler had never invaded Russia. I can dare to say that the National Socialist would still be in power.

[VtwinVince]

Agreed, what it boiled down to was that the great European powers such as England and France would not put up with the threat that Germany posed to the existing status quo. Just look at the efficiency with which Germany's Naval and merchant building programs were outstripping those of England by 1914. In 1918 Germany's competitors were only too happy to gobble up her colonies, gold reserves, eastern and western territories etc. This of course led to a fundamental destabilization.

[Wild Card]

I think you could put the framers of the Treaty of Versialles into the same category. They basically caused the overthrow of a stable sitting government and instituted an experiment in democracy building while at the same time creating an unstable environment for it.

As it turned out, this is very true; but take a look at a few other events of that era:

29 October 1918. Naval mutiny in Kiel.

4 - 5 November 1918. Major revolts in Hamburg, Bremen and Lubeck

8 November 1918. Establishment of the Munich Soviet Republic, which was formally proclaimed on 4/6/19

9 November 1918. Abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm

9 November 1918. Declaration of the Free Socialist Republic in Berlin

11 November 1918. Armistice

And then things really unraveled, Freikorps, Spartacus Party, etc.

My point is that these are only a few of the many similar events which took place before The Treaty of Versailles was created on 28 June 1919. So it would seem that while The Treaty was not so much the cause as a contributing factor to making a bad situation worse.

[Brian S]

Interesting thread. I think Hitler would have attacked Russia with or without a monarchy. As for communists, for Hitler, he was more interested in the communists within Germany than in Russia. It would not, I think, have mattered to him who ruled Russia, he had his excuse of Lebensraum to move forward and no doubt would have gone far into Russia.

The question I am left with is what would have been the result? The monarchy was weak in 1917 but assuming it perservered how would it have survived after no doubt the son and heir would have died of natural causes. Or worse, a sickly Czar on the throne more dedicated to surviving his disease than the threat to his country.

A queen (Czarina) to rule Russia no doubt by 1942 but what would have been her success in massing Russia into a force to rise up and defeat Hitler? The iron hand of Stalin made that possible. Obviously support from America would still have come in terms of ordinance but the leadership, that's the question for me.

[Mike Dwyer]

Interesting thread. I think Hitler would have attacked Russia with or without a monarchy.

I believe you're quite right, Brian, but I think the main point is, if the monarchy had survived in Germany with its class structure (although that was changing due to the war) it would have been "socially" impossible for a mere mortal like Hitler to have ever come to power since he was outside the circle of power of gentry and aristocracy. If he never came to power, then perhaps, and that's not certain, events would have turned out very different under other leaders in a continuing monarchy.

My point is that these are only a few of the many similar events which took place before The Treaty of Versailles was created on 28 June 1919. So it would seem that while The Treaty was not so much the cause as a contributing factor to making a bad situation worse.

Wild Card, you too are completely correct about the time line, I was just speculating that perhaps if peace had been reached in 1917 these future events might not have happened, or if some did happen a stronger government would have still been around to handle them, etc.

This is all just "what if" and completely OFF TOPIC! Sorry for wandering away from the original thread..........

[ekhunter]

Well, as long as we are playing armchair quarterback, I dare to say the monarchy in Germany would not have survived the economic and political unrest of the 1920's. Much of the unrest was due to when the soldiers returned home, and were feeling that they had not lost the war, but that the leaders had given up. Had the Kaiser stayed in power, he probably would have met a similiar fate that Czar Nicholas and his family met. As far as Hitler is concerned, if he had never invaded Russia, and instead used those Divisions to shore up North Africa, the Middle East, and the French Coast, then they (the Nazis), would probably still be in power today. Anyway, that's just my two cents!

[Brian S]

My meaning was the monarchy in Russia... I do not believe its existence would have prevented Hitler from attacking. And, I think if Russia's monarchy had survived it would have not have had the chances of Stalin's iron rule against the attacking Germans.

[DZR]

The most "consequential" man you've never heard of...

My original point with regard to von Brockdorff-Rantzau's action was that had he not let the communist-socialist revolutionary genie out of the bottle , there would have been no catalyst for the national socialist revolution and possibly no second world war at all.

[Don D.]

Given Europe's cycle of violence I think WW2 was inevitable. They had a history of major wars every 20 years or so. I think it is significant that they haven't had one since and you can blame (or give credit to) Hitler for that....

[Brian S]

Yes, WWII was inevitable. Given Hitler's many excuses, Versailles Treaty, Poland "incursion", Lebensraum, etc.... My question is still would a monarchy run Russia have been effective against Hitler and I'm thinking no...