horrifyingthought t1_ja3d2h2 wrote
The standard thinking among academics is actually different - that the Treaty of Versailles was EITHER far too harsh OR far too lenient.
They needed to either choose to not build resentment and not load up punishing reparations, OR they needed to go much much further and make it literally impossible for Germany to have rebuilt at all, probably including standing troop contingents for a a decade or so.
They instead chose the middle ground, which was the worst of both worlds.
AudeDeficere t1_ja3i202 wrote
Unfortunately, they arguably had no better choice.
France was understandably seeking the maximum reparations aso. they could and the USA obviously wanted to leave the expensive business of actively being involved in major wars / occupations to go back to being a passive profiteer and not an active participant, not to mention the Soviet threat looming in the background.
The UK fell kind of in the middle, not being as vengeful as France and not as relatively speaking, uninvolved as the USA and as a result, they all elected to compromise.
It was honestly a fairly decent outcome given the circumstances but fate ( in a non religious deterministic sense ) had other ideas.
Cetun t1_ja4ou08 wrote
The better choice would have been to prop up the Weimar Republic. The government that entered WWI was gone and was replaced by a military government, which was replaced my a democratic socialist government that sued for peace. The Allies had a partner in Germany, the government that controlled Germany simultaneously threw out the military government so Germany could sue for peace and fought off a communist insurrection. How did the Allies reward this new government? By crushing it under the weight of the treaty of Versailles and later one sided agreements. They should have been propping up the Weimar government, they were team players, they were against the communists, fascists, monarchists, and old guard military supporters, all people the Allies didn't want to see in power. I would go on to say the Allies should have been subsidizing Germany's economy in the late 20s and early 30s so that fascists and communist extremists didn't gain power. A blind man could see what would happen if you take the absolute best government you can get after you defeat an enemy and then punish them for it.
Doctor_Impossible_ t1_ja4ypi0 wrote
>By crushing it under the weight of the treaty of Versailles
They didn't.
>I would go on to say the Allies should have been subsidizing Germany's economy in the late 20s and early 30s
They did. Germany received about 35 billion marks in loans, almost all of it from the US.
Cetun t1_ja59bhb wrote
>They didn't.
This isn't up for debate, factually the Weimar Republic failed.
>They did. Germany received about 35 billion marks in loans, almost all of it from the US.
I'm not sure if "here, you owe us even more later", counts as subsidies so much as life support. The problem was the original debt owed because of WWI, more loans would have kicked the can down the road but wouldn't have taken the struggling Weimar Republic into stability.
Recovery takes decades in the best of circumstances, original debts could have effects on the economy for decades. The Treaty of Versailles should have given everyone a clean slate and established a status quo in addition to demilitarizing all of Europe simultaneously. I realize that was unfeasible with France and Britain's colonial empires which required strong navies and armies and the threat of the Soviet Union, but that's even more of a reason to develop a common defense agreement rather than selecting "winners and losers" and then making the losers pay. We know the Treaty of Versailles was a failure, and arguing against that is arguing against history. A stronger Versailles treaty would only have accelerated Germany's road to extremism not tampered it.
jackbenny76 t1_ja555rs wrote
They did. Germany was massively in debt to the US- which had been subsidizing the German economy even after the Great Depression started- until Hitler did the Machtergriefung and then promptly repudiated all international debts. (Technically it's more complicated, but that's basically what happened.) Germany owed 19 billion RM in 1932, over 8 billion of them borrowed from the US since 1924.
You really need to read Adam Tooze's first and best book, Wages of Destruction, a very thorough history of the German economy 1920-1945. I'd also recommend The Deluge, which is basically The US side of that 1920s international finance story.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments