I do have to complain though that the Cornell translation uses "racial elements" for "Stämme" (which I translated as tribes)- in then-parlance this is an acknowledgement to the subdivision of Germany into the (partly mythical, partly HRE and partly socio-cultural) tribalist identities of bavarians, saxons, hessians, prussians, etc. And yes, this carries weight even today. I've seen more than one son of a turkish migrant in bavaria being very, very angry about the damn prussians (read: everybody north of the danube, but especially the ones from Berlin).
Which is totally lost in "racial elements".
Edit: Same goes for "Volk", which by now is corrupted by the Nazis to mean something ethnical, but back then was more or less "everybody who thinks of themselves as german". The Weimar constitution was pretty good for the time. The biggest things missing were constituinal-rank equal right (although, the vote for women was far less contentious than in, say, the UK) and protection for concentious objectors (which given the arms limit, probably didn't come to anyones mind...and it was 1919).
Edit edit: The Cornell translation could definitly do with a couple of footnotes.
Usually when people are swayed the first time to vote for a plan, they stick to it and generally don't pay attention to others or just pay less mind to it. So each time zone will pay attention to different arguments as they are presented. That's my theory at least.
There is also the fact that you have players in the US, Europe, and other different countries with different treatment of societal values spread out across different time zones, so there's that.
There is also the fact that you have players in the US, Europe, and other different countries with different treatment of societal values spread out across different time zones, so there's that.
Well yeah, that's already been stated before, but that's irrespective of time zones which is the point of the question as I understand it. I doubt someone from Nicaragua and Minnesota would view things the same way even though they'd see the same arguments and posts at the same time. And honestly, the United States has more disparate values despite the same time zones than somewhere like Western Europe, same time zones don't mean the same values.
Well yeah, that's already been stated before, but that's irrespective of time zones which is the point of the question as I understand it. I doubt someone from Nicaragua and Minnesota would view things the same way even though they'd see the same arguments and posts at the same time. And honestly, the United States has more disparate values despite the same time zones than somewhere like Western Europe, same time zones don't mean the same values.
Well, yes, but one can't deny that there is a trend of areas in the same time zone sharing the same views-take the US west coast for instance, possibly the most liberal part of the country, with similar BC directly up north. Although there are more areas in the time zone proper, it is at least a limited phenomenon.
Well, yes, but one can't deny that there is a trend of areas in the same time zone sharing the same views-take the US west coast for instance, possibly the most liberal part of the country, with similar BC up north. Although there are more areas in the time zone proper, it is at least a limited phenomenon.
The East Coast shares similar timezones with some of the most conservative areas of the country, so the West Coast is a bit of an outlier. Anyway, my point isn't that geography doesn't often correlate with values, because it often does, but rather that as different people argue at different timezones, the person who gets the last word has a head start in convincing people trickling in to vote.
The East Coast shares similar timezones with some of the most conservative areas of the country, so the West Coast is a bit of an outlier. Anyway, my point isn't that geography doesn't often correlate with values, because it often does, but rather that as different people argue at different timezones, the person who gets the last word has a head start in convincing people trickling in to vote.
I agree with you, and geography doesn't always correlate with values. I'd also add that the timezone phenomenon isn't just "last word." A lot of people just vote without reading page-long arguments, and quite often this is from groupthink. And at times, seeing as how one timezone can often dictate the vote initially, the rest of the individuals in that group, seeing as how everyone else there is agreeing with one outcome, can side with it.
Scheduled vote count started by mouli on Mar 14, 2021 at 10:18 PM, finished with 85 posts and 37 votes.
-[X]Fair: Put them on trial, and make it a fair trial for treason. This will nail most of them and anger the army, provided the trials go well. If the trials go poorly, the officers get acquitted anyways and have used the trials as a platform for agitation. At the same time, it will show that we are ready and willing to call the army to account – on the tail end of the war, we won't have a coup from this. But it will mean that we have to placate the army later.
-[X]Public Trials: Put the few commanders that we have on trial, and make sure that it's a fair one. We have an ironclad treason case in any event, and the trial of the commanders allow us to drive home the victory of the republic over the insurrection – and will also burnish our credentials on the center and the center-right sides of the aisle. The Zentrum wants to see them in court, and we can oblige them – at the cost of leaving those experienced agitators a place to spread their ideas.
-[X]Gericht: Let the army try the KPD high commanders, since the ones that we captured were former soldiers or serving officers who flipped with the 6th Infantry Division. This will almost certainly mean that the high command will be shot, and it will be done quietly, but there will be no martyrs to the revolution made here. The Zentrum will not like it much and will view it as capitulating to the army and the far-right, though, and they have a point. We don't want the army running courts, but can we avoid that in this case?
[X] Plan: Everyone Goes to Court!
-[X]Fair: Put them on trial, and make it a fair trial for treason. This will nail most of them and anger the army, provided the trials go well. If the trials go poorly, the officers get acquitted anyways and have used the trials as a platform for agitation. At the same time, it will show that we are ready and willing to call the army to account – on the tail end of the war, we won't have a coup from this. But it will mean that we have to placate the army later. -[X]Public Trials: Put the few commanders that we have on trial, and make sure that it's a fair one. We have an ironclad treason case in any event, and the trial of the commanders allow us to drive home the victory of the republic over the insurrection – and will also burnish our credentials on the center and the center-right sides of the aisle. The Zentrum wants to see them in court, and we can oblige them – at the cost of leaving those experienced agitators a place to spread their ideas.
If you like laws and sausages, you should never watch either one being made.
Berlin
1920
Matthias Erzberger is tired, and you can see that. But you can also see a sort of weary determination in his eyes, despite the fact that he's been shot at twice in the past two days and spent a week in East Prussia attempting to make peace with the putschists before the republic did them in when the negotiations failed. The Zentrum leader and Minister for Finance sits down opposite you and glares for a minute before sighing, and then just takes a sheet of paper from his attache case and sets it down on your desk – your polished, and for-once clear desk. "Chancellor Ebert. We have to get the government reorganized now that the civil war has ended."
You nod and take out your cigarette-case, offering Erzberger one – he refuses and takes out his own – and you light up before speaking. This looks as if it's a long meeting, and you'd like to savor the American tobacco that you've got your hands on now that the ports are back open. "I know, Minister Erzberger." Minister you call him and he bristles, but you need to hammer that in – the Zentrum have been getting uppity lately, and they're not the leaders of this coalition. So you clear your throat and look meaningfully at the pudgy Catholic, and he closes his mouth to let you continue. He does glare, though. You can live with that. "We do have a fair amount left to do, yes. The franchise bill was on the docket for April before the war began, and we have to resolve the issue of what to do with the western portions of Prussia. We can't have a state where half of it is under emergency rule and half isn't."
Matthias nods, balding head gleaming in the warm yellow electric lighting, and he sighs in a great exhalation of smoke before speaking, not meeting your eyes. "The franchise bill will not pass."
"What." You're for once having a good day, a day where your damned gallstones aren't troubling you and your desk is clear, and now this. "Suppose you tell me what you mean by that, Minister."
The Zentrum man raises his eyes to meet yours, and there's very little give there. "The party won't have the franchise be party lists and proportional. We don't want the vote being diluted by every damned fringe group having a vote in the Reichstag. Not after the war. The Reds and the damned pagan right-wing can do without representation. The Zentrum will not vote for the franchise bill as it was."
You nod. You'd expected something, if not quite this bad. Perhaps if you hadn't antagonized them so much in wartime, perhaps if you hadn't pushed for secularizing all aid distribution….but that is all in the past. "Then what is it the Zentrum wants?" You decide to prod a little, a spark of mischief bubbling up now that you're blessedly free of the damned pain in your side, "Perhaps the old Imperial bill? I understand that the Imperial system is what the conservatives want to maintain."
He scowls at you, "No." Erzberger takes another sheet of paper from his attache case, "We are willing to support a proportional franchise with single candidates per constituency, rather than this mad plan for one representative per party per 65,000 voters in a constituency. That is the least that we will accept. That, or the Condorcet method they used in Queensland."
"Tell me later, Matthias. Tell me the details later. I know what the franchise bill holds, I helped write it." You pinch the bridge of your nose for a moment, a headache building up and your impatience almost palpable, "So you want a threshold on the parties as well, I take it? You raised that earlier."
"Indeed." Erzberger nods sharply, "Five percent."
"Conveniently enough to lock out most of the Zentrum's local competition."
"You know what most of those competition want." There's an accusatory note in his voice, "They want revolution, whether for some pagan reason like the Thule lunatics or something like Eisner. You almost convinced me that the SPD were more sane, Ebert. Hold yourself to that."
"I will try, Matthias, to avoid raising the red flag from the Reichstag." Your dust-dry answer is enough to get the Minister for Finance to do a double-take, and you take the chance to ash out your cigarette and light another before speaking, "Prussia. What about that?"
"Dissolve it. Break it up." He smiles humorlessly at you when you raise your eyebrow at him, "Don't look at me like that. Prussia is the largest state in the republic, and one band of lunatics taking it over means that the rest of us are hard-up. You know what the Bavarians think of the idea."
"They love it." You didn't think that the Zentrum would be this aggressive, but maybe you can work with it. Maybe. "You want to, what, slice Westphalia, Hannover, and the other occupied zones off from Prussia?"
"To make new states, yes." To quarantine the Reds that might still be in the occupied states, you don't say. To let the occupied zones be separate states means the Reichstag can pass laws specifically to bypass those states should they turn, and it means that no single state can block legislation like Prussia can right now.
You're blunt about the next question, and you know that it's ten minutes before you head home. Louise is making something good today, and she mentioned it'd be a surprise. "Now, you do know what the army will say about this plan?"
"We can manage it. We have the votes. And the army is one third Bavarian right now." Matthias' smile is the sort of satisfied expression that one might put on the cat that caught a canary, "You have one loyal division in Berlin, and the nation is too exhausted for a war. If we want to break the power of the Hohenzollern patrimony, we do it now."
"Indeed." You draw out that last word, and you take the sheets of paper that Erzberger has drawn up. Five minutes early, you leave for home.
It's been a decent day. Even with this. You head home more occupied with what the surprise your wife had mentioned was rather than worrying about the job and the Reichstag, for once, even if that's more due to deliberate choice than being carefree. An anachronistic but accurate map of the states can be seen below:
Your Governing Coalition Stability is at 50. The coalition will break apart at 30 and the SPD will not have a majority.
You have 423 total seats in the Reichstag.
The SPD – currently governing – has 163
The Zentrum – in coalition and governing – has 91
The German Democratic Party (DDP) – in coalition and very junior partner – has 75
The DNVP in opposition has 23 of its nominal 44, the rest vacant
The DVP in opposition has 2 of 19, the rest vacant.
The USPD in opposition has 3 of 22, the rest vacant.
There are three other seats occupied by small parties I am not modeling for the sake of sanity.
You in coalition have thus 329 seats of 357 nonvacant seats. A two thirds majority of 'seated' seats is 238. You thus require the Zentrum at least to pass any of the below:
Franchise: A snap election has to be run soon to fill in vacant seats in the now-being-organized territories that were liberated in the civil war. The voting franchise bill that was to pass in April 1920 was delayed by the war, and the Zentrum has now announced that it – and a substantial chunk of the DDP – are prepared to block the old franchise bill and want something more able to prevent fringe participation.
[]The Imperial System: The Imperial system was that every constituency would be represented by a single MP, and that the MP would be elected by a majority of voters. If there was no clear majority in the first round, a second runoff would be held between the top two candidates and that would decide who would win. This is a fairly conventional system and will be broadly acceptable to most parties, but the Zentrum would not prefer this. You would lose 5 Coalition Stability here. This would please the DDP and slightly irritate the Zentrum.
[]The Australian System: Something called instant runoff voting, whereby voters can rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each voter's top choice. If a candidate has more than half of the vote based on first-choices, that candidate wins. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The voters who selected the defeated candidate as a first choice then have their votes added to the totals of their next choice. This process continues until a candidate has more than half of the votes. When the field is reduced to two, it has become an "instant runoff" that allows a comparison of the top two candidates head-to-head. Text taken from Wiki. This would anger the opposition and irritate the DDP. This costs no coalition stability due to the DDP being the most junior partner.
[]The Weimar System, Modified: The Weimar system was to use party lists nationwide and allow proportional representation, allocating one representative per party for each 65,000 votes it won in a single constituency. This means that fringe parties can potentially come from a few constituencies despite having little to no base, and means that the size of the legislature fluctuates. The Weimar system has been deemed too unstable by the Zentrum, and they want to modify it. There is only one rep per constituency, and maps are to be redrawn with the census. The winner in the constituency is one with a plurality. A second vote is cast for the party lists in the state as envisioned in the original bill, and parties that are to be represented in the Reichstag have to gain 5% of the votes or more in the party-list vote. The Zentrum can go with this. +5 coalition stability. This is very very angering for the far-right opposition. The Dissolution of Prussia: Prussia will continue to exist by necessity – the state is an old, old entity that has far too much resonance – but it has to be cut down to size. Since the western regions are occupied and being reorganized after five months of KPD administration in the civil war, they have no representation and we can use the existnce of KPD agitation to argue for a splitting of Prussia to maintain its stability. This will anger the army's Prussian monarchists and anger the opposition as well as the DDP, but the Zentrum can back it. For now. As can the southerners in the army – but we'll owe them for this.
[]Do Not: Stay with the status quo. Prussia will dominate the nation by dint of size, and if Prussia falls to extremism or emergency rule, then the nation will follow.
[]The West: Break off the western KPD states – create new states of Rhineland, Schleswig-Holstein, Westfalen, Hannover while enlarging Braunschweig, Hesse and Thuringia to take in some of the formerly occupied areas of Prussia. Keep the rest of Prussia intact, and with the industrial, restless west sliced off it might be easier to manage the nation. Not to mention, of course, the Zentrum's popularity in the industrial west makes this a natural proposition for the Zentrum to back. +5 Coalition Stability, angers the Prussian traditionalists in the army, angers the monarchists, angers the far-right. The south Germans in the army are willing to tepidly back this for regional interests.
-[]With a referendum: While we don't need it, we can call a referendum in the affected areas to see if the population are willing to go along. This can lead to voter intimidation and far-right violence, but if it goes off and we get what we wanted, it shows that the people are backing this initiative. The army will be tense, but the prospect of another popular insurrection will make them stay their hand. I will roll for voter intimidation and the referendum. You do not know the DCs. Rolls remain hidden.
-[]Without: Article 167 allows us to redraw the border without a referendum, although the law was intended for the post-Versailles border adjustments. This bypasses potential agitation, terror and voter intimidation not to mention action by the army, but it means that we rely on the southerners and the Zentrum (and regional parties like the Schleswig-Holstein Party) to shout loudly enough to outweigh the Prussians in the army.
Votes are open. Feedback welcome. You won't get couped in the first turn, and no option leads to immediate coup. Note that the army is not a monolith.
the 5% threshhold is a good thing, we have that till this day in germany.
Also may I note that as a german it is incredible weird to not see the conservative christian party be the largest party? Think they´ve been the biggest since ww2 with maybe one or two shortlived exceptions
In that case I think we should keep Prussia whole. We can't take every single "piss off the Prussians in the army" option and expect it not to come back to haunt us later. With the threshold we'd have taken three out of four already even without breaking Prussia up.
Either Condorcet or Weimar looks good here.
As for Prussia, however, unless we can get the Reichsbanner to act up at the time, referendum is a no. And with the Weimar choice, I'd go against cutting up Prussia.
Stay with the status quo. Prussia will dominate the nation by dint of size, and if Prussia falls to extremism or emergency rule, then the nation will follow.
Before anything else, I would like to strongly emphasize this. For the sake of long term German Federalism, Prussia must be broken up. This one federal subject is 2/3rds of the population. One could make a serious argument that the moment the Nazis became inevitable was when they successfully seized control of the Prussian state government in 1932.
You cannot have a healthy federal arrangement when one state is the tail that will always wag the dog.
Would dissolution do something with lesser states in Northwest Germany - Lippe, Schaumburg-Lippe, Waldeck - and those two weird Oldenburg exclaves in Southern Rhineland and near Lubeck? Also we probably giving out Hohenzollern southern exclave to Wurttemberg with partition too?
Also how this map redrawings affect occupied areas, since they're still de jure part of Germany (except Saar, it isn't affected by any those laws), even if we don't have any form of control and government over them, as I understood the situation (possibly wrongly). How will referendum proceed there if we go with that option?
I like either Australian or Modified Weimar in the voting issue.
I'm heavily against dissolving Prussia; We cannot take every single action that pisses the army without expecting serious consequences, and Prussia a something really Important for any self-respecting conservative.
Also how this map redrawings affect occupied areas, since they're still de jure part of Germany (except Saar, it isn't affected by any those laws), even if we don't have any form of control and government over them, as I understood the situation (possibly wrongly). How will referendum proceed there if we go with that option?
Not French-occupied ones, rather the ones that are occupied by your army post-civil-war. The Rhineland is under occupation and can dejure be declared a province - and I believe that local governance was German even there. It was occupied by Allied forces based at specific points by treaty, but the Allies did not handle day to day governance.
Would dissolution do something with lesser states in Northwest Germany - Lippe, Schaumburg-Lippe, Waldeck - and those two weird Oldenburg exclaves in Southern Rhineland and near Lubeck? Also we probably giving out Hohenzollern southern exclave to Wurttemberg with partition too?
In that case I think we should keep Prussia whole. We can't take every single "piss off the Prussians in the army" option and expect it not to come back to haunt us later. With the threshold we'd have taken three out of four already even without breaking Prussia up.
I'm with Erzberger and Sturmi on this one. If we want to break the Hohenzollern patrimony, we do it now. The Army will kick and scream, but our initiative is strongest at this point in time; the civilian government is now in charge and they will just have to accept this reality.
"We can manage it. We have the votes. And the army is one third Bavarian right now." Matthias' smile is the sort of satisfied expression that one might put on the cat that caught a canary, "You have one loyal division in Berlin, and the nation is too exhausted for a war. If we want to break the power of the Hohenzollern patrimony, we do it now."
Honestly, the Zentrum have been solid and competent partners in government, and their plan is pretty damn good. I'm down with their plan, but I'm also open to risking the referendum.
[X] Plan: Zentrum is Bae - [X]The Weimar System, Modified:The Weimar system was to use party lists nationwide and allow proportional representation, allocating one representative per party for each 65,000 votes it won in a single constituency. This means that fringe parties can potentially come from a few constituencies despite having little to no base, and means that the size of the legislature fluctuates. The Weimar system has been deemed too unstable by the Zentrum, and they want to modify it. There is only one rep per constituency, and maps are to be redrawn with the census. The winner in the constituency is one with a plurality. A second vote is cast for the party lists in the state as envisioned in the original bill, and parties that are to be represented in the Reichstag have to gain 5% of the votes or more in the party-list vote. The Zentrum can go with this. +5 coalition stability. This is very very angering for the far-right opposition.
-[X]The West: Break off the western KPD states – create new states of Rhineland, Schleswig-Holstein, Westfalen, Hannover while enlarging Braunschweig, Hesse and Thuringia to take in some of the formerly occupied areas of Prussia. Keep the rest of Prussia intact, and with the industrial, restless west sliced off it might be easier to manage the nation. Not to mention, of course, the Zentrum's popularity in the industrial west makes this a natural proposition for the Zentrum to back. +5 Coalition Stability, angers the Prussian traditionalists in the army, angers the monarchists, angers the far-right. The south Germans in the army are willing to tepidly back this for regional interests. --[X]With a referendum: While we don't need it, we can call a referendum in the affected areas to see if the population are willing to go along. This can lead to voter intimidation and far-right violence, but if it goes off and we get what we wanted, it shows that the people are backing this initiative. The army will be tense, but the prospect of another popular insurrection will make them stay their hand. I will roll for voter intimidation and the referendum. You do not know the DCs. Rolls remain hidden.
[X] Plan: Zentrum is Bae - [X]The Weimar System, Modified:The Weimar system was to use party lists nationwide and allow proportional representation, allocating one representative per party for each 65,000 votes it won in a single constituency. This means that fringe parties can potentially come from a few constituencies despite having little to no base, and means that the size of the legislature fluctuates. The Weimar system has been deemed too unstable by the Zentrum, and they want to modify it. There is only one rep per constituency, and maps are to be redrawn with the census. The winner in the constituency is one with a plurality. A second vote is cast for the party lists in the state as envisioned in the original bill, and parties that are to be represented in the Reichstag have to gain 5% of the votes or more in the party-list vote. The Zentrum can go with this. +5 coalition stability. This is very very angering for the far-right opposition.
-[X]The West: Break off the western KPD states – create new states of Rhineland, Schleswig-Holstein, Westfalen, Hannover while enlarging Braunschweig, Hesse and Thuringia to take in some of the formerly occupied areas of Prussia. Keep the rest of Prussia intact, and with the industrial, restless west sliced off it might be easier to manage the nation. Not to mention, of course, the Zentrum's popularity in the industrial west makes this a natural proposition for the Zentrum to back. +5 Coalition Stability, angers the Prussian traditionalists in the army, angers the monarchists, angers the far-right. The south Germans in the army are willing to tepidly back this for regional interests.
At some point we do have to stop pissing off our military - the question is whether we need to begin that now, or can afford to work with the Catholic Centre to break Prussia's dominance first.
Would dissolution do something with lesser states in Northwest Germany - Lippe, Schaumburg-Lippe, Waldeck - and those two weird Oldenburg exclaves in Southern Rhineland and near Lubeck? Also we probably giving out Hohenzollern southern exclave to Wurttemberg with partition too?
Also how this map redrawings affect occupied areas, since they're still de jure part of Germany (except Saar, it isn't affected by any those laws), even if we don't have any form of control and government over them, as I understood the situation (possibly wrongly). How will referendum proceed there if we go with that option?
The exact wording in Article 18 of the Weimar constitution regarding the referendum is:
"The division of the Reich into Lands shall be such as to serve the people to the highest possible economic and cultural attainment, whereby the will of the population affected shall betaken into consideration as far as possible. The alteration of territory of the Lands and the creation of new Lands within the Reich nay be effected by means of a Reich law amending the Constitution.
If the Lands directly affected give their consent, an ordinary Reich law is sufficient.
An ordinary Reich law is also sufficient, if one of the Lands affected refuses consent, but the territorial alteration or the creation of a new Land is demanded by the will of the population and the paramount interests of the Reich.
The will of the population shall be ascertained by plebiscite. The Government of the Reich orders the plebiscite if,. in the territory to be separated, one-third of the inhabitants qualified to vote for the Reichstag so demand.
Three-fifths of the votes taken, but at least a majority cf the enfranchised voters, are necessary for a resolution to alter a boundary or create a new Land. Even if it is only a question of the disconnection of a part of a Prussian administrative district (Regierungsbezirk), a Bavarian "county" (Kreis) or a corresponding administrative division in other Lands, the will of the population in the whole district affected must be ascertained. If the territory to 8e disconnected nowhere adjoins the rest of the district, a specific Reich low may declare that the will of the population in the said district is sufficient.
The consent of the population having been ascertained, the government of the Reich shall introduce an appropriate bill for enactment in the Reichstag.
If the unification or disconnection should give rise to a dispute concerning the distribution of property, the Constitutional Court of the German Reich shall decide the sane on the application of one party."
What allows us to do this without a referendum all is Article 167, a transitionary article which states:
"Article 13, sect. 3 to 6 are valid 2 years after announcement of the Reich Constitution."
Which gives us about 10ish more months of time where we can do as we please in terms of territory with the proper political backing.
At some point we do have to stop pissing off our military - the question is whether we need to begin that now, or can afford to work with the Catholic Centre to break Prussia's dominance first.
I want to point out that we're not pissing off the entirety of the military here, just its Prussian component, which only makes up a third of said military. With the other thirds being the Bavarians and other regions. In my understanding, that means that if the Prussian officers want to make this a big deal, it is their fellow officers that they have to go through first. Which means that the military will have an internal power struggle and become a much less cohesive political force.
Could we do mergers of other smaller states then (fold two Mecklenburgs into one, aforementioned three smaller states into newly-organized western states) and how bad it would look? Waldeck historically was merged into Prussia too, and these small states are too in communist uprising zone anyway, might as well not reestablish their own microgovernments.
Also, would Ostfriesland and Osnabruck districts go to Hannover or Oldenburg and what specific territories we're giving out to Braunschweig?
Sorry for all the geographical nitpick questions, kind of nerd on this.
Could we do mergers of other smaller states then (fold two Mecklenburgs into one, aforementioned three smaller states into newly-organized western states) and how bad it would look? Waldeck historically was merged into Prussia too, and these small states are too in communist uprising zone anyway, might as well not reestablish their own microgovernments.
