Remove ads

Democracy's Torch (Sky plays Darkest Hour)

Reader mode
HOMELESS MAN MAKES STATEMENT: "Grabbing some of the free copies on offer showed it to be inadequate even as toilet paper. Guess what I voted."
 
Now's a good a time as any for an UPDATE!

Sky-sensei has passed, and has resumed writing. He says Changing Destiny is first.
 
Theravis said:
I meant because unlike Belgium, it isn't (IIRC) guaranteed by Britain and would still let us bypass the Maginot Line.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Switzerland is always neutral.

Meanwhile, we won't be able to defeat Britain by sub spamming. We need shipyards to build our surface fleet.

Likewise, we need better ground equipment fast.

On top of that, if we can focus on jet propulsion for aircraft, the RAF shall fall early.

… But I'm getting too far ahead of myself.
 
I promise I'll get back to this soon.

But first, I wonder if I shouldn't have gone for HoI IV instead (ignoring for the moment I don't own said game) because:


Or for:


(the ship is from Stellaris. The reference is obvious once you find it

Also, this was PDox's idea of an April Fools joke)


:V



(in all seriousness, as soon as I'm sure I haven't borked something in the modding I'll work on another update)
 
Skywalker_T-65 said:
I promise I'll get back to this soon.

But first, I wonder if I shouldn't have gone for HoI IV instead (ignoring for the moment I don't own said game) because:


Or for:


(the ship is from Stellaris. The reference is obvious once you find it

Also, this was PDox's idea of an April Fools joke)


:V



(in all seriousness, as soon as I'm sure I haven't borked something in the modding I'll work on another update)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hooray! My plot to annex Luxemburg is advanced!
 
Remove ads
Part 4: Social Democrats hate Versailles Too
  • Threadmarks
    • Part 4: Social Democrats hate Versailles too.
    ​
    In hindsight, as is the case with many historical events, it should have come as little surprise that the Reichstag overwhelming voted against the Treaty of Strasbourg. To do otherwise would have been political suicide and most members of the German government understood this. For the first, and perhaps only time, this also applied to the crossing of party lines between the SPD and NSDAP. Or the BVP and DNVP. The Zentrum and the Communists. While each member of the government had their own reasons- Nazis out of hatred for the Versailles Diktat, Social Democrats with the knowledge that their constituents were more eager to see the restrictions of Versailles gone than to accept Entente handouts -they all voted more or less for the same reason in the end. Preventing Germany from bowing to the whims of the Great War's victors once again. And to keep their support from the German population, a population that would go to more extreme options if they felt they were being ignored.

    It did, however, require intense negotiations by the German representative in Strasbourg.



    Arthur Crispien was a man of intense morals. His loyalty to the Social Democratic movement was never in doubt. Some could even call him a crusader for his cause, with his refusal to toe the party line in the Great War and equally refusing to join the Comintern. His foreign experience made him a prime candidate for Foreign Minister in the Wels government, and thus it was little surprise that he was the man in Strasbourg. On the other hand...

    His firmly held beliefs tended to mash against the Entente diplomats quite regularly. More so the French than the British, perhaps, but both of the western allies were less than happy with Germany's resolve. The French minister, Joseph Paul-Boncour, was a man every bit the equivalent of Crispien. A long-serving member of France's Socialist movements, and one with much experience in foreign policy. The two men sparred with each other quite often during the tense negotiations at Strasbourg.

    It was here that, socialist or not, Boncour demonstrated the line of the French government.

    "Why should Germany attempt to shirk her responsibilities given by treaty and signed by the current government of the German Reich? France is perfectly willing to revoke Germany's reparation requirements should your government accept the remainder of the terms laid out at Versailles."

    Those words, delivered at a particularly heated moment in the negotiations, quite clearly showed the French stance. Germany should toe the line and not go one step over it. If the reparations were to be waived, then the remainder of the Treaty must stay in place. It became something of a rallying cry among the German public, however, when it and the response by Crispien were leaked to German newspapers.

    "Why indeed, Herr Boncour. Why should the current government of Germany continue to bear responsibility for the Kaiser's actions? Has Germany not been punished enough, when her citizens starve in the streets and our military was barely capable of putting down an armed revolt? Herr Boncour, I assure you that I share the belief in peace and that there is no need for a massive military along the lines that we had before the Great War. However, I do not share the belief that Germany is to blame for the Great War or that her people, many of whom were not involved, should continue to suffer under the weight of a treaty signed by a victor over a defeated foe.

    By all means, continue to argue for the treaty. I will not go against the will of the German people and sign this slip of paper. I will not see Hitler, whom I may remind you is far more dangerous than you know, come to power out of a sense of betrayal by the current government. That is the stance of myself, the German government, and the German people."

    Even the Nazi Party papers, once past the initial outrage at the portrayal of themselves and their would-be Führer, were quick to praise Crispien for his words. Germany would never bow to the Diktat, no matter what Britain and France offered in return. It was not a complete break from the obligations of Versailles- neither Chancellor Wels, nor Arthur Crispien, were ready to make that step -but it set in motion future events. It can be argued Strasbourg was the beginning of the end for the Versailles terms.

    Most certainly the end of whatever rapprochement had been made between France and Germany.



    The French felt humiliated by Strasbourg. These negotiations had been intended for a dual purpose. To bolster a fractured home front by showing that France would not bow to Germany or the rumblings of German rearmament. And to show a hard, and united with Britain, line on any attempts of repudiating the treaties that had ended the Great War. Directed at Austria and Hungary as much as Germany, this was a dismal failure on many fronts. Not least of which being the lack of a united front with Great Britain.

    True, the British placed a formal complaint with the Weimar government. True, the British at least outwardly supported the French stance on Versailles. But the United Kingdom was a country more concerned with her fraying Empire and worries at home than with pushing down Germany yet again. There was also a certain belief by the British representative....



    ...that Germany under Wels was better than a Germany under Hitler. Few men could truly claim to understand what John Simon thought, in this or in any other situation. What little could be gleaned from the secretive man was simple though. The British government had no desire to fight another European war, especially not over French demands placed on Germany. There had been a certain amount of celebration in Westminster, in fact, when Hitler had been defeated in the Weimar elections. It was a shining example of German democracy at work-

    though it was conveniently ignored that the Nazi party still held a large enough majority that, should the Coalition fracture they would be the largest voice in the Reichstag

    -and that punishing the Germans would send the wrong signal. In the mind of Viscount Simon, as much as anyone could know it, the logic was simple. It was far better to foster relations with a democratic Germany than to push the German people into the arms of radicals. Britain was now, as ever, dedicated to preserving a balance of power in Europe. Crippling the German military at Versailles had been intended to do such after the Great War.

    And now, despite the outward support for France, Britain congratulated the German government behind closed doors. Congratulated them for their support of democracy and the will of the people over the demagoguery of Hitler. For a democratic Germany was a Germany unlikely to cause wars in Europe once more.



    Of course, France could not back down from her demands. The French government was even less willing to see a war than the British, well-understanding that if Germany were allowed to mobilize it may mean devastation of a countryside still recovering from the Great War. However, backing down entirely would be seen as weakness at a time when France was struggling to hold together a Republic riven by social disorder. France was not as unstable as Germany had been. But it was impossible to deny that the French government was desperate to not be seen as 'weak' at such a crucial time.

    Widely regarded as a punitive punishment for the German government, France pulled their support for the German economy. Trade between the two nations had been a widely growing market between the wars, however, that would change now. France had to show determination to punish Germany and Germany could not back down from resolving the lingering resentment over Versailles.

    The two states were at an impasse.

    And on the home front, Germany had other problems to deal with.



    For Chancellor Wels was determined to do something to help the suffering German people, even if Germany's funds remained limited. Was a welfare system the way to go? That would be decided by the Reichstag and not the Chancellor.



    This is another event in the base mod. Though I've modified the text depending on which option one takes at Strasbourg. The original version fires regardless of if you take the French bribe or not. Which can be...immersion breaking...when you see the text of 'the money won at Strasbourg' used for the Welfare system. Despite saying 'ha ha, no' to France.

    Anywho, event choices:


    [] Expanding welfare:


    [] Not expanding Welfare:



    From a gameplay perspective...well.

    From a roleplay perspective though...

    Just like the last vote, place your choice like in a quest. RP or no RP.
    ​
     
  • Threadmarks
    • "What is the purpose of our country, our national economy, if not to care for our constituents?"

    [X] Expanding Welfare
     
    "There's a system much like the one being proposed today already in use on Mars; without it I wouldn't be here to tell you. I am confident that with sufficient effort Germany can replicate the success had by the Martians."

    Ah, Ronald

    [X] Expanding welfare
     
    "How will we rebuild our Germany if we do not have men and women fit enough to get back to work?"

    [X] Expanding welfare
     
    [X] Expanding welfare
    "While welfare is always a risky business, prone to failure, the Volk must be united against the French. We can scale it back later when the crisis is past."
     
    Simply because we have an office on a capitol building does not place us above citizens. We serve at their discretion. It was they who elected us, and it will be they who we must fight for. How can we call ourselves men and women of the people, if we try to oppress them, and forbid them aid in times of need?

    [X] Expand welfare.

    p.s. yaaay.
     
    Last edited:
    [X] Expanding welfare:

    "Once more, we must turn inward. Put off the days where war was a fact of life; instead to heal our own rifts."
     
    Reinhard von Smalhausen steepled his fingers as the strategy session among the heavy hitters of the DNVP continued. The SDP welfare proposal was extensive but lacked further military expenditure. Now the question was the timing of supporting the proposal for maximum political capital. After a half hour of debate he finally spoke.

    "The question comes down to whether we openly join hands with the SDP on this proposal now, or wait to extract concessions. My analysis is that doing either of these will not turn into votes from the SDP to us. What we should determine is what action will extract support from the Nazis to us. I hold that the sooner we act with the SDP without any immediate demands or concessions the more irrelevant we show the Nazis to be. For now it is most important that we become the option for voters looking for a greater military, which means we must make the Nazis look as impotent as possible. And as we support the SDP in public solidarity, we privately tell the Prime Minister that the next budget should include investment in infrastructure; infrastructure that supports future military growth. I say we must support this welfare bill.

    [X] Expand welfare.
     
    [X] Expand welfare.

    If only for the simple fact that if the citizens of Germany starve, how can we rise from the ashes of the Great War? Will they not hate us, sitting here in the Capitol when measures could have been taken to alleviate their suffering?

    I won't have that on my conscience.
     
    "... and we can see how this rejection of revision on the Versaille treaty heightens the possibility of a future war between the Bourgiouse powers.

    On a different note, one of my sources reports almost being attacked by a government official who identified her as working for our cause. I have ordered them to discontinue contact at the moment even though the official in question has a certain reputation that prevented undue suspicion from being raised. I would, however like to formally inquire if Central is conducting any operations involving flouride and the German water supply."
    -Partial Transcript of Agent ON Report from Soviet Archives
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top