How Great A Burden For The Weimar Republic Was The Treaty Of Versailles? Essay, Research Paper
Aim: Find evidence for and against the assumption
that the Treaty of Versailles was a burden to the new democratic Weimar
government in Germany.The war had not been successful. Russia?s departure from
the war had had no effect on the strength of the allies and Germany was in an
imminent position, it was going to lose the war. At the time of the First World
War Germany was run by the Kaiser who was a semi-absolutist, he could appoint
who he wished, but also had to consult the Reichstag, an assembly of members
elected by universal male suffrage. During the war two other people joined in
running the country with the Kaiser, General Ludendorff and Field Marshal
Hindenburg. These two men plus the Kaiser exercised a virtual military
dictatorship over Germany. The war in 1916 looked good for the Germans, they
were winning and Hindenburg and Ludendorff blocked several opportunities for
peace. In 1918 it was a different story, the Germans were fighting a war on two
fronts and the naval blockade imposed on Germany meant that food and other
essential goods were not being brought in. The USA had got involved at that
point and poured in a further 2 million troops to support the war effort.
Ludendorff and Hindenburg clearly saw that the end of the war was imminent and
quickly came up with a plan to pass the defeat of the war on someone else they
started there own boigiour revolution. They managed to persuade the Kaiser to
abdicate they then started an Imperial rule again under the control of Prince
Max of Baden. Prince Max of Baden who was the chancellor, until February 1919,
he led the Imperial provisional government set up by the two Generals and the
Kaiser, but the American President knew what was happening and refused to start
talks with Germany until it had a proper government. The different parties in
Germany such as the SPD?s and the USPD?s started a constituent assembly, The
Weimar Constitution. The Weimar constitution was actually very democratic.
Proportional representation meant that everyone in Germany had some sort of
representation. Article 1 of the constitution states that ?The German
Federation is a republic. Political authority is derived from the people.? This
was very advanced for its era, especially the fact that voting included women suffrage
as well as male suffrage. Another good example of it being very democratic in
its thinking is article 41, which states that ?The National President is chosen
by the whole German people.? Not only could the people choose their own
government, but they also had a vote in who led that government. Many
historians have said that it was an amazing and bold political idea, of which
aspects still survive in today?s political systems. As a historian/book writer
once said, a countries political system can not be changed quickly, revolution
only brings the same type of autocratic government with a different face and
promises of a new improved political system, change is gradual. I think that
this government had come into existence too quickly, it was a good fair way of
running a country, but Germany wasn?t ready for a system, which was so
democratic and fair. Germany had only ever experienced Imperialism and this
government was considered to be radical, I don?t even believe that the people
who run this government were ready to up hold its democratic nature. Even so
the concepts behind the idea were very good indeed, it was the first government
ever to give the people a choice. ?? The new Weimar Republic named after the small town where
its first parliament met was far different from the proud Imperial country
founded by Bis?marck. Few Germans admired a government, which had been born out
of defeat; whose representatives had signed the hated Versailles Treaty. From
the start it was plagued by revolutions, riots and dis?obedience of every kind,
especially as its constitution allowed the German provinces a great deal of
freedom. In Berlin a rising of revolutionary socialists called Spartakists had
to be crushed by the army; a similar rebellion was put down in Munich.
Unfortunately, as in Italy, the German army did little about disorder organised
by parties of which its leaders approved. Ex-servicemen were able to join to?gether
in units called Free Corps and allowed to murder and beat up their opponents.
Unofficial ?courts? sentenced and executed their enemies. Once all the party members
had been voted in, by universal male and female suffrage, a constituent assembly
was set up. A constitution was written and all the assembly members were asked
to sign it, and this is when the Weimar constitution was born. The constitution
written by a liberal lawyer called Hugo Preuss, contained a voting system
called proportional representation. This was the first big problem for the new government,
its very own voting system. Proportional representation (PR) basically means
that all the parties that are voted into government have a vote in the legislation?s
that are proposed by the president and his party. This meant that the
presidents government would need at least 50.1% to pass anything, no government
ever managed to achieve this landslide majority therefore coalition government
was a common procedure in the Weimar governmental process. The majority party
would have to find another party with similar ideals and persuade them to vote
in accordance with their legislative ideas. More time was spent getting other
parties to agree with you than actually improving the laws of the nation. The
constitution also stated that ?The President of the Federation may dissolve the
Reichstag? this basically gave the President the right to run the country on
his own, with out the support from the elected government. Ebert, the President
of Germany, did disband the German government at a point and ruled by him self,
this shows the power of the national President, and it is almost as absolute as
the Kaisers powers once were. Another one of the articles in the constitution state
that ?The national President has supreme command over all the armed forces of
the Federation?. If the President liked he could start a war without the
consent of his elected government or he could use the army to take over the
country and impose a dictatorship over Germany. The government engaged in too
much procrastination and not enough action it was basically a failure from the
start. ?? After the war and the
reshuffling of Germanys government the new Weimar government were asked to
discuss and sign a treaty. One of the first questions were whether or not
Germany should be able to vote for or against the proposals made, the members
voted no they shouldn?t. This left Germany powerless to any decisions made by
the members of the treaty, and therefore not responsible for any of the
conclusions that the committee came to. Germany was also blamed for starting
the war, which made it easier for the allies to punish the Germans. Thousands
of millions of pounds were to be paid in reparations to the allies, Germany
lost lots of important useful land and they were not allowed to have an army
over 100,000 men, they were also not allowed to join with Austria and certain
zones were demilitarised. The biggest blow to Germany was the fact that the
government had to sign this treaty. The treaty was unpopular but the fact that
the government had agreed to this treaty was even worse, they had betrayed the
German people. ?? Was the Treaty of Versailles
really the reason for the fall of the Weimar republic? Well, throughout the
Weimar Republic?s history its opponents laid the blame for Germany?s humiliation
at Versailles at the door of the new republic and the ?November Criminals? who
had stabbed the German army in the back. If nothing else the Treaty caused
complete humiliation and national animosity towards the USA and its European
counterparts. Opponents used the treaty against the Weimar republic to create
huge discontentment among the people. The reparations were ridiculously high,
and Germany couldn?t pay them. Germany was defenceless against invasion, which
France did on many occasions to take Germany?s coal and metal because essentially
Germany had broken the treaty by not being able to pay the reparations. The
whole treaty was a mess; the German public felt betrayed by their own
government because they are the ones who agreed to sign the treaty. Hugo
Preuss, 1923 said ?The criminal madness of the Versailles Diktat was a shameless
blow in the face to hopes of political and economic recovery.? ?The opposition to the government reviled in the opportunity to
ruin its reputation and cause the German public to be ashamed and disillusioned
in their government. Riots were a common occurrence for the government to deal
with, and towards the end revolutionary take-overs were also quite common. In
four years 376 political murders took place in Germany. If the killers were
communists they were caught and put to death. If not they were given light
sentences or allowed too escape. Nowhere was this lawlessness more widespread
than in Munich. Capital of Bavaria Here the authorities made no secret of their
contempt for the Republic Some even wanted Bavaria to become independent again
under its old royal family. When Munich s police chief was told that there were
murder gangs operating in the city he replied. ?Yes, but not enough of them?. Political troubles were only part of the story in
1923, when the French army occupied the Ruhr coalfields because Germany had
failed to make certain payments of reparations. German workers began a new war with
their old enemy All over the Ruhr there were strikes and acts of sabotage.
Before long factory and mining work stopped altogether since the area produced
80 per cent of Germany?s coal, iron and steel, the economic effects were felt
throughout Ger?many. Production slowed down, causing widespread unemployment
Worse still German money began to lose its value because it no longer
represented real wealth In January 1923 72.000 marks equaled £1 Ten months
later it took 16.000 million marks to equal a £1. Germans found their savings
wiped away overnight, their wages useless pieces of paper. On the other hand there is evidence which does
show that the treaty of Versailles didn?t actually effect the government
directly. The reparations were too high for Germany to pay and so it didn?t
actually cause a constant economic depression, in fact in November 1923 a new
currency, the Rentenmark, ends inflation crisis and economic recovery begins.
Germany, in 1924 receives foreign help in the form of loans, which literally
marks the end of Germany?s punishment. Pacts between Germany and France and
Germany and the USSR were formed in 1926-1927. Germany even joins the League of
Nations, which gave them an important chance to help make decisions on European
matters; it also marked the fact that Germany?s European counterparts were recognising
Germany again. A quote from a book called ?Weimar and the Rise of Hitler?
written by A. Nicholls in 1979 states ?The real damage the treaty did to
Germany was to disillusion more moderate men who might otherwise have supported
their new republic.? I believe this confirms the fact that it wasn?t the treaty
its self that was the problem, it was the way it was used as propaganda against
the government that caused the biggest problems. J.Hiden, The Weimar Republic,
1974 says that ?It is no longer acceptable to blame the ultimate failure of the
Republic on the treaty of Versailles, and even its economic effects are
disputed?. These two sources seem to be reliable as both have hindsight also
they clearly illustrate the fact that the treaty was hardly at all to blame for
the collapse of the Republic. These three main factors potentially put Germany
in a strong position: ·
The break-up of the Tsarist, Austro-Hungarian and
Turkish empires created opportunities for Germany, since it was now surrounded
by small, weak states, especially in the east. ·
France failed to achieve its aims of a permanently
weakened Germany and a secure border ·
Reparations were not so burdensome that they
destroyed the German economy Above is just one of many anti-republican propaganda
posters used to rally support for groups like the Nazi party. The Treaty was
used in a very unfair way towards the government, directly the treaty didn?t
have a significant effect on Germany, but indirectly it was used to put down
the government and cause national hatred for there leaders. J. Hiden said ?The
pernicious effects of the Treaty of Versailles lie?.in the way it created added
dimensions to existing internal conflicts and contradictions?. The government
was weak, and with the treaty causing so many problems the government wasn?t
decisive enough to deal with those problems. In conclusion I think that the constitution was a
problem on its own for Germany. The written constitution wasn?t properly
thought through, and although the ideas and concepts are good and fair I don?t
believe that Germany was ready for something quite so radical and democratic.
In relation to the treaty I think it did pose as a threat to the government,
not because of the economic repercussions, but because of the way in which it
was used to rally support against the government. Germany was going through
very precarious times and a decisive strong government was needed, which is
exactly what the Weimar constitution didn?t offer.