[1] In its early issues, Süddeutsche Monatshefte hosted mainly essays by the likes of Hofmiller (such as his 1909 putdown of the modernist author Robert Walser),[9] Carl Spitteler, and Karl Voll, and poetry by Paul Ilg [de].

As Anglophiles, Hofmiller, Lujo Brentano, and Theodor Vogelstein [de] suggested fusing Anglo–American lessons in modernity with the German Volkstum, to make Germany a more competitive capitalist nation; in 1906, a Dr. Paul Tesdorf went further, promoting eugenics as a means to engineer a better people.

An early contributor, Henry Thode, wrote articles which censured modern art from conservative and antisemitic positions, attacking modernist critics such as Julius Meier-Graefe.

[20] In January 1913, Süddeutsche Monatshefte made official its doctrinal links with anti-democratic conservatism: Robert von Pöhlmann published an article condemning majoritarianism, demanding instead the remodeling of Germany into a Kulturstaat ("civilization-state"), with a politically enshrined social stratification.

[22] The magazine's nationalism became extreme over the following months, with Cossmann arguing in favor of Siegfriede ("victory peace")[23] and Müller celebrating Prussia as a "heroic-aristocratic warrior state";[24] similarly, Hermann Oncken and Friedrich Meinecke wrote praises of militarism and Prussian virtues.

[25] Süddeutsche Monatshefte promoted an increasingly radical right-wing platform, supporting militarists Alfred von Tirpitz and Erich Ludendorff while excoriating more moderate military and political elements.

[28] In 1915, Eduard Meyer, Georg Kerschensteiner, and Ludwig Curtius published here their thoughts on the political and historical revelations of war, introducing theses about nationalist rivalry as the source of progress and European civilization.

[29] Aiming to strengthen German propaganda in neutral Spain, the magazine hosted exposes depicting Iberian Federalism as a product of French intrigues, and homages to the conservative Mauristas.

[1] In that context, its antisemitism also became more radical, integrating notions about "Jewish Bolshevism", and dropping ethical distinctions between assimilated and non-assimilated Jews,[35] although Cossmann remained rather critical of such analogies.

[1] Cossmann found backing from powerful industrialists, aristocrats, and Bavarian People's Party (BVP) figures, who also sponsored him and his secretary Franz von Gebsattel to buy and publish the daily Münchner Neuste Nachrichten, overbidding their Jewish competitors.

[39] This circle included Tirpitz, Prince Eugen zu Oettingen-Wallerstein [de] of the secretive Gäa-Club, Gustav von Kahr, Albert Vögler, and corporate backers from the Gute Hoffnungshütte.

[43] From 1921, Cossmann's magazine took notice of the emerging Conservative Revolutionary movement, accepting its critique of Völkisch traditionalism, and bringing in the radical sociologist Max Hildebert Boehm [de] as a contributor.

[52] Cossmann won when Judge Hans Frank, himself a radical nationalist, ruled that he had acted in the public interest by publishing wartime letters attributed to SPD pacifist Felix Fechenbach.

[54] In its final decade, Süddeutsche Monatshefte became "mainstream",[55] a "serious journal of the conservative bourgeoisie", hosting contributions by right-wing assimilated Jews such as Leo Baeck, alongside antisemitic Germans like Theodor Fritsch, Ernst Jünger, and Count Reventlow.

[59] These works were complimented in 1929 by a Friedrich Burgdörfer [de] essay on biopolitics and the alleged Slavic population pressure on Germany's eastern frontier, suggesting counteraction through German recolonization.

[63] Jünger's articles, however, showed leniency toward modernization and a more critical stance against Völkisch tropes: he conceived of the "German national revolution" as an urban uprising, and decried peasant conservatism as outdated, "doomed to failure".

[64] Süddeutsche Monatshefte writers were also undecided about the import of physical education and the Weimar youth's emphasis on recreational sport: Ulrich von Wilamowitz deplored these developments, while Wilhelm Wien saw in them signs of recovery from "the postwar chaos".

[67] Shortly after the onset of the Great Depression, Süddeutsche Monatshefte resumed campaigning for "the revival of war generation" and the fulfillment of its "historical destiny"—themes central to the essays of Edgar Julius Jung, which saw print in Cossmann's magazine.

[71] The economic crisis brought in opportunities for corporatist and social credit schemes, which were taken up by Ludwig Reiners [de], who proposed creating a national labor conscription service on such grounds.

[23] In early 1933, Cossmann and his collaborator Erwein von Aretin [de], who had openly criticized Adolf Hitler in 1923, called for a monarchist coup against the nascent Nazi regime that would see Crown Prince Rupprecht placed on the throne.

[76] Having already hosted comments by Erwin Liek [de] on holistic health in November 1932,[77] other such issues had contributions by Nazified Neo-Adlerian therapists: Fritz Künkel, who favored reintegrating patients within the "greater community"; and Harald Schultz-Hencke, who talked about a "rediscovery of the soul" by psychiatric science.