The Dogger Bank War - how a North Sea battle changed the course of the 20th century
- Thread starter Onkel Willie
- Start date
I really, really really don't want a German dominated Europe tbh. Both because I'm a Teaboo (being a brit myself) and also because they're... Repressive and authoritarian and kinda bad/worse than, say, France? I mean, it's colonialism, there are no angels here, but still.
East first together with Italy and in 1913? Oh my... Could get quite complicated as well as long, how's the Haber-Bosch process coming along?
What do you mean? Were the Herero Genocide and the Rape of Belgium just figments of my imagination then?
Can anyone say Fascist France and Fascist Russia (or whatever alt-fascism is called)?
Tyr Anazasi
Banned
Ban
There was no Herero Genocide. When Trotha gave his orders, the damage had been done. Trotha was an idiot and tried to cover his incompetence with such orders. Indeed the Herero had been led by his own leaders into the desert. That was no real great moment of German history though, but we could start the discussions about British, French and especially Belgian colonial history here. In no case though the Reich government had ordered such a crime. After it became public, Trotha was relieved.
Source: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/voelkermord-an-den-hereros-in-deutsch-suedwestafrika-a-1098649.html
OTOH look at Togo, German East Africa under Schnee or Samoa under Solf. In 1914 there were over 1.000 schools in German East Africa, a number not reached in 1925 under British rule.
And the Rape of Belgium? Well, if you mean the attack, you have a point. It was illegal to attack Belgium. But rape? There were many cases, in which civilians acted in a kind contrary to the rules of war and were shot. Such stories were, of course, denied by the Belgians. Recent researches, however, relativize that denials. Source: Ulrich Keller: Schuldfragen: Belgischer Untergrundkrieg und deutsche Vergeltung im August 1914.
Again I don't say, there were no crimes.
Yet again I could answer with the British blockade or forcing Greece into the war.
However, this discussion could derail the whole thread. I think, we should discuss it elsewhere.
Lolwut?
Imperial Germany had universal male suffrage when only the rich could vote in Britain. Public nudity was legal in Germany when doing so in Britain could land you in jail. They also pioneered public welfare, had the first female police officers in the world, and ironically enough, when in France anti-Semitism was considered fashionable and patriotic, in Imperial Germany Jews were respected and enjoyed legal freedoms and protections, as well as wielded great influence. Just off the top of my head, there are the Rothschild family and Walther Rathenau as examples of Jews who were both respected and powerful in Imperial Germany.
Imperial Germany also led the way in scientific research and technological development, and ensured that German would be the language of science until Nazis rose to power.
The point is generally fair, but perhaps over stated. You did not have to be rich to vote in the UK after 1867, but certainly it was not adult male sufferage But then the Franchise in Prussia was not exactly free and fair.
Tyr Anazasi
Banned
60% of the men in Britain were allowed to vote in 1884. On the Reich level the Germans could vote universally, with few exceptions, like soldiers.
i said it was generally fair, only slightly over-stated, your reply does not change that. I don't consider that 60 per cent of the male population would be considered a definition of "rich"
Tyr Anazasi
Banned
Well, IMO even the Prussian franchise was fairer, as even the poorest could generally vote. On the Reich level 90+% could vote, making the franchise much more democratic than the British.
Of course, no one here (I think) is endorsing colonialism. But as European colonial powers went pre-1914, the Germans were arguably the most progressive.
If you're looking for genocidal beasts, why, look at the Belgians.
If you're looking for genocidal beasts, why, look at the Belgians.
Oh yeah, definitely. Considering the death toll in the Congo is between 2 to 10 million, that means on average 6 million Congolese died to fill up Leopold II's coffers.
*spits*
Well there's the Herero and Namaqua genocide.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_genocide
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_genocide
