Nonetheless, the french republic volunteers won some victories OTL and were very near to in other cases.[/source]
Certainly, but evey battle is a unique situation. Judging American performance in 1812 by New Orleans alone, and there goes Canada. I suspect an NO type situation in your battles (do name them): poor planning by the Germans, hubris, a fine French commander, a crack force, an excellent defensive positon, all those sorts of factors which can win a battle but not a war.
And there are enough veterans to serve as cadre and officers, more than was the case in 1792.
I am dubious about this figure. In 1792, the royal army had not just been badly defeated in battle and had a great many of its men captured. Have you a source for your figures? And are they adjusted for proportion? In absolute terms, more officers in 1871 seems plausible. In 1871 there are also a great deal more Frenchmen, and, come to that, Germans.
1) France was also very disunited in 1792-93
Certainly, but not to the extent that the allies could defeat them on one front and make a seperate peace, of that some regiments would suddenly withdraw to partition Poland. The allies most certainly had it worse.
2) South German'Sates didn't come into this war willingly OTL. They were forced to do so by treaty and public enthosiams. WHen enthousiams wanes due to casualties and no end of war in sight, these states are going to want out. It won't work, but it will induce some frailty in the systems in decades to come.
Write that public enthusiasm remark down! Red handed! Red handed!
Ahem. Although really, you have a funny definition of willing, if poular support and an obligation under a fair and equal treaty signed in light of threats to national sovereignty from the common enemy is "unwilling".
I believe Germany has already been united. Even if enthusiasm in the south does wane (and I seem to recall that it was Baden, not Bismarck, who was most enthusiastic about German Alsace) faster than in the north, there is no way for them to ditch.
Because it takes too long to write all the effects and I don't have the time yet.
The original PoD is as follows : Hugo comes back to Paris a few days earlier tha OTL.
Hmmm. I think I shall have to wait till you've got your butterflies clear to comment, but it seems interesting.
I doubt you can go the consequences I described from just that ( or how that leads to the Marseillaise getting her original name back ), and I don't have the time now to write down and explain the pages in between.
I understand. Sorry for being a bit nasty earlier.
I didn't comment because I don't think it was worth.
You are looking at this backward and see that there was no serious movement in the area which is nowadays germany.
IOW, all the separatist movements which existed realised their goal of not beeing part of Germany.
Uh, no. There was never a seperatist movement in Lower Silesia, East Brandenburg, Vorpommern, or northern East Prussia. The ones in southern East Prussia and Upper Silesia never suceeded democratically. Do you know what the Oder-Neisse line was?
Now, look at the areas which XIXth century german nationalists claimed as part of Germany...
This is absolutely absurd. Let me demostrate by anaolgy.
Some French far-rightists claimed for a long time that Algeria was part of France.
It isn't. In cultural and linguistic terms, it never was.
Ergo, not all areas claimed by French nationalists are actually France.
French nationalists [and all sane people] claim that Provence is part of France.
Therefore a long and bloody guerilla war could easily develop in Provence, having dire consequences for France and the world.
It happened in Algeria, after all!
Yes it does. You do not consider it possible that any kind of PoD could change the OTL sentiment and make that german National identity more fragile than it was OTL. Or that any kind of secret police would make german people more recentful of prussian domination than there were OTL.
I do not consider it possible to cross the Channel in Rhine barges whilst giving a great navy the slip. Forgve my playing, as it were, the Hitler card, but not believing it possible to bring about a specific, very unlikely thing within a very short, defined time limit does not a determinist make. To continue the comparison, you are taking my belief that Sealion could not have suceeded and claiming that I believe that no German military force could every have succesfully launched an invasion of Great Britain. Which is silly and determinist. And not what I'm saying at all.
Yes, and they create tensions everywhere ( See, for exemple, the separation of The Netherlands and Belgium, or the problems in France). Save, seemingly in Germany. At least according to you.
Excuse me, did I say that? I must ask you to refrain from putting words into my mouth. The problems in France never resulted in succesful seperatism between the years of [almost any two dates in French history] because owing to the anture of France's problems they could never have physically destroyed the nation. The same is true of Germany's problems in the Kulturkampf. They were real. They caused tensions. They couldn't have destroyed the state.
Again, you're looking at it from backward, by claiming that area that didn't end up as part of germany were never german.
I need not repond to this as it is a lie. See "I believe Austria did have a German consciousness" and "There was never seperatism in Lower Silesia". You are telling blatant, provable lies about what I have said. Please don't
That was not the opinion of the XIXth century german nationalist and not what they attempted.
Man, we sure here a lot of these nationalists. One would think they were in power! That aside, I don't actually understand this remark.
The area on which they managed to stamp their idea of German culture end up in Germany; the ones in which they failed, or which rejected Prussian domination, didn't. that is OTL.
That is a lie, unless being forcibly removed by Soviet armed forces now qualifies as rejecting Prussian domination. That is a lie which is starting to verge on a Deutschbasch. I repeat: Have you ever heard of the Oder-Neisse line?
A different tL could see a different germany, either bigger or smaller, depending on the events. I can go for either with a 1871 PoD ( for bigger, if Alsatians had been treated better, I may be German at this point ).
Do I deny this? Not in the slightest. All true and good sense. All I'm saying is that with a PoD in 1871, detaching Bavaria and the south from Germany by the popular will before 1900 is pretty much impossible.
Switzerland was, along with Netherlands, Most of Belgium, Part of Northern France ( in addition to Alsace and Lorraine, obviously ), Austria, obviously, some small parts of Italy and parts of Central EUrope, up till Lituania and parts of Bielorussia.
Belorus? You appear to be talking about the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party. This is a wonky list, though. Estonia and Latvia are off it despite being much more claimed than Lithuania, while "Mailand" is apparently far more important than "Warschau".
As for Austria, there were some which were for unification ( pushed along by the Nazis, as you note ) but also quite a few which resisted.
Apology for playing the Hitler card hereby withdrawn. Until you explain how the Nazis were responsible for the German Republic of German Austria, Federal State of Germany, 1919, then you can consider us Hitler-card even. No wait, my Hitler card was bearly a Hitler card and actually made sense. You're just saying "The Nazis did it!" to try and cancel out something (the German solidarity of Austria in one of Germany's darkest hours) which contradicts your view of Germannes as something prone to shattering when dropped. Despite the fact that the Nazis had not yet been founded in Austria, or, I believe, Germany, So yeah.
Just to be clear, I don't think that a 1871 PoD can lead to an immediate dissolution of Germany. Just that it can set the stage for events which will lead to it half a century down the line, after two Eurpean wars ( which was not the case OTL, but the circomstances differ and the national identity isn't as strang in the TL I'm thinking about that IOTL )
And it ould appear that we have discovered the heart of the matter, the bone of contention, the apple of discord!
This is the before 1900 forum. The thread says "by 1900".
So it would seem that we are no longer really having a debate. However, I would appreciate if you responded to this post because some of the things you said, like that low Nazi remark, got my blood pumping and I want to finish this thing.