Czarist Russia was also rapidly modernizing by several metrics.
Very true, especially by the 1880's.
I would personally not call A-H a force of particular cultural achievement (a concept that's very hard to quantify) or scientific achievement.
The science was not in the level of Germany. I'll agree there.
Disagree on culture. Franz Liszt for example. Vienna was a city of high culture (just like Paris).
That's a very distant leap. Many events and factors between the creation of Czechoslovakia and 1938 could have resulted in a totally different sequence of events.
Only a two decade leap, which can be big, but it's still important to remember that it was out of the Empire's dissolution that Czechoslovakia, along with many other weaker and divided states were born. It is an important factor in Czechoslovakia's eventual annexation.
Agreed, revolutions and radical breaks have many pitfalls and downsides; however, there isn't always a credible alternative.
Sort of disagree. A better monarch would have done the job better than what occurred in otl. This is a bit weak for historical analysis at the time I'll admit, but I just disagree with the credible alternative in technicality (perhaps at the very time frame).
The results of a century of nation-state rule in central Europe are actually still fairly heterogenous.
Well, forced ethnic removals don't help that.
The results of a century of nation-state rule in central Europe are actually still fairly heterogenous.
Yeah, because mostly Hungarian towns in Southern Slovakia are under Slovakian control. So since the forced assimilation did not succeed (like the forced Magyarization in Slovakia only earlier), ethnic heterogeneity occurs. Not exactly the intended goal.
But I can agree with most other points; so it seems we have a disagreement of nuance, rather than a fundamental disagreement.
Agreed. And you certainly are very knowledgeable. And respectful. So two thumbs up
Where would you say you lean politically? That may explain the nuance.