German gains in event of Entente economic collapse

By the time the Entente as a whole has collapsed economically, Germany will have done so long before. Even in Russia the crisis that happened was one of growth as Tsarist industry's total output was actually growing in the period leading up to the February Revolution. And given that Russia is the most economically vulnerable of the Allies, as French industry IOTL made an amazing recovery from the loss of the great bulk of their industry in 1914.....I might note, too, that the cause of Tsarism's collapse was political, namely the incompetence of Nicholas II and his obsession with supporting Rasputin even if it meant alienating every single one of his supporters, and military in that Tsarist armies lost enthusiasm for the steamroller tactic about 1915 and continued use of it in both success and failure in 1916 killed any residual support in the rank and file of the Russian army and degenerated its combat power, which is why the Tsar couldn't depend on the soldiers to shoot all his enemies for him. Economics actually had nothing whatsoever to do with it in the sense of a Russian economic disintegration.

Short form Tsarist Russia collapsed because they couldn't feed the cities. They couldn't balance use of their railnet between raw materials, finished war materials and food. Sorry that is an economic collapse.

Russian tactics weren't anything to write home about but the key issue was the home front.

What happens in Germany is highly debatable and a good case can be made for German collapse on the home front. The ration levels in German cities speak for themselves. At the same time Germany did manage to avoid total break down of central order following the armistice despite the blockade remaining in place and food output of occupied territories no longer available to take food from.

Michael
 
Not necessarily. Being blockaded, Germany was spending vastly less on imports than the Entente, so foreign exchange wasn't a big problem for them.

The problem is that this also happened in Russia, cut off from foreign aid and ultimately making its own weaponry.

Short form Tsarist Russia collapsed because they couldn't feed the cities. They couldn't balance use of their railnet between raw materials, finished war materials and food. Sorry that is an economic collapse.

Actually they had no problem making things and their factories grew in terms of overall production after the blockade. The problem was that this was despite, not because of, anything the Romanovs did and when they became superfluous and military disasters kept piling up people decided to ditch them. The crisis was one of growth.

Russian tactics weren't anything to write home about but the key issue was the home front.

Which suffered immense morale issues when all the wounded started returning *from* steamroller tactics and when a good number of people a rational conscription policy should have exempted died in the 1914 battles.

What happens in Germany is highly debatable and a good case can be made for German collapse on the home front. The ration levels in German cities speak for themselves. At the same time Germany did manage to avoid total break down of central order following the armistice despite the blockade remaining in place and food output of occupied territories no longer available to take food from.

Michael

Leaving aside that the Kaiser was deposed, a military dictatorship had run Germany into the ground and that in the year the war ended and the years after there were three Communist Putsches by three different movements, a monarchist putsch, and one fascist putsch. :rolleyes:
 
Actually they had no problem making things and their factories grew in terms of overall production after the blockade. The problem was that this was despite, not because of, anything the Romanovs did and when they became superfluous and military disasters kept piling up people decided to ditch them. The crisis was one of growth.

BLINK BINK the Russians had no problem making things? Would you care to rethink that statement perhaps?

Which suffered immense morale issues when all the wounded started returning *from* steamroller tactics and when a good number of people a rational conscription policy should have exempted died in the 1914 battles.

I am sorry I don't believe the record match's what you describe. The key problem was a distribution and supply situation. Which again is an economic collapse.

Leaving aside that the Kaiser was deposed, a military dictatorship had run Germany into the ground and that in the year the war ended and the years after there were three Communist Putsches by three different movements, a monarchist putsch, and one fascist putsch. :rolleyes:

So you are going to count things 5 years after the guns went silent? And lets ignore that all 5 revolts failed for the moment.

The point is that Germany if it made other choices, like not over hyping the Peace Offensive, Germany could have kept going. My point was the base economic conditions got NO better right after the war and they actually got much worse in 1919 especially from a food point of view. At the same time the new Republican government was able to keep central order. I am not saying it was happy land or anything like it. Germany was defeated but at the same time they did nearly win it all.

Michael
 
BLINK BINK the Russians had no problem making things? Would you care to rethink that statement perhaps?

This is quite true, the Bolsheviks were able to fight the entire Russian Civil War, including the Battle of Warsaw, with the last year of Romanov wartime production for Russia's 1917 armies. The Russians had no problem making things, they had an enormous problem with logistics, however.

I am sorry I don't believe the record match's what you describe. The key problem was a distribution and supply situation. Which again is an economic collapse.

Eh, the Russian problem was that the successes of the Zemstvo Unions here were too successful to the point that the Tsar was doomed from Russia's economic growth and his willful idiocy.


So you are going to count things 5 years after the guns went silent? And lets ignore that all 5 revolts failed for the moment.

The point is that Germany if it made other choices, like not over hyping the Peace Offensive, Germany could have kept going. My point was the base economic conditions got NO better right after the war and they actually got much worse in 1919 especially from a food point of view. At the same time the new Republican government was able to keep central order. I am not saying it was happy land or anything like it. Germany was defeated but at the same time they did nearly win it all.

Michael

Yes, I am. Germany never came close to winning it all, it gambled on a major tactical victory at Amiens and failed, and in getting to Amiens it showed war-ADD.
 
The problem is that this also happened in Russia, cut off from foreign aid and ultimately making its own weaponry./QUOTE]

Are the cases comparable?

The Russian ruling elite imploded even while seemingly holding its own in the war, even if making heavy weather, much as Germany was at the same stage. Germany's OTOH (bar only the dynasties [1]) could not be dislodged even after leading her to catastrophc defeat. Her "Bolsheviks" were easily crushed by right wing paramilitaries and her non-Communist left openly sighed with relief when Feldmarschall von Hindenburg graciously consented to stay on as CinC. Is it really credible that the German "top people" would lose their hold after winning the war, or even coming out ahead in a compromise settlement? [2]

[1] Even they could probably have held on but for the impression that the Allies would be unwilling to treat with the Kaiser.

[2] Certainly a compromise peace would have looked very much like a defeat to much of public opinion in the Allied countries, and if people there were saying they had lost, it shouldn't be too hard to persuade ordinary Germans that they had won.
 
Top