How Can France Do Better Post Napoleon?- Especially in terms of demographics

Thande

Donor
Depends on what you mean by post Napoleon...post 1815 things are tricky, though I suppose France as run by some Machiavellian in the style of Bismarck could have directed the 1848 revolutions to its own ends.

In terms of demographics you could perhaps have a France that held onto Wallonia, maybe all the Southern Netherlands, Catalonia and Piedmont...those areas could all be acculturated I think. Obviously not the Rhineland or those other Napoleonic annexations though.
 

Susano

Banned
Depends on what you mean by post Napoleon...post 1815 things are tricky, though I suppose France as run by some Machiavellian in the style of Bismarck could have directed the 1848 revolutions to its own ends.
Difficult. I mean, concerning France the German 48ers were somewhat shizoid: On the one hand they glorified France and its revolutions - but of course, OTOH, they glorified the Liberation Wars (as the latter phase of the Sixth Coalition with Napoleon being beaten is called in Germany). As long as France stays away, the former part, with some vague happy feeling of European fraternity might be stronger, but should France meddle I think we can be sure the latter part will be stronger...
 

Thande

Donor
Difficult. I mean, concerning France the German 48ers were somewhat shizoid: On the one hand they glorified France and its revolutions - but of course, OTOH, they glorified the Liberation Wars (as the latter phase of the Sixth Coalition with Napoleon being beaten is called in Germany). As long as France stays away, the former part, with some vague happy feeling of European fraternity might be stronger, but should France meddle I think we can be sure the latter part will be stronger...

I was more thinking of 1848 in Italy rather than Germany. Though I suppose the history there isn't great either.
 
I was more thinking of 1848 in Italy rather than Germany. Though I suppose the history there isn't great either.

I think that a clever France could get part of Belgium during the Belgian revolt. They probably won't get Flanders as Britain would never let the French have the Flemish coast if they could avoid it, but I think a French Wallonia is possible (possibly including what is now Flemish Brabant and Brussels). If Luxemburg remained in personal union with the Netherlands, I think, France could get it too (although that could easily lead to a war with (part of) Germany).

I think that if France plays his cards very well, it is possible to get more out of Italy, although I am not sure how.
 
Well, I can see a tacit understanding betwene the two Empires, but what interest does either side have in an alliance? After all, Prussia wasnt really seen as threat by anybody. It clearly was a rival for Austria, yes, but it was seen by everybody as the junior great power in the German Confederation, behind Austria. The 1866 war and its result was basically a huge surprise for everybody. Thus, its easy for Napoleon to rationalise that any prestige gains of him will be at the cost of Austria, since they will likely have to happen in Italy and Germany, and OTOH Napoleon simply doesnt have anything to offer to Austria.

I, too, see a tacit understanding as the best way to go. I think it's clear that, however odd it may seem, Austria is France's best friend in terms of keeping France's power relatively stronger compared to the other European powers.

Consider the following situation: the 1848 troubles result in the Second Republic, and the inevitable Second Empire, Austria suffers badly from unrest, etc. One difference: the Prussian King accepts the "crown from the gutter". At once you have provided a common cause for Austria and France to unite against, and at the same time the power they have to struggle against is weaker than in 1866 or 1870. I doubt that a German Empire this early can hold together as easily as the North German confederation was later. Napoleon III loses his Austria-hate, and together the two powers disassemble the brief liberal German Empire, say, in the mid-1850's; ensure that Prussia-Germany has angered Russia at some point recently, or that Russia's focus remains on the Ottomans and the Balkans.

Now Prussia's power is broken, and Austria unites everybody-but-Prussia and anybody west of the Rhine in a very loose, feuding pan-German confederation, preferably confederated with all of the Hapsburg possessions; France won't have to worry about Austria nearly as much while Hanoverians are screaming across a diet-hall at Hungarians. France's booty consists of Prussia's old possessions west of the Rhine. The Germans here will cause trouble, as the French caused trouble in Alsace-Lorraine, but that's fine; better France worry about internal dissent than spend millions of francs on costly and useless adventures in Mexico or Africa.

I agree with the earlier assertion that the addition of Belgium to France would be, for the most part, a net gain for France. The issue here is Great Britain. Great Britain needs to "owe one" to France (brief Crimean War?) or be otherwise occupied (Opium War? Sepoy Rebellion?) when France annexes Belgium at some point between 1830 and 1870-ish. Conclude France's foreign policy successes by having the Emperor guarantee the Pope's power in Rome while Austria is busy elsewhere, be an encourager of Sardinia's pretensions while at the same time holding them on a relatively tight leash so as not to provoke anything with Austria, and go into Egypt with a true 50-50 so that Great Britain is forced to work with them in everything.

You now have a French Empire that is one of the four (or five, if Abdul's Ottoman restoration works out ;)) powers in Europe, has reached its "natural" boundary of the Rhine, exercises power over 50% of the Italian states, and doesn't waste unnecessary funds abroad.
 
Bruttoinlandsprodukt :D
I think its GNP in English...
Ah. Didn't realize Monty Burns was a non-native English speaker. Thought it was an English acronym. Thanks.

Although 'inlands' presumably is 'domestic' so GDP rather than GNP, although they usually are much the same.
 

Susano

Banned
Ah. Didn't realize Monty Burns was a non-native English speaker. Thought it was an English acronym. Thanks.

Although 'inlands' presumably is 'domestic' so GDP rather than GNP, although they usually are much the same.

Oh, right. For some reason, the Anglosphere seems to prefer using the GDP, while Germany seems to prefer to measure the BNP (Bruttonationalprodukt, so yes, that would be GNP).
 
Perhaps the Talleyrand Plan for Belgium gets accepted, with the Netherlands annexing Flanders, France annexing Wallonia, and Antwerp being a British protectorate. Works out for Britain a bit, works out for Netherlands certainly, and works out for France.
In the long run, France gets the meatier piece of the leg as it turns out that Wallonia is a great place for industrialisation, giving France a head start for Continental Industrialisation. July Monarchy will probably fall in 1848, which will probably lead to a Second Empire; but at least the Second Empire will have an existing industrial base, increasing its wealth and stability.

Perhaps also have France shift its foreign priorities around a tad. Less Mexico, more Asia and Africa. Or even if it does get involved in Mexico, if they don't send swathes of men into the country to prop up a client-king, they should be fine; shelling the hell out of coastal cities should get the Mexican government to acquiesce quite nicely.
 

Susano

Banned
Why are people jumpoing so much at the Talleryand Plan, and diplomatcis in general? Sure, it means France now gets one part thats well industrialised and with good demographcis, but it still means its vast majority is neither! Its funny in, a way, how it so clearly shows AH.coms inclination away from social history :D Not that I mind, Im more for political history well. But social histroy is the underpinning of it all, and I appreciate it - I just wouldnt want to do it myself, heh. But yes, the Talleryand Plan wont help France in the way the OP focused on. To get what the OP focuses on wed need social changes...
 
Oh, right. For some reason, the Anglosphere seems to prefer using the GDP, while Germany seems to prefer to measure the BNP (Bruttonationalprodukt, so yes, that would be GNP).

It's because the Anglosphere are financiers and the Germans are industrialists *nods wisely*
 
Top