Modern Imperialism
Banned
How would trade, industries, and economics develop without the world wars? This applies to regional and internationally economics.
How would immigration/emigration impact all this? Europe going to have a much larger population especially Russia. Won’t Germany and Western Europe have to deal with large influx of Easterner European immigrants especially of Jews from the Russian Empire? Will Europe have a overpopulation issue?Let's start with the big obvious stuff
No large scale collapse of trade, this had tremendous effect on many countries even not involved in the war.
No wartime large scale involvement of the government into the economy, this had great effects especially in the US and Germany
No destruction of economic assets in many countries due to war.
A lot of people that died during the war simply don't die, this had a tremendous effect on many fiends, from physics to engineering
A lot of war specific stuff isn't discovered or produced.
Higher degree of political stability inside every country involved or otherwise.
Smaller deficits and lower taxes overall.
Socialism takes a big hit overall, at least the more radical side. That said, there is no red scare, so for example the socialist party would continue to exist in the US
Overall less political polarization in most countries.
A lot of people aren't called to arms and keep living their lives
Now let's get into the situation inside specific countries
Sweden for example is one of the very few countries that benefitted from the war, because it was able to sell iron to the great powers involved in the war, fixing a lot of the financial problems that Sweden had.
Italy, AH and Russia would continue their incredible economic growth, with the first two converging with North western Europe by the 1940s.
All the countries that are especially dependent on international trade, like many South American countries, Canada, Australia and a lot of European colonies would experience stronger growth. More political stability would especially benefit South American countries like Argentina, Chile and Brazil, which would also see a more stable Flux of immigrants.
Oh course there would be another panic, probably around 1915.
The great depression of 1929 doesn't happen, but a slowdown is possible around the same time. This might have political consequences in countries that were growing fast and were politically unstable, such us Russia.
There would not be the power vacuum in China that allowed Japan to take control of large swaths of China. This might result into a more stable China overall.
Other miscellaneous: another minor war in the Balkans is possible and an Ottoman expedition into Arabia is plausible. The Arabs would not get the support from the UK and would probably lose, but of course the issues with the Arabs wouldn't end there.
Remaining on the topic, the Berlin-Bagdad railroad would be completed and the ottomans would start see the benefits of their large oil reserves. But Oil would have to compete with solar power, which was being developed at the time by the American inventor Frank Schuman and raised the interest of the German and British government before the war
How would immigration/emigration impact all this? Europe going to have a much larger population especially Russia. Won’t Germany and Western Europe have to deal with large influx of Easterner European immigrants especially of Jews from the Russian Empire? Will Europe have a overpopulation issue?
Never liked grapes like this, remindes me to much of that dark ages graph, besides pre war Europe was in a boom and I doubt it would have lasted if the was no world wars, not that the graph isn't in some way right.
What? The Gold Standard came back WW1 in Europe, but was killed off by the Great Depression until Bretton Woods:World War I destroyed the global integration of capital markets. The Gold Standard never returned despite attempts after the war to revive it. The system of issuing bonds and shares internationally failed to recover from the war, and stock exchanges listed fewer international shares. The ownership of stocks and bonds from other countries shrank dramatically.
That doesn't sound right...none of the returning soldiers were fit, all disabled? Do you have a source on that?As a rough guesstimate of the impact of manpower losses, Australia sent 300,000 men over-seas. 60,000 died and of the rest none were discharged fit.
When repatriation of the Australian Imperial Force was completed in 1920, 264,000 men and women had returned to Australia, of whom 151,000 were deemed “fit”, and 113,000 “unfit”. Many had returned throughout the war, beginning in 1915 with those suffering from disease and injuries; then as fighting on Gallipoli, Sinai–Palestine and the Western Front progressed, the wounded began steadily returning home as well.
Math is off on that, as there would have only been 240k survivors of WW1 if 300k were sent and 60k didn't come back. More than half of the 690k men would have not been in WW1 and that isn't even counting the numbers of men that age into to that working age age-range every year.
- 690,000 survivors (50% with some form of disability/injury)
Sure, but they went back to it until the Great Depression made them abandon it...then they went back to it again after WW2 with Bretton Woods.They went back onto Gold because they wanted the pre war system back but it was never going to work and did more harm in the economic wreckage of the post war world.
And the accepted figures are challenged: https://amp.smh.com.au/opinion/why-the-numbers-of-our-wwi-dead-are-wrong-20140428-zr0v5.htmlThis says otherwise:
750,000 working age males in 1913Math is off on that,
No where in there does it support your claim that 100% came back unfit for anything. Plus apply for pension help doesn't mean they were necessarily disabled either or any less effective as workers depending on the field they were working in, or even that those who came back 'unfit' in some way weren't able to work or be productive in some field even if it wasn't the one they would have chosen if totally fit. Still it is an interesting corrective to the official numbers.And the accepted figures are challenged: https://amp.smh.com.au/opinion/why-the-numbers-of-our-wwi-dead-are-wrong-20140428-zr0v5.html
Not the part I was referring to, I was talking about the 50% of working force being disabled; even if you include everyone shipped off and the dead, that still less than 50% and you still haven't proven everyone that came back was unfit to work or less able to work than before.750,000 working age males in 1913
Less 60,000 dead
Equals 690,000 ‘survivors’ of the 1913 pool.
Yes some will enter the workforce but also some will retire.
...none of the returning soldiers were fit, all disabled?
...your claim that 100% came back unfit for anything.
...50% of working force being disabled
Brazil might actually get more investment from the US and UK. The US is likely to be much more focused on the Western Hemisphere and to lesser extent maybe the Far East too. They aren’t going to be investing as heavily into Europe without the world wars. The US especially won’t be as dominant in Europe economically as otl. Trade is going to be more mutual and less one sided by the two. Germany probably dominates mainland Europe economically while Britain has a tight grip on most global trade. Britain controls 1/3 of the world and has the world largest navy. Germany might be more advanced in industry and have better production but Britain has control over a large amount of the world’s raw resources. Britain and US could have a odd relationship when it comes to investing in Latin America or South America. Britain probably distance itself more from Europe then otl and starts focusing more overseas especially in places like Latin America. The question is how much would US and UK business and investors blur together in Latin America. A lot of British and New England capitalist often worked together and mixed.Brazil is going to get massively handcapped without the brains received during both world wars and the massive amount of land lease, industrial help and foreign investiment that we received in the second war. The most basic technology to get the steel to be used on consumer goods couldn't be produced here until Pres. Vargas signed a agreement for the USA to give us the technology in exange for our entry in the war.
Brazil most likely remain agrarian but to be honest our process of development was so crushed in the 90s that things wouldn't be so different.