Liberal Germany, Independent Hungary, United Italy, 1848

[Gladi]

Bright day
Bohemian insurgency was laughable affair. While it is true some "troops" have been drawn. Czech leadership quickly fell behind Austrians, thanks to Frankfurt Parliament. Windishgraetz broke up few badly-equipped student regiments and he had to provoke them a lot by parading in full arms for several days.

 

[Homer]

Okay, so the Swiss civil war isn't that much of an affaire and the Bohemian uprising isn't either, and the Italian campaign wasn't that much of a war.
Now, again, I' propose some real troops in there:
"Kleindeutsche Lösung" earlier, and invasion to help their fellow revolutionaries in Austria. After all, some members of Paulskirche parliament were shot in Austria - also that was after the rebellion Vienna was suppressed. Windischgraetz wouldn't have to provokate a Prussian army to get some fighting!

 

[MerryPrankster]

Let's assume we have a sort-of dual POD of Frederick William taking the Imperial Crown and the Hungarians withdrawing their regiments early. FW buys off Russia with Galicia and the Hapsburgs are eventually forced to flee to Russia.

What happens next in Europe? Will liberal Germany and France butt heads over Alsace-Lorraine? Will the Hungarians be faced with risings by Croats, Czechs, and Slovaks? Earlier Scramble for Africa?

 

[Max Sinister]

Many of the German democrats were actually quite pro-French. It all depends how the young French republic develops. Does it survive, or will Louis Napoleon take power too?

 

[Susano]

I wouldnt say so much pro-French as kinda European-minded. However, that was a more complex issue then just that. The 48ers propagated the peaceful coexistance of nations, but as a result of that, many favoured ethnic borders - like giving Posen to an independant Poland. Or, OTOH, giving the Alsace (Lorraine never really was an issue, those parts of it gained 1871 were... a bonus) to an united Germany.

But of course, in the question of just what nationality this or that region is, despite their liberalness, most European 48ers would answer in the sense of the own nation, which is understandable.

So, it could well come, out of the best intentions, to quarrels between democratic Germany an democratic France over the Alsace. And, yes, the Hungarians will definitly have a problem with the Croats etc. And an independant Bohemia/Czechia willc ertainly face internal ethnic troubles, too.

Hah, seems like "1848 suceeds" doesnt lead to much of an Utopia. Not until the boundaries are redrawn, anyways.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Many of the German democrats were actually quite pro-French. It all depends how the young French republic develops. Does it survive, or will Louis Napoleon take power too?

In my Afrikaner TL, the Directory survived (as did the Batavian Republic), but the Republican armies were forced to withdraw from Germany and Italy.

So the young French republic isn't quite so young and there's no Napoleon to worry about.

 

[LordKalvan]

I wouldnt say so much pro-French as kinda European-minded. However, that was a more complex issue then just that. The 48ers propagated the peaceful coexistance of nations, but as a result of that, many favoured ethnic borders - like giving Posen to an independant Poland. Or, OTOH, giving the Alsace (Lorraine never really was an issue, those parts of it gained 1871 were... a bonus) to an united Germany.

But of course, in the question of just what nationality this or that region is, despite their liberalness, most European 48ers would answer in the sense of the own nation, which is understandable.

So, it could well come, out of the best intentions, to quarrels between democratic Germany an democratic France over the Alsace. And, yes, the Hungarians will definitly have a problem with the Croats etc. And an independant Bohemia/Czechia willc ertainly face internal ethnic troubles, too.

Hah, seems like "1848 suceeds" doesnt lead to much of an Utopia. Not until the boundaries are redrawn, anyways.

What is "Utopia"? It never happened during human history: even in the best periods there was always a worm (or more than one) in the apple. However, IMHO, 1848 was a true historical cusp: in OTL, the liberals were defeated. Not forever, ultimately they came out on top. OTOH, the Italian unification was master-minded by Cavour (liberal), but after his death the right became dominant in the Parliament; German unification was master-minded by Bismarck, and the junkers; and Hungarian independence was delayed by almost 3 generations, and when it came was quite messy. Not to mention that France, rather than leading a liberal "concert of Europe" went on the road of the 2nd Empire (and I wonder if it would have happened in a world where the 1848 liberals had been generally successful).

In OTL, between 1848 and 1878, there was a war every few years; my feeling is that it would not have happened in a liberals-win TL. It is true that romanticism and the idea of nation where already well established in 1848 (actually they were one of the dominant ideas which lead to the revolutionary motes); still the nationalist ideas were not yet as completely established as they became during the next 50 years in OTL. The majority of liberals (even in peripherical areas like Hungary, or the kingdom of Two Sicilies) were quite "internationalist" in their approach, and very well read.

Another interesting issue is what's going to happen with Russia (which had been the mainstay of conservativism and repression in the years between the Congress of Vienna and 1848). I do not believe it would be possible to keep them happy with Galicia, the Czar's worries went much deeper; and Poland did rebel against its Russian masters.
However, assuming that the Habsburg empire goes down quickly, and that the German nation is united on a liberal basis, there is not a lot that they can do (except possibly a large scale repression in Poland). The idea that the Russians alone can invade and pacify Germany, Hungary, Italy is pretty ludicrous (and in any case would have scared the British into a much more serious commitment to help the budding liberal states). In a way it is quite more believable the other way around: the liberal revolution moves eastward (Poland, Baltic states, St. Petersburg if not Ukraine) and the czarist regime does not survive. Which might be the best way to pave the road toward a true utopia.

 

[Faeelin]

So, it could well come, out of the best intentions, to quarrels between democratic Germany an democratic France over the Alsace.

Counter example: North America, where the US and Britain avoided going to war over places like Oregon, Northern Maine, etc.

 

[HueyLong]

Counter example: North America, where the US and Britain avoided going to war over places like Oregon, Northern Maine, etc.

Those areas were fairly sparsely settled, and the disputes never involved heavy feelings of nationalism on either side.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Those areas were fairly sparsely settled, and the disputes never involved heavy feelings of nationalism on either side.

Agreed. I think there'll be a nationalism-on-nationalism bloodfest coming.

In my Afrikaner scenario, I don't think the Germans will do well, at least this time. As has been said, the Frankfurt government was not exactly the most practical one in the world. They have the lessons of the victorious Directory to draw on, but the Directory has 30 years of governing experience.

I wonder how defeat (or at least a draw) will play well at home? Will Frederich William or "the parliament of professors" suffer the most for this?

For a victorious-1848 in general, will Louis Napoleon's government do better or worse if faced with war with a liberal Germany over A-L? And what will be the political consequences for both?

 

[Faeelin]

Those areas were fairly sparsely settled, and the disputes never involved heavy feelings of nationalism on either side.

I think you underestimate American feelings towards Canada.

I mean, we had presidents win elections on the platform of "We'll conquer Canada!".

(I oversimplify).

Britain might not have cared, but Americans did.

 

[Susano]

Counter example: North America, where the US and Britain avoided going to war over places like Oregon, Northern Maine, etc.

Okay, okay. Of coruse war isnt inevitable, but then I never said so. I only said its a possibility - which it also was in North America.

 

[Max Sinister]

German unification was master-minded by Bismarck, and the junkers

Make that Bismarck alone. They don't call him the "conservative revolutionary" for nothing.

In my Afrikaner TL, the Directory survived (as did the Batavian Republic), but the Republican armies were forced to withdraw from Germany and Italy.

So the young French republic isn't quite so young and there's no Napoleon to worry about.

I was talking about the Second Republic of 1848.

 

[Homer]

Okay, okay. Of coruse war isnt inevitable, but then I never said so. I only said its a possibility - which it also was in North America.

Agreed. There would be a war, maybe about Alsace, probably about Schleswig-Holstein - which is still Danish at that time. Probably the liberals - most of them have interest in trade - would call for colonies. So there's plenty of possibilities to go for war.

But I think there would be no World War: WWI was influenced by the idea of free countries fighting tyranny. It's hard to think about fighting tyranny when faced with a liberal Germany like the one 1848 was about to rise...

But on the other side, a unified Germany would face a lot of work at home: there were different measures in every state, you had tariffs between the different states. You'd face problems between Catholics (majority of Germany after Austria is "liberated") and Protestants - the emperor is Protestant. You'd have countries, like Prussia, which were absolutistic only months ago and now are part of a rather democratic state - in fact more democratic then Bismarck's Germany 20 years later. Probably, you'd get a burst in economic development, as was seen in 1871.

 

[MerryPrankster]

I was talking about the Second Republic of 1848.

I know. That's why there are two "what would happen" questions--one for the surviving Directory and the other for Louis Napoleon (the Second Republic before it became the Empire).

I think the Second Republic might be more vulnerable than the surviving Directory, since it's newer and less stable.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Homer,

There might still be some kind of conflict owing to colonies, alliance systems, and secret treaties. The Sick Man of Europe will still be attracting flies.

The dreikaiserbund (alliance of Austria, Germany, and Russia, which were the least democratic of all the Euro states) would obviously not exist, so there might be some earlier mayhem in the East. This could be provoked by the situation in Poland--if the Germans let their Poles go, the Russians might try to grab the new Poland to stop it from encouraging their Poles. The Germans, if they're stable enough, might try to stop that; if they're not, they could build up and take vengeance later.

Not to mention the minorities within the new states will want their nations too. The German revolutionaries might be inclined to let the Poles and Czechs go, but IIRC the Hungarians were VERY unpleasant re: their minorities. You might have Croat and Slovak uprisings every so often.

 

[Nicole]

Not to mention the minorities within the new states will want their nations too. The German revolutionaries might be inclined to let the Poles and Czechs go, but IIRC the Hungarians were VERY unpleasant re: their minorities. You might have Croat and Slovak uprisings every so often.

Indeed... I believe that the 1848 government abolished many of the minority recognitions in Croatia and Transylvania, as well as making documents only available in Magyar...

 

[LordKalvan]

Make that Bismarck alone. They don't call him the "conservative revolutionary" for nothing.



I was talking about the Second Republic of 1848.

I was trying to give the feeling of a change imposed from above, rather than through a grass-roots movement (even the Piedmontese Constitution was "granted" by the king, not approved by the representatives of the people, or subject to a confirmation referendum).

Re. the 2nd Republic in France, I wonder if a more successful 1848 (more successful for the liberals, I mean) would have allowed Louis napoleon to go ahead with his coup. Or to switch from republic to empire.

 

[Homer]

Homer,

There might still be some kind of conflict owing to colonies, alliance systems, and secret treaties. The Sick Man of Europe will still be attracting flies.

The dreikaiserbund (alliance of Austria, Germany, and Russia, which were the least democratic of all the Euro states) would obviously not exist, so there might be some earlier mayhem in the East. This could be provoked by the situation in Poland--if the Germans let their Poles go, the Russians might try to grab the new Poland to stop it from encouraging their Poles. The Germans, if they're stable enough, might try to stop that; if they're not, they could build up and take vengeance later.

Not to mention the minorities within the new states will want their nations too. The German revolutionaries might be inclined to let the Poles and Czechs go, but IIRC the Hungarians were VERY unpleasant re: their minorities. You might have Croat and Slovak uprisings every so often.

So as I said: war is always possible,
many internal problems for all new countries.

I personally don't believe that the Germans would let their Poles go. There were discussions about the national frontiers in the Paulskirche, and they decided that the whole of Posen should belong to Germany. In faact, there were two principles, ethnicity and history, to decide whether some lands should belong to Germany or not. And the Paulskirche majority - surprisingly - chooses the principle that guaranteed a larger Germany: Bohemia, Posen, south Tyrol and Schleswig were seen as parts of Germany - allthough inhabited by non-German majorities.

Now Hungary will of course face greater problems with its minorities then Germany, because they would make up a larger part of the Population, and with Serbia and Romania arising one day, there would be foreign powers who want these territories. On the other side, Germany would face lesser problems with its minorities, because they would make up a smaller part of German population.

After all, there would be many international crisis after Italy and Germany unify and Hungary separates from Austria: who would get South Tyrol? Who would get the Burgenland? What about Schleswig? What about Istria? Or Slovenia? Now add some inner tensions with minorities and Russia as the only absolutistic state left and we'd face a very unstable Europe.

 

[LordKalvan]

Russian hostility might be a bonus: it pinpoints at a common foe, and would be a factor of unity.
The "disputed lands" were there in OTL too (and the German/Italian unifications did not solve the issue). Maybe this time around some compromise solution might be achieved on a cantonal basis.
Hungary is a problem, I agree. But again, the progress of liberalism might simplify the research of a solution