Policies of a Monarchist France after 1900

Let's suppose that the restoration of the monarchy in France is successfully done in 1871 and continues today, what would be the policies of this France ITTL? How would she react during the 2 world wars? In 1940, the King of France ITTL would be in favor of an armistice or would be in favor of the continuation of the fight?
 
Well, the kingdom of France has a much better track record in wars than republican France, for whatever reasons.
*rolls eyes*
Let's suppose that the restoration of the monarchy in France is successfully done in 1871 and continues today, what would be the policies of this France ITTL? How would she react during the 2 world wars? In 1940, the King of France ITTL would be in favor of an armistice or would be in favor of the continuation of the fight?
The differences aren't likely to be that big in terms of policies themselves, a French monarchy would know very, very well it needs to listen to the People. Some additional stability could lead to interesting results, but the changes wouldn't be THAT massive considering the continuity of the State OTL in various regimes.
 
The differences aren't likely to be that big in terms of policies themselves, a French monarchy would know very, very well it needs to listen to the People. Some additional stability could lead to interesting results, but the changes wouldn't be THAT massive considering the continuity of the State OTL in various regimes.

Yeah, I do agree with a post-1870 POD, French foreign and military policy isn't going to be that different. That being said, a 1869 POD leads to a very different place. A France with no revanchism is a very different France. France was almost certainly the most hardcore nation in World War I. IIRC, the French were planning to continuing to fight even if Paris was lost.
 
But the most interesting is in 1940 after the defeat of the French Army in the metropole: they accept armistice or they fight on from Alger?
 
A poster on soc.history.what-if argued (sorry, the URL is no longer working) on the old "what if the Count of Chambord accepted the tricolor" question:

"I have always seen it as more than simple stubbornness. He was a traditionalist and had little love for the modernistic profiteers of revolution he saw in the Orleanist line. Why should he leave his tranquil exile home in Austria and become king for the probably short rest of his life, when in the grand view this only meant enabling the Orleanist heirs-of-regicides? IMO the flag issue was just the symbol, not the reason.

"Having Chambord die before 1870 and the Legitimist line extinct in 1871, thereby uniting the claims (save the Carlist ones, which no one in France took seriously) looks like a vastly better way to restore Bourbon monarchy - the offer is made to the one remaining claimant, the comte de Paris, to become the "King of the French".

"Again, IMO, a constitutional Orleanist monarchy after 1871 with tricoleur and 1831 coat of arms...would probably look a lot like the Third Republic in nearly all important regards, except perhaps for a bit (but not that much) less anti-clericalism, and might survive to the current day just like the monarchy in the Netherlands and Belgium has."
 
Top