Slightly more powerful present day Spain

Spanish history between 1788 and 1960 can be roughly summarized as: everything got worse. Pretty much anything could have happened and left Spain in better shape.

The two more obvious culprits are Fernando VII the fucktard and the french invasion. Fernando VII singlehandedly caused 150 years of political turmoil and failed experiments in liberal democracy, and the french invasion, besides causing the loss of the colonies (it would have happened at some point in the century anyway) killed Spain's nascent industrial revolution in the cradle, causing a delay of several decades in Spain's industrialization that put the country hopelessly behind the rest of Europe for the remainder of the 19th century.

Even more importantly, Spain's population growth was unique in that it followed pre-industrial patterns of very low growth until the 1950's. Even if France's population is famous for having a very slow growth during the 19th century, Spain's was even lower. An earlier industrialization would have evened things out.
 
Spanish history between 1788 and 1960 can be roughly summarized as: everything got worse. Pretty much anything could have happened and left Spain in better shape.

The two more obvious culprits are Fernando VII the fucktard and the french invasion. Fernando VII singlehandedly caused 150 years of political turmoil and failed experiments in liberal democracy, and the french invasion, besides causing the loss of the colonies (it would have happened at some point in the century anyway) killed Spain's nascent industrial revolution in the cradle, causing a delay of several decades in Spain's industrialization that put the country hopelessly behind the rest of Europe for the remainder of the 19th century.

Even more importantly, Spain's population growth was unique in that it followed pre-industrial patterns of very low growth until the 1950's. Even if France's population is famous for having a very slow growth during the 19th century, Spain's was even lower. An earlier industrialization would have evened things out.

Basically, just "el deseado" ( the desired, the wanted, talk about unfunny names in prospect ) having an accident or being killed by his French captors would make butterflies and almost any change would be for the better... of course he could grown a brain, but being a pathological idiot would throw in almost ASB realm. ( Hell Napoleon´s brother was million times better king ... without any real control of the country )

But the daughter was another brilliant example of "DON´T DO IT" and the First Republic had 6 presidents in 11 months and ...

Spain in 19th century is a great example of how to send everything to hell ... and most of the worst problems of the 20th are direct consequences of this ...

Yep, its quite easy for the country to do some things a bit better.
 
What if Don Carlos and reactionaries defeat Isabella, with reactionary Spain as a stabilizing factor in society it would butterfly away liberal monarchy and leftist governments and maybe even Franco who came hundred years later, thus possibly giving far needed stability for any future development. She would still be the mightiest neutral state in both WW's and this time without a civil war and various uprisings.
 
It might be worth noting that the GDP per capita of Spain and Italy is almost identical, Spain’s is actually marginally higher.
Cook, with facts like that, you'll never get on the History Channel ;)

But yeah get rid of fucking Fernando "Train Wreck" VII.
 
Isn't Italy considered a regional power, like one tier below U.K./France/Germany?

Actually I don't even know how to put the Euro nations on tiers.
 
Delicate question; are the regional minorities's nationalisms hindering Spain? Catalonia and the Basques... Catalonia is a reasonably strong economical motor, at least.
 
Had the French revolution not taken place, Carlos IV may have go on with the "moderate reformism" of his father, Carlos III. This may have allowed a slow growing of the country. However, Carlos IV wasn't better than his f***** son Fernando, and having Godoy around will f***k everything, sooner or later. In fact, sooner THAN later.

So, we might butterfly the French Revolution and good old Bony's attempt to unify Europe (forgive the joke :D) or we might butterfly Carlos IV and have his elder brother Fernando -who became king of Naples in OTL- and hope that he's raised up properly and don't become the silly fool he did turn out to be.

Frankly, once we reach 1788, I see no "logical" way to avoid the rest of the dreadful chain of events. So, kill Carlos IV in his child days, so his brother Fernando isn't wasted in Italy and hope that the manages to do something right.
 
What if Don Carlos and reactionaries defeat Isabella, with reactionary Spain as a stabilizing factor in society it would butterfly away liberal monarchy and leftist governments and maybe even Franco who came hundred years later, thus possibly giving far needed stability for any future development. She would still be the mightiest neutral state in both WW's and this time without a civil war and various uprisings.

Nope, putting a reactionary on the government would accentuate the problems the country had, with no sort of compromise, the liberals first and the socialist and communist later would try to take the country by the force ( more than OTL, which is impressive ) ... some sort of mistake of the gov like entering WWI would almost surely cause a "soviet lite" rebellion.

One of the few changes that actually probably things go worse, but an interesting ATL to read ( not to live in btw )

Had the French revolution not taken place, Carlos IV may have go on with the "moderate reformism" of his father, Carlos III. This may have allowed a slow growing of the country. However, Carlos IV wasn't better than his f***** son Fernando, and having Godoy around will f***k everything, sooner or later. In fact, sooner THAN later.

So, we might butterfly the French Revolution and good old Bony's attempt to unify Europe (forgive the joke :D) or we might butterfly Carlos IV and have his elder brother Fernando -who became king of Naples in OTL- and hope that he's raised up properly and don't become the silly fool he did turn out to be.

Frankly, once we reach 1788, I see no "logical" way to avoid the rest of the dreadful chain of events. So, kill Carlos IV in his child days, so his brother Fernando isn't wasted in Italy and hope that the manages to do something right.

Well the reformists ( "afrancesados" ) were very important in Carlos IV reign, and many of them choose to help Jose I ( Nappy´s bro ) in his reign; "officially", although made it by the menace of violence, the succession was legal, and many of them escaped to France after loosing the war. Just butterflying the war saves many brilliant minds ...
EDIT:

Delicate question; are the regional minorities's nationalisms hindering Spain? Catalonia and the Basques... Catalonia is a reasonably strong economical motor, at least.

Not much more than the rest of the autonomies ...
 
Last edited:
Though I dislike Ferdinand VII like everyone else, I don't think that the problems of Spain can be reduced to individualities. After all, even absolutist monarchs are forced to make compromises and to build a base of power and support amongst different groups of interest to stay in the chair. Perhaps the kind of avilable supporters speak more about the fate of a country than the monarch in question. In other words, in my opinion the structural causes are more relevant than the contingencies.

Trying to be brief, Spain have had an historical "problem" of national vertebration. By national vertebration I'm not thinking about identitary issues nor I'm adopting Oterga y Gasset's views, in fact I'm using the term "national" because I can't find a better word. It's simpler, the structuration of proper internal market and a operative network of interlinked urban centers (where Germany is the best example) have been deficient, meanwhile, there haven't been a political center able to monopolize power (where France is the example) probably because Spain is not France and this is "counter-natural" regarding the spanish realities for many reasons. It has been finally a midway with the worst of both cases where large chunks of the country were (and still are very often) mere espectators while the big fishes played power games.

I think that this circumstance allows to the existence of phenomena like the caciquismo which have been historically more harmful than a hundred of Ferdinands VII, and its byproducts, like the economical dualism, the lack of an early agrarian reform (which was REALLY necessary in the south of the country) or the lack of coherent policies for the enssemble of the country, because policy-making consisted in exchanging favours for support there today and here tomorrow. For example, a region like Andalusía had the potential to be an economical powerhouse in Iberia, however it has been one the poorest and less developed parts of Spain due to its socio-economical structure.

On the other hand Spain has natural and ecological limitations that France and Germany haven't. It's farer from the centers of the industrial revolution and the main european markets, most of the country lacks decent natural ways of communication (and the manmade ones weren't good either) the ecological balance is delicate in many parts, with periodical droughts and a good chunk of Spain isn't exactly the beacon of fertility and habitability. Geez, even in the best of the possible worlds, I can't see, say, Guadalajara or Teruel, having dramatically larger populations.

So, while Spain could be better with a higher GDP per capita, I don't think it could be at the same level of influence and power than Germany and France.

Though many of the necessary structural changes would need earlier PODs, following the others and starting in 1780 I guess we can change some things to get Spain in a better shape and somewaht more stable. However I would like to point that instability is a problem, but you can bear it if it stay inside some limits. I mean, France in the 19th century, though not reaching the levels of Spain, wasn't either an example of stability.

So, some thoughts:


In the 19th century.

-No napoleonic invasion, as said by Kurt.

-The "sudden" lost of the colonies harmed Spain severely, losing from day to nigh its main markets. The independence of the colonies was unavoidable, as has been said by Strangelove, but a negotiated independence and/or a (much) early recognition of the new republics would have been perfectly possible and would be enough to make the lost of the Hispano-American markets less deep and less shocking while making it a more progressive proccess, giving the spanish economy the possibility to adapt herself to the new scenario.

-Avoiding the intervention of the Holy Alliance could help the stablish the fundations of a proper liberal state, though I have doubts about this one.

-Dinastic agreement at the death of Fedinand VII, or making the butterflies give him male offspring. Or perhaps, if Charles IV publishes the Pramatic Sanction of 1789, the Carlist Wars can be avoided.

-No confiscation (desamortización) of the communal properties. Also, reducing the corruption in the procces of sale of the church properties would help, leading actually to the surge of a class of middle owners as intended originally. Perhaps redistributing those lands (or a part of them) amongst landless peasants instead selling them could be also positive. Though the state lose the immediate cash it needed, it would gain future taxpayers and consummers.

-Deeper fiscal reforms.

In the 20th century:

-It's easy, no Civil War or at least getting rid of the 40 years dictatorship as soon as possible.



Delicate question; are the regional minorities's nationalisms hindering Spain? Catalonia and the Basques... Catalonia is a reasonably strong economical motor, at least.

In my opinion, no more than the centralists. It's not the nationalisms, wich in many ways are a consequence rather than a cause, is the system of relations that have led to try to "build" a country counting only with three actors (Madrid, Catalonia and Basque Country) and the inability (or lack of interest, perhaps) to define a territorial model accountable, inclusive, respectful and fair for everybody's interests and particularities.

Cheers.
 
At this respect I would add: if you could avoid an Habsburg becoming king of Spain and thus avoiding the European entaglement and keeps any possible Spanish king saying "No pienso, ni quiero, ser señor de hereje" (I don't want to be king of some heretics), everything may go even better: the American gold isn't wasted in futile wars and, above all, it may remain here, and not in Genova et al.

Am I going too back in time?:D I think so.

PD: a tots alcança" :D
 
At this respect I would add: if you could avoid an Habsburg becoming king of Spain and thus avoiding the European entaglement and keeps any possible Spanish king saying "No pienso, ni quiero, ser señor de hereje" (I don't want to be king of some heretics), everything may go even better: the American gold isn't wasted in futile wars and, above all, it may remain here, and not in Genova et al.

Am I going too back in time?:D I think so.

PD: a tots alcança" :D

Although does not enter the forum by any kind of margin ( after 1900 ), I think that even without a Hapsburg king, Spain implicating itself in Europe´s wars, mainly against France, its impossible to avoid.

And economically I do not see democratic Spain being better than after 60´s dictatorship ... of course socio-culturally is another thing, but the OP talks about economic/military/politic "power"...
 
I'm not sure if you answered the question, but would a definitive union of Portugal with Spain hinders or helps Spain in the long run?
 
I'm not sure if you answered the question, but would a definitive union of Portugal with Spain hinders or helps Spain in the long run?

It would be like an extra Catalonia but without any industrial might, so I doubt the extra population and resources would make any meaningful difference.
 
I'm not sure if you answered the question, but would a definitive union of Portugal with Spain hinders or helps Spain in the long run?

It would be like an extra Catalonia but without any industrial might, so I doubt the extra population and resources would make any meaningful difference.

Well it depends:

If its a re-union thats completely truth, with the US-Spanish war having strange repercussions in OTL Portuguese colonies ...

But if is because they did not leave in Felipe IV´s time there are so many butterflies that its a headache ...
 
.

And economically I do not see democratic Spain being better than after 60´s dictatorship ... of course socio-culturally is another thing, but the OP talks about economic/military/politic "power"...

Well, avoiding the 20 years of autarchic experiment, being part of the international community instead of a pariah, having normal acces to international markets, credit and investements, being able to build normal relations with the countries of our interest and getting the option of joining the common market long before than in OTL...would have been positive assets for the spanish economy and strenght, I guess. Also, socio-cultural openess has positive economical effects in the long term, with a decent university, freedom of thinking, expression, creation and invention, direct and open contacts with the theoretical and practical advancements of the civilised world, no brain drain due to political reasons, a criticl public opinion and a lbetter formed democratic tradition (no sociologic francoism) ...seriously, I think that without the dictatorship the spanish economy would have had an earlier boom and much better fundaments than in OTL, as well as the spanish ability to exerce influence in the world would be larger.

Obviously, the first step would be the same in any circumstance, industrialization and movilization of the rural workforce towards those industries, though it could be made in slighty different manner than in OTL, for example promoting more geographically diverse industrial poles than in OTL. But once this is done, innovation, diversification and productivity are the key, and I think that the economical model inherited fom the 60's has serious flaws in those issues, as we are seeing now. Also, the excesive weight of tourism in the economy, specially the kind of tourism that is promoted in Spain, perhaps could be butterflied in different circumstances, considering that in the 50's tourism wasn't still so popular as it would become during the next decade in Europe, butterflying aswell certian "traditions" in the construction sector...


Cheers.
 
You are completely right, except maybe the part of butterflying the construction bubble ... I think it was inevitable.

The city councils found a golden goose and squeezed it dry. Even the honest ones ( some town with less than 7 folks in it :p ) did everything they could to ride on it, and no politic party, no regional gov, and of course no national gov wanted to do nothing to control it, much less to put a limit on it ... too much "political sh@t"

I did not mean that the dictatorship was as good economically, just that it was one thing they did not botched completely ... just as usual ...
 
Top