Successful 1848 Revolutions Prevent World War 1?

Thomas1195

Banned
As for the suggestion that the Conservative Right somehow vanished in Third Republic France, Raymond Poincare, Georges Boulanger, the Conservative Union, the Ralliement, the Catholic Church, the Progressive Party, the Monarchist Factions, and the civil and judicial apparatus that destroyed Alfred Dreyfus would like to speak to you...
Well, conservatives could not even manage to become the main opposition. You must distinguish Old Right from Progressive Republican/Democratic Republican Alliance, the latter was classical liberals who started out as centre-left but became right-wing after the collapse of Old Right (e.g. Monarchists) and thus similar to modern-day Danish Venstre.
 
In 1848 there were hardly any social liberals - intervention, however well intentioned, was seen as a hangover from the tariffs and controls of the old Regimes. Witness the debate in Parliament over the Corn Law repeal. When faced with famine in Ireland the most important issue for the "liberals" was removing barriers to free trade, not supporting the living standards of the Irish.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
In 1848 there were hardly any social liberals - intervention, however well intentioned, was seen as a hangover from the tariffs and controls of the old Regimes. Witness the debate in Parliament over the Corn Law repeal. When faced with famine in Ireland the most important issue for the "liberals" was removing barriers to free trade, not supporting the living standards of the Irish.
Of course, social liberalism would not emerge before 1860s-1870s. But a successful 1848 combined with universal suffrage in an industrial country like Britain would increase the radicals in parliamentary representatives. Radicals, while not social liberals at that time, had several core similarities, notably supporting state education. IOTL, Joe Chamberlain (pre-Home Rule) and Charles Dilkes were essentially the first among social liberals.

Even if you somehow managed to kill the entire British Labour Party today, in terms of shooting every MP, Peer, and Party functionary, for instance, do you really think that would be the end of left-of-centre politics in Britain? That Labour voters, for example, or local councilors, would simply shrug their shoulders and submit to Tory domination?
Well, that's what happened with US socialist movements (but replacing "killed" with "arrested and suppressed"), which were purged by Woodrow Wilson and then John Edgar Hoover.
 
Last edited:
US-style internal improvement is a fine alternative, as it could be applied nationwide

Possibly, but that wasn't what the Radicals proposed in 1848 nor what the Liberals were willing to fund. The agitation for the National Factories came from the cities [mainly Paris and Lyon] from workers who wanted employment in those cities. But yes, in theory, internal improvement might work. Although 1840s France has much less need of it than 1840s America where it was tied to an ever expanding frontier.

There is no question that classical liberals would go into conflict with industrial workers over the issues you mentioned, but social/interventionist liberalism could emerge earlier to challenge classical liberalism and could reconcile these conflicts significantly, although not totally.

As always, I think you over estimate how easily the large industrialists and other mercantile Liberals could be silenced within the British Liberal Party, but yes, potentially the development of social liberalism could ease some inter-class conflicts. Although it will exacerbate others as whatever their stripes Liberals will always cling in essence to Free Trade, as they did in OTL Britain.

Well, conservatives could not even manage to become the main opposition. You must distinguish Old Right from Progressive Republican/Democratic Republican Alliance, the latter was classical liberals who started out as centre-left but became right-wing after the collapse of Old Right (e.g. Monarchists) and thus similar to modern-day Danish Venstre.

But you yourself didn't make this distinction - you said monarchists and conservatives of the Parti d'Order. I'm only going on what you said. And no, I think you vastly overestimate the ''collapse'' of the right in France. It wasn't a case of the right dying and everyone else shifting over a bit as you make out. You are mistaking election results and political parties for strength of sentiment nation-wide. That would be like looking at Britain today and saying that there is no political discourse to the right of the Tories because UKIP have no MPs.

Well, that's what happened with US socialist movements (but replacing "killed" with "arrested and suppressed"), which were purged by Woodrow Wilson and then John Edgar Hoover.

I'm sorry, but it really isn't what happened to the US socialist movement. That's just not accurate in any way. Of course suppression in the 1910s and 1920s had an impact, but it didn't [and hasn't] killed of socialist political influence in the United States.
 
Well, unlike the prior Reign of Terror, a "Night of the Long Knives" would swiftly wipe out the organization and leadership of the conservatives/monarchists after a night, even Thiers could be killed. You can look at the way the Conservative Right essentially disappeared in the Third Republic until the 1930s. This purge could look like a successful Gunpowder Plot, lets say: Conservatives and Monarchists hold an all-party meeting at a big building. Suddenly, the building blows up (original Gunpowder Plot)/Suddenly, Republican guards locks the doors of the building and burn it down. Both are very quick and swift.
There would be no intervention because other countries were also undergoing revolutions at that time.
First of all there were no liberal paramilitary groups ("Republican guard") to carry out such a plot.
Secondly, there would be no gathering of all conservative forces mainly because they were not a unified group, there were for example monarchists but they were split in three different groups based on who they supported and consequently did not get along with each other at all. You will never find the legitimists, orleanists and bonapartist holding a joint meeting.
Third, the conservative right did not disappear in the third Republic. You may want to read about Raymond Poincare, Georges Boulanger, to learn about some conservative politicians or the Conservative Union, the Ralliement (a catholic conservative party), the Progressive Party (names can be deceiving) to familiarise you with some movements.
Fourth, not all other countries were undergoing revolutions, Spain and Britain for example did not. And if the revolutions start to look like a repeat of the French revolution they might well intervene against them. Russia also saw no revolution of its own, and if the French start to murder the nobility, the Prussian and Austrian might well invite them to protect themselves.

Finally if we disregard all of that and assume for the moment that the liberal revolutionaries somehow manage to successfully murder all conservatives, I don't see why the won't use the same tactics against the radical . If you are willing to kill all opponents to the right why would you try to negotiate with your opponents to the left and adopt their policies?
 

Perkeo

Banned
If the republicans win in Germany and France, they might reach an understanding, but that’s really much to ask for.
And even if France and Germany do ally, that means a very different system of alliances, but not necessarily one that prevents major European wars.
 
Top