The fate of eastern Germany in a Central Powers WW I victory scenario?

CaliGuy

Banned
What do you think that eastern Germany's (East Prussia, West Prussia, Pomerania, Posen, and Silesia) fate would have been in a scenario where Germany won WWI (late in the war--as a result of the U.S. cutting off its loans to Britain and France in 1917)?

Would eastern Germany--with the exception of industrialized Silesia--have continued to stagnate due to its agricultural economy (while the rest of Germany was rapidly industrializing)? Or would eastern Germany have experienced a revival in its economic fortunes in this TL as a result of the German military-industrial complex moving into there in order to use as a base for Germany's governing of Eastern Europe?

Any thoughts on this?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Would eastern Germany--with the exception of industrialized Silesia--have continued to stagnate due to its agricultural economy (while the rest of Germany was rapidly industrializing)?
For the record, here are two useful Wikipedia articles about this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostflucht

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landflucht

Also, here is a map to show the location of the areas/territories that I am talking about here:

https://eucurtohistoria.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/germany1871.jpg

germany1871.jpg
 
I think that postwar the large estates would mechanise and become more like the big farms in the US, Canada and Australia. With the Prussian 3 class franchise ending after the war the political power/protection of this class of people would be reduced and they'd have to get with the times to maintain their wealth and influence. IIRC AH was wary of Mitteleuropa because of the threat to its agricultural sector, so I'm guessing the potential threat is from the German agricultural sector.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I think that postwar the large estates would mechanise and become more like the big farms in the US, Canada and Australia.

So, would we see even more eastern Germans move west since their labor would no longer be needed on the farms in the East?

With the Prussian 3 class franchise ending after the war the political power/protection of this class of people would be reduced and they'd have to get with the times to maintain their wealth and influence.

By "this class of people," you mean the Junkers, correct?

IIRC AH was wary of Mitteleuropa because of the threat to its agricultural sector, so I'm guessing the potential threat is from the German agricultural sector.

Potential threat to Austria-Hungary, or to whom? Indeed, I simply want to clarify this part.
 
I wonder if things might not go in a somewhat different direction. A German victory in 1917 would probably have resulted in the incorporation of substantial portions of the northwestern corner of the former Russian Empire into Germany. As these areas - what, in our own time line became the Baltic States - were home to a large number of large agricultural estates, the effect of annexation would have been a great increase in the number of the owners of such estates, and thus their political influence. In other words, we might well see an alliance between the "Baltic Barons" and the "Cabbage Counts."

In such a situation, mechanization might strengthen the economic position of the landowners. They would be able to make the investment in tractors, which they would then make available to their tenants in exchange for an additional share of the harvest. They would also be able to obtain the services of traveling combine harvesters, which would put them in a strong position when it came to the division of the harvest. The use of combine harvesters would also allow the landowners to dispense with the services of the Russian migrant workers who did much of the work of harvesting crops in eastern Germany before 1914.

Because of this, we might see a landscape that many Canadian, Australian, and American grain farmers would find familiar, but a political system that would be very different from the ones they knew.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I wonder if things might not go in a somewhat different direction. A German victory in 1917 would probably have resulted in the incorporation of substantial portions of the northwestern corner of the former Russian Empire into Germany. As these areas - what, in our own time line became the Baltic States - were home to a large number of large agricultural estates, the effect of annexation would have been a great increase in the number of the owners of such estates, and thus their political influence. In other words, we might well see an alliance between the "Baltic Barons" and the "Cabbage Counts."

Would a victorious Germany have been willing to give German citizenship to Latvia's and Estonia's entire population, though?

In such a situation, mechanization might strengthen the economic position of the landowners. They would be able to make the investment in tractors, which they would then make available to their tenants in exchange for an additional share of the harvest. They would also be able to obtain the services of traveling combine harvesters, which would put them in a strong position when it came to the division of the harvest. The use of combine harvesters would also allow the landowners to dispense with the services of the Russian migrant workers who did much of the work of harvesting crops in eastern Germany before 1914.

All of this appears to make sense. :)

Because of this, we might see a landscape that many Canadian, Australian, and American grain farmers would find familiar, but a political system that would be very different from the ones they knew.

Agreed.
 
So, would we see even more eastern Germans move west since their labor would no longer be needed on the farms in the East?

Dunno, there will be a lost generation of men killed, maimed and living shorter, reduced capacity lives due to the war as well as a need for people to run an expanded German government machine so mechanisation might not be too bad in terms of demographic displacement.

By "this class of people," you mean the Junkers, correct?

Yes, the 3 class Prussian franchise divided representation up into thirds by tax bracket within the district based on the revenue the Government received, first class constituted 4.7% of the population, the second class 12.7% and the third class 82.6%. The distribution meant that a first-class vote had 17.5 times the value of a third-class vote and wealthy Junkers in the top 2 classes had a disproportionate influence on the Government.

Potential threat to Austria-Hungary, or to whom? Indeed, I simply want to clarify this part.

I'm no expert on this, but I know that as part of the Mitteleuropa setup Germany wanted to protect its industries and AH wanted to protect its agriculture. Given ME was centred on Germany I assume AH wanted to protect its agriculture from Germany, presumably because it was a threat somehow.

I wonder if things might not go in a somewhat different direction. A German victory in 1917 would probably have resulted in the incorporation of substantial portions of the northwestern corner of the former Russian Empire into Germany. As these areas - what, in our own time line became the Baltic States - were home to a large number of large agricultural estates, the effect of annexation would have been a great increase in the number of the owners of such estates, and thus their political influence. In other words, we might well see an alliance between the "Baltic Barons" and the "Cabbage Counts."

That seems plausible enough, however as mentioned above the landed wealth gave bloated political power due to the voting system and the voting system was going to change soon after the war which will deflate the power of these landed classes.

In such a situation, mechanization might strengthen the economic position of the landowners. They would be able to make the investment in tractors, which they would then make available to their tenants in exchange for an additional share of the harvest. They would also be able to obtain the services of traveling combine harvesters, which would put them in a strong position when it came to the division of the harvest. The use of combine harvesters would also allow the landowners to dispense with the services of the Russian migrant workers who did much of the work of harvesting crops in eastern Germany before 1914.

I think tenant farming would die out, estates would be consolidated into units best suited for mechanisation and farm workers would be employed for wages.
 

Deleted member 94680

Depends what you envisage as Germany's "governing of Eastern Europe" to be. Protectorates of the Empire or satellite states occupied by the Army or just flat out annexation. The form that post- Brest-Litovsk Eastern Europe takes would affect the amount of German troops needed to enforce it. More soldiers needed for the Heer would mean mechanisation of eastern Prussian farms would maybe even be required as opposed to being resisted.

Out of interest, does anyone know for definite when the promise of overhauling the German franchise was made? I believe it was late in the War IIRC, would a POD of 1917 or so allow the Kaiser and the Junkers to dodge making that promise?
 
Out of interest, does anyone know for definite when the promise of overhauling the German franchise was made? I believe it was late in the War IIRC, would a POD of 1917 or so allow the Kaiser and the Junkers to dodge making that promise?

7th of April 1917, hence its called the Easter Message.

Depends what you envisage as Germany's "governing of Eastern Europe" to be. Protectorates of the Empire or satellite states occupied by the Army or just flat out annexation. The form that post- Brest-Litovsk Eastern Europe takes would affect the amount of German troops needed to enforce it. More soldiers needed for the Heer would mean mechanisation of eastern Prussian farms would maybe even be required as opposed to being resisted.

I don't think occupation would last in the longer term, IOTL occupation began with 50 divisions and by the time it ended was down to 25 divisions. Once the politicians and diplomats wrest control of the Eastern territories from Ober Ost they'll set them up so they benefit Germany without requiring a heavy hand; things like membership of the Mitteleuropa customs union and I imagine defence treaties and the like, otherwise these countries will be left to run themselves more or less.
 

Deleted member 94680

7th of April 1917, hence its called the Easter Message.

Right, thanks for that. I suppose, even if victorious, the agitation for societal reform would be there.

I don't think occupation would last in the longer term, IOTL occupation began with 50 divisions and by the time it ended was down to 25 divisions. Once the politicians and diplomats wrest control of the Eastern territories from Ober Ost they'll set them up so they benefit Germany without requiring a heavy hand; things like membership of the Mitteleuropa customs union and I imagine defence treaties and the like, otherwise these countries will be left to run themselves more or less.

Fair enough, I suppose. The German Army would be larger ITTL (along the lines of the pre-War Heer, plus a bit for the increased commitments) but obviously far larger than 100,000 men. I'd wager the Navy would be bigger as well, given German desire to seriously challenge the RN.
 
Right, thanks for that. I suppose, even if victorious, the agitation for societal reform would be there.

Bethmann understood, and managed to convince the Kaiser, that you couldn't deny a fair vote to millions of 20-24 year olds who had just fought in a massive war.

Fair enough, I suppose. The German Army would be larger ITTL (along the lines of the pre-War Heer, plus a bit for the increased commitments) but obviously far larger than 100,000 men. I'd wager the Navy would be bigger as well, given German desire to seriously challenge the RN.

Even at prewar levels the German military would be vastly more powerful than the OTL Reichswehr/marine.
 

Deleted member 94680

Even at prewar levels the German military would be vastly more powerful than the OTL Reichswehr/marine.

Oh I agree entirely, that was the point I was trying to make. Although as you said, I'm not sure it would be able to take the unemployment resulting from the mechanisation of Prussian farms.

A post-WWI victorious Kaiserreich would need a higher degree of autarky in Europe than, say, a victorious Third Reich. Europe after the War, for all the German satellites or protectorates, would still have plenty of independent hostile nations that might not be so keen on German trade.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Depends what you envisage as Germany's "governing of Eastern Europe" to be. Protectorates of the Empire or satellite states occupied by the Army or just flat out annexation.

Puppet states (with the possible exception of the United Baltic Duchy, of course).

The form that post- Brest-Litovsk Eastern Europe takes would affect the amount of German troops needed to enforce it.

Agreed.

More soldiers needed for the Heer would mean mechanisation of eastern Prussian farms would maybe even be required as opposed to being resisted.

Agreed.
 

Anderman

Donor
Back to topic. East and west prussia could become tourist attractions massurian lakes etc. Another factor for development could be the university of Königsberg adding a department of engineering would help.
It should be mentioned that dispite BMW or MAN Bavaria was not industrial power house before WW2 either.
 

Anderman

Donor
BMW Bayerische Motorenwerke the car manufacturer and MAN Maschinenfabrik Augsburg Nürnberg makes diesel engines and other machines at the time. Both companies are located in Bavaria but Bavaria was still a mostly agricultural state.
 
A post-WWI victorious Kaiserreich would need a higher degree of autarky in Europe than, say, a victorious Third Reich. Europe after the War, for all the German satellites or protectorates, would still have plenty of independent hostile nations that might not be so keen on German trade.

From my reading about German war aims, industrialists and politicians recognised that Mitteleuropa alone was not big enough for the German economy, it needed free access to world markets. It was for this reason that so many things went on and off the list of war aims in the west: the spectrum for Belgium was from full annexation through to joining to ME to a simple treaty not to ally with Britain or France, similarly by late 1916 even the annexation of Briey ore field was no longer imperative compared to the over riding imperative that Britain and France don't erect trade barriers with themselves, their empires or third parties they have a lot of influence over. I was a surprised to learn how much they'd give away in the west to get this free access.
 
Agriculturally speaking, East Prussia was one of the most advanced regions in the 1930's. Without WW2 and a victorious WW1 I would expect this trend to explode even more, only coming to it's right post-deindustrialisation (it would probably happen, especially with Mittelafrika around). East Prussia could become TTL's GMO hub. This could combine with Teutonic Knights tourism (as mentioned by Anderman). If Brest Litovsk get implented Königsberg would be the hub to the German Baltic. I think the biggest advantage of East Prussia, West Prussia and Pomerania will be (my first point) that they will never industrialize. In the short term this gives them a disadvantage. But when Silesia, Rheinland and Saxony enter a big time economic recession on a similair scale to OTL Wallonia these regions could finally start to bloom. Their coastal locations also gives them a wind energy advantage, and their relative low population densities combined with their land climate could also simulate solar energy farms. In the long term I think east Germany would prosper.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
BMW Bayerische Motorenwerke the car manufacturer and MAN Maschinenfabrik Augsburg Nürnberg makes diesel engines and other machines at the time. Both companies are located in Bavaria but Bavaria was still a mostly agricultural state.
OK; also, though, why exactly did this change after the end of World War II?
 
Top