The mother of AHCs: Make the French individualist, laissez-faire Anglophiles

So what about continuing the July Monarchy? The Orleanists seem to be a pretty pro-English lot. Alternately, how about an Orleanist restoration after the Second Empire collapsed?
The jully monarchy was too instable the only regime that was stable enought was ironically the second empire and it was pro british.
 
Yes, that's true, there was crisis and instability which culminated in the regime collapsing after the Nazis occupied Paris.
The Republic have fallen after. You've plenty of historical context where the fall of the capital didn't lead to the fall of a state.

Well, the simple fact that the IIIrd republic transformed itself into Vichy Regime because of the fall of Paris (something they totally allowed by imp reparation (not talking about the fact they tried to encourage Hitler attacking East since 1936), making authoritarian decisions against their own population, and being a flawed regime.

I'm not sure why you mean by "the German resources" that provided the first decade of growth. Do you mean after WW1, when France was receiving reparations for the German exploitation of their country?
The reparations made by Germans exceeded what France known as destruction, around 150 milliards of gold-mark while the damages were estimated for France around 125 milliards of gold-francs.

And i'm not talking about a real plunder of western Germany concerning resources.

I know that people hate democracy on this site, but you could be fair. The Kaiserreich got whupped by a broken system.
You know, i could ask apologies for implying i'm hate democracy, and i'm a fan of military dictatorship.

Nevertheless, i will answer that. The fact the German Empire wasn't exactly the good guy of WW1, they weren't the "only responsible of the war", or the country that alone wanted 4 years of devastation everywhere in Europe.

This accusation allowed French government to take whatever they wanted. If the course of events would have been different, we could being talking about "France would have deserved what happened because it was the only responsable of the war" as a justification of Germany to take whatever they wanted.

So yeah, considering the difference between damages and reparations, the fact France never had to pay something for the devastation caused by its army, really helped french economy.
 
I agree it was based on such a culture from the beginning, but I'm not sure the military came later. Military spending was a huge part of the US from the time of independence, through the constant fear of invasion from BNA, all the way through 1812. There are examples the other way too: the Dutch are liberal in orientation despite facing worse threats of invasion then the French.


Are we both looking at the country that maintained the smallest possible regular army out of a fear of standing armies, and in Jefferson's time as president, decided that a navy of oversized rowboats was the way to go?

If there was a constant fear of invasion from BNA, it doesn't show in national policy.

On the subject of France, if you want more individualism, I think you need less feudalism - "a man can and should take care of himself" doesn't really work in that kind of social order.

And England saw feudalism erode faster than France.
 

OS fan

Banned
What language is the phrase "laissez-faire" in?
What is the origin of its use and meaning in economics?

It's French, mostly used together with "Laissez passer" and sometimes also with "Laissez decomposer". Proposing "let them do, let it pass". Economy without the state interfering.
 
So what about continuing the July Monarchy? The Orleanists seem to be a pretty pro-English lot. Alternately, how about an Orleanist restoration after the Second Empire collapsed?

Not really. You've obviously never heard of Guizot nor the Infanta Crisis. Louis Philippe rode in on a wave of popular power and then immediately curtailed it and crushed the uppity lower classes. Guizot was Prime Minister for a great period in the 1840s and quipped over the lack of franchise extension ala Britain: "If you want to vote -- get rich." In 1832, Britain's Reform Act had granted the right to vote some 150,000 men: up tp 600,000 from 400,000. Meanwhile, France's electoral law of 1831 merely lowered the electoral cens from 1000 franc to 500. The electorate increased to 100,000 to 166,000 -- and it stayed there, increasing only a little in the late 1840s, and still two late. Out of a country of some thirty million, one out of every 170 Frenchmen could vote.

And then was Spain. Britain and France permenantly broke over Spain and Isabella II. Louis-Philippe sought to marry her to her cousin Cadiz with his son to her sister. As Cadiz was a homosexual, Isabella would have no progeny and his son's heirs would become Kings of Spain. It was Utrecht all over again with Britain squawking and suggesting yet another Coburg for Her Majesty the Queen of Spain. France won out but lost Britain's friendship. Her dynastic hopes were dashed further when Isabella managed to have children anyways.
 
So what about continuing the July Monarchy? The Orleanists seem to be a pretty pro-English lot. Alternately, how about an Orleanist restoration after the Second Empire collapsed?

That was the idea, in fact. The Monarchist had the majority after the Franco-Prussian war. When they agreed on which king they wanted between the legitimist one (frome Charles X) and the Orleanist one (frome Louis-Philippe) they made a deal : the comte de Chambort (legitimist) would be king, but as he didn't have any children, the next would be an Orléans (the comte de Paris).

The problem ? The comte de Chambord wanted to bring back the old white flag instead of the tricolor one. The monarchists thought it wasn't going to work, so they decided to wait the comte to die and then make the comte de Paris King.

But, hey, before Chambord died the republicans manage to get the majority in assembly and the senate, and that's how a restoration gave birth to a Republic.
 
Not really. You've obviously never heard of Guizot nor the Infanta Crisis. Louis Philippe rode in on a wave of popular power and then immediately curtailed it and crushed the uppity lower classes. Guizot was Prime Minister for a great period in the 1840s and quipped over the lack of franchise extension ala Britain: "If you want to vote -- get rich." In 1832, Britain's Reform Act had granted the right to vote some 150,000 men: up tp 600,000 from 400,000. Meanwhile, France's electoral law of 1831 merely lowered the electoral cens from 1000 franc to 500. The electorate increased to 100,000 to 166,000 -- and it stayed there, increasing only a little in the late 1840s, and still two late. Out of a country of some thirty million, one out of every 170 Frenchmen could vote.

So how about having them expand the franchise sooner and the regime surviving?

The problem ? The comte de Chambord wanted to bring back the old white flag instead of the tricolor one. The monarchists thought it wasn't going to work, so they decided to wait the comte to die and then make the comte de Paris King.

So let's kill off the come de Chambord before the end of the Second Empire. Problem solved, no?
 
I probably should have put a smiley somewhere in there...

It's French, mostly used together with "Laissez passer" and sometimes also with "Laissez decomposer". Proposing "let them do, let it pass". Economy without the state interfering.
Indeed.
Curious how something put forward as almost alien to French nature uses
a french phrase attributed to a French merchant, isn't it. ;)
 
Top