The Unfortunate Death of Archduke Franz Ferdinand

CaliGuy

Banned
Franz Ferdinand is irrelevant since this PoD has him die in a hunting accident.

True; indeed, a lot depends on what Kaiser Karl does in this TL.

Grey Wolf has a couple of flaws in his post about him anyways.

If you want to elaborate on this, then go ahead.

Nevertheless, the Hungarians were hardly pro-independence at this time despite the nationalistic rhetoric. If their autonomy is maintained, they won't be a problem. Even then, Hungary is so utterly dependent of the Monarchy that their economy would (and did iOTL) collapse of they broke away.

So, did Hungary's economy stagnate after 1920?

Also, I agree that a lot depends on whether or not Hungary's autonomy is maintained as well as if Kaiser Karl decides to implement universal suffrage in Hungary in this TL.
 
True; indeed, a lot depends on what Kaiser Karl does in this TL.

Pretty much, and I would argue that Karl was significantly more flexible than FF and got more respect in general.


If you want to elaborate on this, then go ahead.

I didn't want to derail, but since you asked, I'll keep ot brief.

The premise is built on FF turning the Empire into a federal state and IIRC parliamentarian. The problem is FF was neither these things; he was most definitely not liberal and from what I read may have wanted to restore absolutism, and he was most definitely a centralist. He had no intentions to federalise and there is no evidence that hr supported the United States of Greater-Austria scheme (though he was briefly interested).

So, did Hungary's economy stagnate after 1920?

Also, I agree that a lot depends on whether or not Hungary's autonomy is maintained as well as if Kaiser Karl decides to implement universal suffrage in Hungary in this TL.

Oh man, did it stagnate. The Hungarian economy completely collapsed and the post-war treaty made recovery very difficult. Arguably, Hungary never recovered from 1918-1921, although that would be fairly inaccurate since the average Hungarian's quality of life has increased since then, it never propsered like during the KuK era.

I don't think Karl and the Hungarian magnates have much of a choice when it comes to expanded suffrage. They'll have to give in or it might end in revolution.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Pretty much, and I would argue that Karl was significantly more flexible than FF and got more respect in general.

OK.

I didn't want to derail, but since you asked, I'll keep ot brief.

The premise is built on FF turning the Empire into a federal state and IIRC parliamentarian. The problem is FF was neither these things; he was most definitely not liberal and from what I read may have wanted to restore absolutism, and he was most definitely a centralist. He had no intentions to federalise and there is no evidence that hr supported the United States of Greater-Austria scheme (though he was briefly interested).

Didn't FF want to implement universal suffrage in Hungary? I mean, I heard that he wanted to implement this in order to help consolidate his own power and advance his own policies, but AFAIK he still wanted to implement it.

Also, Yes, in regards to the United States of Austria, AFAIK this was a proposal which Professor Popovici proposed and which FF rejected.

Oh man, did it stagnate. The Hungarian economy completely collapsed and the post-war treaty made recovery very difficult. Arguably, Hungary never recovered from 1918-1921, although that would be fairly inaccurate since the average Hungarian's quality of life has increased since then, it never propsered like during the KuK era.

OK; understood.

Also, out of curiosity--how successful do you think that the Magyarization campaign would have been had Hungary kept its territories intact to the present-day? :

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

I don't think Karl and the Hungarian magnates have much of a choice when it comes to expanded suffrage. They'll have to give in or it might end in revolution.

Were the Hungarian magnates smart enough to see this danger, though?
 
Didn't FF want to implement universal suffrage in Hungary? I mean, I heard that he wanted to implement this in order to help consolidate his own power and advance his own policies, but AFAIK he still wanted to implement it.

Also, Yes, in regards to the United States of Austria, AFAIK this was a proposal which Professor Popovici proposed and which FF rejected.

That sounds rather uncharacteristic of him. It could have been little more than a threat to the magnates. I'd need some sources to be convinced otherwise. Hell, I don't even think the King had the power to implement such a reform anyways.

OK; understood.

Also, out of curiosity--how successful do you think that the Magyarization campaign would have been had Hungary kept its territories intact to the present-day? :

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

Likely as successful as active Magyarisation or any form of coerced ethnic assimilation ever was short of genocide. i.e. not much success. Assimilation just... doesn't work unless the person voluntarily embraces the new culture. It worked with the German-speakers and Jews of the Kingdom, whom were educated and typically near the Magyar urban centres, but not with the Slovaks, Serbs and Romanians in the 'periphery', whom happened to have limited access to education institutions (as did the majority of Magyars, but that's another topic).

Were the Hungarian magnates smart enough to see this danger, though?
Some were, some weren't. The Hungarian elite was severely divided on several issues and there were a number of sympathetic noblemen supporting reforms. I doubt the majority is dumb enough to gamble and likely lose everything. Especially if there is widespread demonstrations, whom are likely to bypass the magnates and directly appeal to the King (with results dependent on various circumstances).
 

CaliGuy

Banned
That sounds rather uncharacteristic of him. It could have been little more than a threat to the magnates. I'd need some sources to be convinced otherwise. Hell, I don't even think the King had the power to implement such a reform anyways.

Ask Wiking; indeed, I think that he previously mentioned this somewhere here.

Likely as successful as active Magyarisation or any form of coerced ethnic assimilation ever was short of genocide. i.e. not much success. Assimilation just... doesn't work unless the person voluntarily embraces the new culture. It worked with the German-speakers and Jews of the Kingdom, whom were educated and typically near the Magyar urban centres, but not with the Slovaks, Serbs and Romanians in the 'periphery', whom happened to have limited access to education institutions (as did the majority of Magyars, but that's another topic).

OK.

Some were, some weren't. The Hungarian elite was severely divided on several issues and there were a number of sympathetic noblemen supporting reforms. I doubt the majority is dumb enough to gamble and likely lose everything. Especially if there is widespread demonstrations, whom are likely to bypass the magnates and directly appeal to the King (with results dependent on various circumstances).

OK; understood. However, it is also worth noting that the Hungarian elite wasn't smart enough to make reforms in time to avoid revolution in 1918 in our TL.
 
OK. However, there might eventually be a new peak for this--perhaps after Russia becomes sufficiently powerful that France becomes sufficiently confident of winning a European war without Britain.

Yes, it will probably have some effect on this. However, if a sufficiently good opportunity arises--such as if Hungary attempts to secede in 1917--France might nevertheless be tempted to go to war even without Britain's help.

Also, over the long(er)-run, Russia's growing power might compensate for British neutrality or even British hostility in the eyes of the French. However, this would probably take a couple of decades at the very least.

The assumption here is that Russia remains stable. This is by no means certain and even without the disasters the war brought there was still a strong possibility of a revolution.
 
Staying a world/great power, hence : the colonies.

Compared to that Alscae-Lorraine was a side-dish.

I think you would be underestimating the political importance of the irredentism , as well as its importance and influence for (at least) the French decision-makers.
Beside as well then you are overestimating the rationality and/or the logics influence in the political-military decision making process (European and French in specific).
 
But he was being treated in Berlin by an English doctor and the Kaiserin was of course Princess Vicky. It's not stretching the possible alternatives to postulate that much earlier treatment at Guys hospital to remove the cancerous growth might haven successful. Given the long life enjoyed by his father, he might easily have lived until the 1930's.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The assumption here is that Russia remains stable. This is by no means certain and even without the disasters the war brought there was still a strong possibility of a revolution.
Ironically, though, a revolution might be good for Russia if it results in more competent leadership.
 

BooNZ

Banned
Yes, because the U.S. sure went to Hell after its own revolution (sarcasm)!
To continue the metaphor, the American 'revolution' was more of a pedicure on a perfectly good foot.

Further, the evidence of the nexus between that change of management and improved prosperity of the U.S. population is not entirely conclusive. Ourselves and the west island endured British colonialism with a higher GDP per capita than those exceptional North Americans until the 1930s.

Considering who was running the place I'd say more like amputating a gangrenous foot with a chain saw and no anesthetic.
Probably more accurate, but not very amusing... Despite everything, Imperial Russia was making really meaningful progress in education, agricultural productivity and infrastructure.

What its leadership failed to grasp was that Imperial Russia was still not prepared/suited/ready for total war.
 
Top