The value of a Central Powers victory?

[JSmith]

This may have been addressed elsewhere but it seems to be that its becoming common AH knowledge that a Central Powers victory in WW1 would not have been such a bad thing. Its obvious that the main reason for this persepective is that a Central Powers victory would likely have meant no Adolf Hitler and no Nazis-in power in Germany and killing millions at least. This of course would have been a great thing. But besides this wouldn't an Allied victory have still been preferable-in OTL at least not TL 191 ? Wouldn't Imperial Germany have been similar to Nazi Germany-without the genocide but still harsh and dictatorial? Doesn't some form of Fascism or Communism still arise ? Wouldn't there have still been another global war-hot or cold? Please give me your ideas on this topic.

 

[wietze]

Germany pre-WW1 was a democracy, not that different from other democratic countries of the time.

maybe read up a little


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire

 

[Deleted member 1487]

This may have been addressed elsewhere but it seems to be thats its becoming common AH knowledge that a Central Powers victory in WW1 would not have been such a bad thing. Its obvious that the main reason for this persepective is that a Central Powers victory would likely have meant no Adolf Hitler and no Nazis-in power in Germany and killing millions at least. This of course would have been a great thing. But besides this wouldn't an Allied victory have still been preferable-in OTL at least not TL 191 ? Wouldn't Imperial Germany have been similar to Nazi Germany-without the genocide but still harsh and dictatorial? Doesn't some form of Fascism or Communism still arise ?Wouldn't there have still been another global war-hot or cold? Please give me your ideas on this topic.

I think a negotiated peace deal without the US in 1917 would be best, as it avoids the issues of the Communists taking over Russia and the problems of Versailles, as well as all the Civil Wars in 1918-22/3. That would save a lot of lives. Germany of course would not be the nicest of places, but not any worse than the British or French were in the interwar era to their colonial peoples (which was not nice).

Honestly though, even though Germany was going to go through a nationalistic period after WW1, the monarchy had been discredited, so a modern constitution was coming and eventually that would probably trend toward a more socialistic society that took care of its people and was less interested in maintaining the interests of the nobility at home or abroad.

Frankly there would just be less chance for another war with the Entente and Central Powers exhausted but not beaten, as neither side would really have overwhelming grievances worth starting another war over, and all would recognize that modern warfare was not 'winnable', so would not be worth fighting. It also keeps European stability, so there wouldn't be chaos that crazies could sneak into after the war.

 

[Gregg]

This may have been addressed elsewhere but it seems to be that its becoming common AH knowledge that a Central Powers victory in WW1 would not have been such a bad thing.

And sea mammals will conquer Britain in 1940.

Wouldn't Imperial Germany have been similar to Nazi Germany-without the genocide but still harsh and dictatorial?

Without the genocide in Europe. With a genocide in Africa instead. Not an improvement, really.

Doesn't some form of Fascism or Communism still arise ?

Probably, though where and when is hard to butterfly exactly.

Wouldn't there have still been another global war-hot or cold?

Yes. Assuming a CP victory that hasn't also involved the invasion and occupation of the UK (so, one without ASB help), then Germany and Britain will engage in arms race until they fight a war.

Germany pre-WW1 was a democracy, not that different from other democratic countries of the time.

It was very different from other democratic countries of the time, and it prided itself on being such. Germany explicitly saw itself as a third way between "Western" democracy and "Eastern" autocracy, combining both. What that meant in practice was that the Kaiser could be an autocrat as long as the democratically-elected legislature was willing to pay for it (and that was almost all of the time). A Germany that wins WWI isn't going to magically turn into the Weimar Republic and embrace liberty and democracy. Unless it's a very last-minute victory (which seems ASB to me), the Kaiser will be emboldened by victory and will hold strong autocratic power for the next decade.

 

[freivolk]

Germany pre-WW1 was a democracy, not that different from other democratic countries of the time.

maybe read up a little


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire

No, sorry, it was definitly not a democracy, it was a constitutional monarchy. The Reichstag was a democratic element, but the executiv powers laid only in the hand of the Monarch.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

Kaiser "Only amidst the ruins of London will I forgive Georgy."

 

[altamiro]

Unless it's a very last-minute victory (which seems ASB to me), the Kaiser will be emboldened by victory and will hold strong autocratic power for the next decade.

No, this would be the case after a very quick Central Powers victory. Since 1916 the Kaiser was a glorified figurehead on the military dictatorship by Ludendorff and Hindenburg, and everyone knew it. Even immediately before the war, for every 5 minutes Willy 2 was for the war he was 10 minutes against it. This, at least as much as the lost war itself, destroyed any support Germans had for the Kaiserreich system. Last minute hairbreadth victory won't change that - either L&H vacate their seat to make place for something halfway between Wilhelmine Germany and more conservative but more stable Weimar Republic, or they clamp down on the unrest and you get a German Civil War right there and then.

 

[Gregg]

No, this would be the case after a very quick Central Powers victory. Since 1916 the Kaiser was a glorified figurehead on the military dictatorship by Ludendorff and Hindenburg, and everyone knew it.

But Ludendorff and Hindenburg aren't going to challenge him for power. Nobody who would emerge with credit from a victory up until spring 1917, is going to do anything other than rally around the Kaiser and pass the credit on to him. That's how empires work. Hell, it works that way in many democracies too - look at Churchill's career.

Even immediately before the war, for every 5 minutes Willy 2 was for the war he was 10 minutes against it. This, at least as much as the lost war itself, destroyed any support Germans had for the Kaiserreich system.

As far as I know, his vacillation was entirely reflected by the German people before the war, switching between bellicosity and pacifism as much as the British did.

Last minute hairbreadth victory won't change that

A last-minute hair's-breadth victory almost certainly would doom the Kaiser, because he's already made a lot of promises to the Reichstag and I doubt he'd be able to force himself to stick to them. But I don't see how a late victory is possible without some very specific changes to the timeline.

either L&H vacate their seat to make place for something halfway between Wilhelmine Germany and more conservative but more stable Weimar Republic, or they clamp down on the unrest and you get a German Civil War right there and then.

Which L&H would crush. They crushed it in OTL despite having lost the war - any movement against the Kaiser isn't going to survive in a TL where he and his circle have just won the war. The way I see it going - again, unless it's a very late victory - is a post-war election which is won by conservatives and pro-Kaiser liberals. The SPD has split, the constituencies are unreformed, and the nation is gripped by patriotism and victory - Germany is not going to elect a reformist Reichstag. Five years after that, Germany will be prospering from its pan-European trading bloc and its new Empire of Mittelafrika, and the Kaiser and his government will get the credit; reformist elements will make some gains, but probably not enough for a majority. So it's going to be at least a decade before you have a Reichstag that begins pushing for even moderate reforms approaching what we saw in Weimar.

 

[unprincipled peter]

"The Reichstag was a democratic element, but the executiv powers laid only in the hand of the Monarch."

I've been led to believe that Wilhelm II was pushed to the background after one too many blunders.

That said, this OP is something I wonder about. I think far too many people simply ascribe all the eventualities of the third Reich to the Germany that AH wins WWI. That's a mistake. Yes, the underlying feeling of German superiority and militaristic tendencies are part of the German culture, but that culture had also gotten warped by the shock of losing, a warped interpretation of why the loss occurred, and a decade of having the entire country's infrastructure, gov't, and society ripped apart. The same Germany that OTL occurred would not be the same one that would occur in an ATL. Plus, our 20/20 hindsight is massively colored by our vision of Third Reich Germany. After that, we find it hard to imagine a Germany not evil. I don't think that's necessarily the case. Germany certainly would want to remain top dog in Europe, and expand their colonial empire. they would remain no more depraved than their contemporaries, unlike the Third Reich, who took depravity to a new level.

 

[Mikestone8]

Without the genocide in Europe. With a genocide in Africa instead. Not an improvement, really.

Any reason to think Africa's history will be any bloodier than OTL? No doubt there'll be a native war or two, but no reason to expect anything more than that.

No doubt, a century after a CP victory, Africa will be a basket case, but probably no more so than it is anyway.

 

[Bernard Woolley]

I'm sure that Belgium and Luxembourg might not agree that a CP victory would not have been 'such a bad thing'.

 

[rast]

Pre-war Germany was a state under the rule of law and she provided freedom of information and opinion to her citizens. The Reichstag did not elect the chancellor, but they decided about all the money the chancellor intended to spend.
So, while not exactly a full democracy, she also was far from despotism. - And the Kaiser had far less means to influence day-to-day politics than for example the US President; for everything he wanted to be done he required the counter-signature of the chancellor.
The long-term trend was to more democracy, although the old elites fought hard to retain their prerogatives.
Even Hindenburg-Ludendorff would have been reduced to normal size once peace had been declared. Hindenburg would have been retired again, and Ludendorff would have moved to the red brick house near the Reichtstag as Chief of the General Staff, a position of hardly any influence in peacetime.
Any attempt at military dictatorship would have failed once demobilisation was declared, and not declaring demobilisation after victory would have resulted in instant national uprising and general strike.

 

[theirishdreamer]

Hmm

A Central Powers victory will be good for some and bad for others, which is basically as OTL went. Belguim yes, but is it worse for the Belguim people or to use the main example Jews.
Except with a CP victory a mostly democratic dominating Europe is better than what happened OTL. Many talk about French revanhism and such but thats not really viable as WW1 being lost finishes France as a Great Power and relgates them to the level of Spain.

The lack of conflict in this kind of Europe would be view favourably than the self destruction and bloodshed than happened from an Entente victory. In many ways all the world wars did was delay Germany's rise to European dominance and assure the Century was "won" by the US.

 

[unprincipled peter]

French revanchism is given far too much power on this board. In OTL, France was under no disillusionment that they were anything but a weak sister on the continent. Alsace-Lorraine was a cause for resentment, but France would not have gone to war as a sole cause to get it back. With a defeat in WWI, resentment remains, but any dreams of getting A-L back withers even more completely than it was pre war. There is about ZERO chance a second world war would have erupted over A-L, and sans Ferdinand's death, WWI would not have erupted over it.

France was finished as a great power in victory. In defeat, she would have been reduced further.

 

[Snaut]

Its obvious that the main reason for this persepective is that a Central Powers victory would likely have meant no Adolf Hitler and no Nazis-in power in Germany and killing millions at least. This of course would have been a great thing.

‘No Nazis’ tends to be used as a major argument for the value of CP victories. IMO this view ignores the fact that their rise IOTL was the result of considerable luck, and was not significantly influenced by the Entente’s victory. The overthrowing of the German Empire made the rise of Nazism possible, yes. But so did lots of other things – such as Hitler not dying in a trench, Russia not surviving intact to form a powerful and terrifying counterweight discouraging German revanchism, and so on. Comparing a CP victory to one specific Entente Victory timeline – our own - in which Hitler did come to power and did terrible damage to Europe is one thing. Comparing it to a randomly chosen Entente victory, in which Nazi Germany and a major European war are not likely, is quite another.

 

[Monty Burns]

‘No Nazis’ tends to be used as a major argument for the value of CP victories. IMO this view ignores the fact that their rise IOTL was the result of considerable luck, and was not significantly influenced by the Entente’s victory. The overthrowing of the German Empire made the rise of Nazism possible, yes. But so did lots of other things – such as Hitler not dying in a trench, Russia not surviving intact to form a powerful and terrifying counterweight discouraging German revanchism, and so on. Comparing a CP victory to one specific Entente Victory timeline – our own - in which Hitler did come to power and did terrible damage to Europe is one thing. Comparing it to a randomly chosen Entente victory, in which Nazi Germany and a major European war are not likely, is quite another.

The entente victory did play a role, indirectly. If it were just the territorial losses and nothing else, you're right. But parts of Germany were occupied (the Ruhr occupation was particularly nasty and happened years after the war) and the reparations were, while never really threatening, a public opinion desaster. At one time, Germany would have to pay until the 1980s. Not that much actually, and it wouldn't hurt very much economically, but it's not that hard to make something out of that for a talented and unscrupulous demagogue such as Hitler. And then you had the hyperinflation that ate away the savings of many in the lower middle classes that later voted for Hitler. Finally, there's communism as another anti-democratic force which I doubt would have been this influential without WWI - and without Bolshevik Russia around.

 

[Vingilótë]

The entente victory did play a role, indirectly. If it were just the territorial losses and nothing else, you're right. But parts of Germany were occupied (the Ruhr occupation was particularly nasty and happened years after the war) and the reparations were, while never really threatening, a public opinion desaster. At one time, Germany would have to pay until the 1980s. Not that much actually, and it wouldn't hurt very much economically, but it's not that hard to make something out of that for a talented and unscrupulous demagogue such as Hitler. And then you had the hyperinflation that ate away the savings of many in the lower middle classes that later voted for Hitler. Finally, there's communism as another anti-democratic force which I doubt would have been this influential without WWI - and without Bolshevik Russia around.

I think it's important to note that many of the economic problems actually stemmed directly from Versailles. The hyperinflation, for example, was a direct result of the reparations and the French occupation of the Ruhr, and while it's main gains were in terms of good PR, it also highlighted that the reparations had been and would have been the cause of many economic disasters down the road. Likewise, the Great Depression's devastating effect on Germany was also a direct result of Versailles, because Germany, who had been dependent on loans from America to cope with Versailles, no longer had this resource. So, the economic collapse in the 1930s can also be linked back directly to Versailles.

 

[wietze]

A Central Powers victory will be good for some and bad for others, which is basically as OTL went. Belguim yes, but is it worse for the Belguim people or to use the main example Jews.
.

the effect in belgium would be mixed anyways, it would probably be better for the flemish speaking part of the population due to no longer being forced to comply to the french speaking upper class.

 

[Catspoke]

Any reason to think Africa's history will be any bloodier than OTL? No doubt there'll be a native war or two, but no reason to expect anything more than that.

No doubt, a century after a CP victory, Africa will be a basket case, but probably no more so than it is anyway.

I think there is the concern that there would be more genocides of the Herero variety

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide

I don't think there would necessarily be more as a matter of state policy, the Germans just didn't handle revolts well (or maybe too well), so if somebody revolts or causes trouble, extermination is the likely result.

However I don't think Britain agrees to any peace after 1915 where Germany keeps her colonies. Why risk German submarine bases being built worldwide for the next war????

 

[Vingilótë]

I think there is the concern that there would be more genocides of the Herero variety

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide

I don't think there would necessarily be more as a matter of state policy, the Germans just didn't handle revolts well (or maybe too well), so if somebody revolts or causes trouble, extermination is the likely result.

I don't think Britain agrees to any peace after 1915 where Germany keeps her colonies. Why risk German submarine bases being built worldwide for the next war????

I don't think any peace involves Germany keeping her colonies, period. Well, the British ones, at least. There's simply no way for them to enforce such a demand.