To the Victor, Go the Spoils (Redux): A Plausible Central Powers Victory

All caught up and just want to thank the author for this fantastic timeline. I have nothing against a good ‘wank’, but it’s quite refreshing to read a timeline where plausibility instead of a pre-established ultimate goal is unequivocally the primary concern of the author. Looking forward for more!
 
Something I’ve just thought of. Germany might agree to Wilson’s League of Nations (if the League is proposed here) as a means to try and strip colonies from Belgium or France.

In other words, the German delegation turns up to the Brussels conference, claims that Leopold’s excesses in the Congo are “proof” the area requires “protection” under a LofN mandate, effectively turning it into a German colony.
 

tonycat77

Kicked
Which isn't to say British colonialism wasn't incredibly violent and repressive, but it was at the very least a functioning democracy who generally didn't commit widespread genocide in their African colonies. There is absolutely nothing admirable about the German Empire in this period which isn't found in the British, while far more is reprehensible.
I can't believe you wrote that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule
 
Locked out of influence by the restrictive German electoral franchise
Sorry but i have quite a bit of a problem with this line.
Many confuse the prussian electoral franchise with the german federal franchise of the time.
As a matter of fact the federal franchise was one of the most democratic ones of the time. The downside was the federal parliament had way to few competencies.
The prussian franchise on the other hand was quite unjust but the prussian parliament, as the parliament of the biggest memberstate of the empire had an excessive amount of power.
 
I don't think a League of Nations is in the cards -- the bitter multipolarity that exists between the German and Anglo blocs suggests something more like the Congress of Vienna, based in the Westphalian model. Wilson also couldn't manage to get America to join when we were on the winning team, let alone in these circumstances
 
In other words, the German delegation turns up to the Brussels conference, claims that Leopold’s excesses in the Congo are “proof” the area requires “protection” under a LofN mandate, effectively turning it into a German colony.

From what I remember from an earlier TL on this site, they wouldn't even need to go back to Leopold, because during the war the Belgians used a coercive coolie system to support their colonial forces that was so extreme it caused Congo Free State-level deaths all over again.
 
I can't believe you wrote that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule
Let’s not turn this thread into a flame war again
 
Let’s not turn this thread into a flame war again
There's still room for deescalation, considering there aren't any personal attacks as of yet. Unlike last time, where people were being accused of being kaiserboos for simply being interested in a more decisive German victory, which is naturally one of the more explored alternate WW1 timelines.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe you wrote that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule
Not going to engage, because I have a headache and lack of patience today.
I will say I have never said the British Empire was not brutal and did not kill a tremendous amount of people in colonial wars. So don't put words in my mouth. I may respond more tomorrow, but probably not.
 
Not going to engage, because I have a headache and lack of patience today.
I will say I have never said the British Empire was not brutal and did not kill a tremendous amount of people in colonial wars. So don't put words in my mouth. I may respond more tomorrow, but probably not.
I can't believe you wrote that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule

I wonder about this dialogue and what preceded it. Is it Ok on this forum to have such a memory about the famines in India and Bengal.?The Bengal famine can even document Churchill’s intent as he hate Indians and its their own fault for breeding like rabbits.
It would be quite problematic to have such an opinion on other historical famines committed for similar reasons.
You can find the quote here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a7612176.html?amp
 
I can't believe you wrote that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule
I wonder about this dialogue and what preceded it. Is it Ok on this forum to have such a memory about the famines in India and Bengal.?The Bengal famine can even document Churchill’s intent as he hate Indians and its their own fault for breeding like rabbits.
It would be quite problematic to have such an opinion on other historical famines committed for similar reasons.
You can find the quote here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a7612176.html?amp
I can't believe you guys wrote these with a straight face.

Just the day before yesterday I asked very politely this:
Yeah.... No.

Lets not have a moral debate on the virtues and ethics of the unquestionably vile things Germany, among others, did in the colonial era here please.

Go elsewhere, or dont talk about it on my thread. I'll address these issues my own way within the TL - they are not for people to debate and discuss here.
This is not a space to discuss the morality of various world empires. With hindsight, literally every empire on earth that has ever existed committed enormous crimes. It's virtually pointless debating which one was 'less evil'.

I've asked everyone to respect the fact I do not want discussion about it here for the simple reason that obviously people will never reach a conclusion on those arguments precisely because it's a totally subjective debate.

So, cease - and that goes for all parties involved in this discussion.
 
@tonycat77 @Gudestein
Personally I understand your annoyance with certain posters in this thread but well given the OP has asked to stop, my recommendation is to avoid mod action, just follow the OP’s instruction or put this thread on ignore, which can be surprisingly effective if you want. Or you can also put the certain user on ignore which would hide their posts.
 
Last edited:
Finally, the SPD saw an opening and organised a meeting of the leaders of the Interfactional Committee under Frederich Ebert, Matthias Erzberger, Vice Chancellor Friedrich von Payer, and even radical socialist Hugo Hase of the USPD. Here the faction agreed, with the crucial backing of the FVP that would give them a majority in the Reichstag, to demand immediate new elections along the principles of universal suffrage or the resignation of the Government and it’s replacement with a Government with the confidence of the Reichstag.
The elections to the Reichstag already operated under universal suffrage, and a new election wouldn't do the SPD and the other reformists much good - it wasn't the franchise that was the issue, but rather that even having a reformist majority in the Reichstag (which has been present since 1912) won't do much good because the Kaiser can just appoint whoever he wants anyway.

They'd be much more served to demand something like the OTL October Reforms, imo, or at least a reformist chancellor as their first priority.

Also I wonder if the Reichstag would push for any future peace treaty with France and Britain to be approved by the legislature. That was a big sticking point for them which they wrote into the October Reforms, and would give them a tool to contain the annexationists in the OHL, DVLP and National Liberals. Iirc the OHL presented Brest-Litovsk for approval by the Reichstag, though only informally, so the precedent for the demand is there.
 
Last edited:
If the interfaction forces a government resignation, I think the most likely candidate for Chancellor is Max von Baden. He was recommended by several SPD members after Bethmann-Hollweg's fall in 1917 and was appointed Chancellor in October 1918 in OTL. Other candidates I'd also consider likely would be Vice Chancellor von Payer, Wilhelm Solf and even Ebert. I'm interested to see where you take German politics in this timeline.
Baden is the obvious choice but Solf is also very reasonable, and unjustly overlooked in alternate history where the German Empire survives (he was very influential, one of the few progressive State Secretaries in the government at that time and head of Deutsche Gesellschaft 1914). Payer is a bit too old (he refused an offer to become Reichskanzler in 1918) and I think it's a bit too early for an Ebert chancellorship.

Matthias Erzberger is also a good choice for Chancellor, he was one of the main instigators of the IFA and the Reichstag Peace Proposal and the main leader of the progressive Zentrum wing.
 
I don't think it will be easy for the SPD to come to power, firstly because Germany at that time was still very aggrarian and therefore conservative, and secondly because the great conservative movement remained more or less intact and did not disintegrate into a hundred splinter parties. The big question will be whether the Zentrums Party will join forces with the SPD, as OTL did, or, which in my view is more likely, join the wider conservative camp.
Germany is by no means an agrarian country at this point, it's one of the most industrialised in Europe.

Atm in OTL Zentrum is under the control of its left wing, especially Erzberger's clique and other influential people like Joseph Wirth, so I really can't see them working with the conservatives. They'd need to have a change of leadership, be it to Ludwig Kaas or Adam Stegerwald or someone else before they could consider cooperation with the Protestant conservative right - OTL it happened, but after Erzberger got assassinated and Wirth ended his political career after a failed chancellorship, both of which were very Weimar-specific events.

Besides, who knows how the Conservatives develop after the war. At this point the DkP is a dying force. They and the Junkers have been in opposition to the Kaiser and the government ever since the Mittelland Canal affair, so they have nothing but their electoral strongholds in eastern Prussia and indirect influence over the Agrarian League. Those strongholds are consistently shrinking because of changing demographics, the 1912 election was the worst for the Conservatives in history. OTL they renewed thanks to Weimar ruin and by unifying with basically everyone on the right into a big tent party, which then turned towards middle class reactionary populism (until the NSDAP stole their thunder of course), but idk if that would be repeated in TTL.
 
wSZs4v6.png

Chaos in Germany
The German Interfactional Committee Reorganises
October 1918

While Ludendorff had fallen from his role as effective military head of the state alongside Hindenburg much earlier in the year, he had slowly recovered from his stroke and by October was largely back on his feet - even if he was not fit for command. His aide and ally Max Bauer instead acted as his emissary to the OHL, while Hindenburg listened to both the Quartermaster Max Hoffmann and Ludendorff for advice.

The Kaiser, despite being firmly allied to the OHL, remained his own man and even in 1917 had considered peace with the allies that would have seen Alsace Lorraine returned in exchange for Luxembourg being annexed. This had failed though on account of British disinterest in a peace. Now though, Britain had effective naval supremacy and France had fallen - thus the two sides were at a stalemate neither could easily escape.

For the German people, and particularly the deputies in the Reichstag, this proved far too much to abide by. Peace was being negotiated in Brussels and Vienna, but upon highly expansionist lines Britain would no doubt reject, and ultimately it was Britain who now seemed motivated to continue a blockade - having begun to wrap up their war in Arabia. Essentially, Germany’s Parliamentary leaders, ignored for so long, now worried Germany was sleepwalking towards disaster.

This was not an unfounded concern. After the failure of the Hochseeflotte to sally and the threat of mutiny, the OHL essentially became rudderless. Unclear exactly what to do, but determined to achieve the maximum war aims for Germany, the clique chose to try and impose the harshest terms upon France they could get signed on paper, while aiming to feed the empire with French tribute supplies demanded in the coming treaty.

For Friedrich Ebert and Philipp Scheidemann of the SPD, both growingly popular politicians, the OHL’s direction of the country was growingly difficult to tolerate.

Locked out of influence by the restrictive German electoral franchise and unable to force an election to take place, the SPD felt unable to influence the negotiations with the allies and unable to end the growing economic crisis triggered by the British blockade. The SPD too were concerned that the state may not just fall to revolution if the current policy was kept - but that it’d fall to bolshevik revolution. Particularly after mutineers of the Hochseeflotte pledged their support for the USPD - not the SPD. Exhausted from the conflict, the SPD was also buoyed by a growing confidence from their rising support among the German populace, which sat at least 40% of the country’s voters by late 1918.

The biggest party in Germany, and joined by a gang of other parties who also felt locked out of negotiations such as the Zentrum and FVP, the group ultimately decided that they needed to take action.

Demanding Power
On October 5th, just two days after the German fleet failed to deploy, delegates in Brussels announced that a draft resolution of terms had been agreed in principle by the German delegation.

This agreement would see Belgium lose half of its territory to Germany - while also becoming a ‘vassal’ of Germany, while a further strip of French land in the Alsace region would be annexed as a ‘military zone’, Luxembourg would be annexed and a large strip of French territory from Nancy along the Meuse to Charleville would be annexed, along with the port of Dunkirk.

This outraged the Reichstag, who saw it as an inevitable trigger for a prolonged conflict with Britain and thus economic collapse. Particularly as by the 5th, news of the mutiny had begun to spread among Parliamentary leaders even if it had largely been contained from the general public. Worse still the proposal, combined with the discovery that the Kaiserliche Marine had failed to sortie by the French Government, triggered the immediate collapse of France’s self-destructive Government under Joseph Caillaux and the return of Aristide Briand’s more self-assured Ministry.

France, emboldened by the British belief that Germany’s fleet had essentially been neutered, and with the backing of the US, rejected the proposal and issued an ultimatum demanding more lenient terms along the Wilsonian principles, even going so far as to promise a continued war if the Germans did not agree. This was echoed by the US and British Governments, who aimed to force Germany into agreeing to the independence of Belgium and limited border changes.

Finally, the SPD saw an opening and organised a meeting of the leaders of the Interfactional Committee under Frederich Ebert, Matthias Erzberger, Vice Chancellor Friedrich von Payer, and even radical socialist Hugo Hase of the USPD. Here the faction agreed, with the crucial backing of the FVP that would give them a majority in the Reichstag, to demand immediate new elections along the principles of universal suffrage or the resignation of the Government and it’s replacement with a Government with the confidence of the Reichstag.

Issuing their demand to the Kaiser on November 4th in the morning papers, the group warned that failure by the Kaiser’s Government to agree to these basic terms would lead to the advocation of an immediate general strike across Germany.
"Did you do it? Did you win?"
"Yes."
"What did it cost?"
"..."
"...Hello? Oh, I've seen you've collapsed as well."

At this rate I expect WW1 will be seen as an even more pointless war than it is in OTL
 
I can't believe you guys wrote these with a straight face.

Just the day before yesterday I asked very politely this:

This is not a space to discuss the morality of various world empires. With hindsight, literally every empire on earth that has ever existed committed enormous crimes. It's virtually pointless debating which one was 'less evil'.

I've asked everyone to respect the fact I do not want discussion about it here for the simple reason that obviously people will never reach a conclusion on those arguments precisely because it's a totally subjective debate.

So, cease - and that goes for all parties involved in this discussion.

The reformer, while you own the TL and what you write, you dont own the comments and the discussion. In this case I am calling out some questionable post and actually writing that maybe it shouldn’t be allowed here? It’s in the discussion. I actually agree with you that there is no point of this relativistic evaluation of OTL colonialism on this thread, but the posts I commented upon were on this TL and in my opinion should not stand undisputed.

I do understand your frustration about the sidetracking, but you also have the option of simply ignoring it. It’s not aimed at your writing. The threadmarks allows the readers to skip these comments as well.

@tonycat77 @Gudestein
Personally I understand your annoyance with certain posters in this thread but well given the OP has asked to stop, my recommendation is to avoid mod action, just follow the OP’s instruction or put this thread on ignore, which can be surprisingly effective if you want. Or you can also put the certain user on ignore which would hide their posts.
I have no intention of leaving the TL, it’s an amazing effort and a great read.
 
Top