Your just going to get mods involved if you continue. Leave it and move on so your not hurting the timeline, this is not a forum for these kind of discussions, if you thought it questionable than contact a mod yourself.
To the Victor, Go the Spoils (Redux): A Plausible Central Powers Victory
- Thread starter TheReformer
- Start date
It affects me if the thread gets clamped down on by mod actions and/or locked.
The purpose of a thread is defined by it's creator, and is outlined in the OP. I'd rather not have massive, literally unreconcilable, often quite virulent debates on my thread. There's plenty of other places to discuss it, It's not actually much of an ask.
I find liberal use of the ignore function rather helpful.
On topic, It feels like all the parties involve might be somehow stummbling to an acceptable peace treaty for all sides.
On topic, It feels like all the parties involve might be somehow stummbling to an acceptable peace treaty for all sides.
I may have expressed myself somewhat awkwardly on this point, but what I meant to say was that at that time the majority of the German population still lived in rural areas. This population is traditionally more conservative than the urban population.
I also think that the decision of the SPD leadership, in combination with other events, risks damaging the party in the long run, especially considering that the SPD has lost influence due to the split from the USPD. How bad it is depends on many factors, one of which is how the emerging peace is viewed by the German population in the long term.
The Zentrum Party has already come under criticism from the Catholic Church for its collaboration with the "socialists" of the SPD. However, this cooperation was more or less accepted because of the existing necessity. Without this feeling of necessity, it may well be that this historical cooperation becomes politically unacceptable under the impression of the "Red Scare".
The future of the conservative camp also depends very much on how society develops and what the conservative parties position themselves for.
Not... really? In 1910, 60% of the population of Germany lived in towns and cities of over 2,000 inhabitants, and 21% lived in cities with 100 thousand inhabitants. Only 25% of the population were employed in agriculture:
Compare to France at 40% of the population employed in agriculture in 1914 and the US at almost 50%. Germany was, for all intents and purposes, an industrial state, at least by early 20th century standards - it wouldn't have almost 35% of the electorate voting for SPD in 1912 otherwise.
I'm not sure if the USPD would be a big factor, the bulk of their membership simply rejoined the SPD after the war - and the rift between SPD and USPD would likely be smaller, not greater, as SPD will likely not get the chance to massacre USPD activists with the help of Freikorps in this timeline.
Zentrum had been turning less and less ultramontanist ever since the end of Kulturkampf and the perception of the SPD had changed significantly after the war began, they were no longer seen as an anti-state force but as loyalists to the existing order. It wasn't going to stop smth like the Pan-German League from deriding SPD as the devil but not the left-wing Zentrum leaders who are currently in command of the party - who themselves are trade unionists and economically progressive, and were also trying to transform Zentrum away from the Catholic tower.
Last edited:
With all due respect, your views on Germany include them using carriers in WW2 to destroy the Royal Navy, and it was disputed fruitlessly for hundreds of pages before the mods had to move your timeline to the Writer's Forum for lack of plausibility.
I just discovered this and have to say you've mapped out one of the most interesting WW1 stories I've read in awhile. As Herodotus said its refreshing to read a story where the drive is what events seem plausible rather than just having a pre-set goal in mind.
Sorry thereformer, I was done.
Lets end it here, I raised the point I wanted to make and the point is independent of who made it. You example does illustrate how hard it is for an OP to direct or end discussions here. Not solely a bad thing, but I actually just wanted to make the point I felt needed to be said and not divert the TL further by becoming a target on this TL.
Good tip, will use it now
Carriers and atrocities are not the same thing.
Lets end it here, I raised the point I wanted to make and the point is independent of who made it. You example does illustrate how hard it is for an OP to direct or end discussions here. Not solely a bad thing, but I actually just wanted to make the point I felt needed to be said and not divert the TL further by becoming a target on this TL.
Thoroughly enjoyable read. I'm most interested in the eventual fate of the Austrian empire; even victorious, four years of war must surely have broken forever the Hapsburg project. With an increasingly harsh peace on the horizon for the average German, the lack of any really significant victory to celebrate in Vienna, and the restive Slavs still harbouring nationalist tendencies, how long can that state last, and what will be the eventual fate of the German Austria? The name of the chap escapes me at the minute, but there was an Austrian diplomat or minister who published memoirs after the war stating that a lot of the population were favourable to the idea of a German-Austrian union. Will this Germany feel compelled to keep the current structure in place? Can it even do so?
1. Don't derail.
2. Don't snipe at each other.
3. If something is completely implausible/impossible report it. I suspect that there are no issues with this, since the thread has run 23 pages and the only reports it has generated have been due to people sniping each other.
4. Go forth, and sin no more.
2. Don't snipe at each other.
3. If something is completely implausible/impossible report it. I suspect that there are no issues with this, since the thread has run 23 pages and the only reports it has generated have been due to people sniping each other.
4. Go forth, and sin no more.
Yeah! Sorry, I actually just completely forgot to post last night
That being said, now we've had two weeks of daily posts I'm gunna go down to every other day now. This is just so I don't run out of backed up pre-written content while writing/researching the next stuff.
Cheers!
Ironically, Austria presented WW1 as a defensive war internally in spite of being the ones to trigger it. While there were voices favouring annexations, by and large they seemed resolved not to use the opportunity to expand and instead favoured setting up puppet regimes (in Serbia and Montenegro).
So, a white peace would be very much spun as a victory, particularly if Serbia is defanged (and nobody is going to care overmuch about it after Russia bowed out).
The nationalists are, as of mid-1918 still set in their demands for autonomy and that is a dangerous minefield that could blow Austria's legs out from under it. There are pro-independence groups, but they're, as yet, not the strongest. And most of the pro-independence national councils were in France at the time and reliant on French support, excepting the Czechoslovak Legion (who are stuck in Russia proper). There's also the issue of the returning troops - the Hungarian revolution didn't come out of nowhere and it can trace its roots to returning PoWs who were exposed to communist ideology in Russia. Hungary, with its restrictive voting franchise dominated by landed nobles proved a fertile ground for communist ideology.
In short, I wouldn't underestimate the durability of the Habsburg monarchy, though the possibility of collapse certainly exists.
Yeah, the update itself on the peace conference points out that Austria-Hungry pretty much wants no more Slavs and is not interested in territory expansion, maybe only for that copper mine that is like just a few miles out side it’s border and even then that’s barley a change.
The breakup of Austria-Hungary was as much imposed on the country by the Allies as something that the subject nationalities wanted themselves. Yes, many wanted it, but Trianon was really as much about punishing Austria and pushing for a very Wilsonian (and thus half-nonsensical) idea of national self-determination (and democracy, because god forbid Hungary get to keep the Hapsburgs like they wanted). And giving France their circle of allies in the region. Yugoslavia was not really something most non-Serbs wanted, or at least not in the way Serbia got it, but because the Serbs were recast as the good guys of the Balkans by the Entente, they got their wish list from Santa, even at the expense of the Italians.
Austria had a lot of problems after 4 years of expensive war, but the Hapsburgs were now free of Franz Joseph and his stodgy conservatism, so I'd say Austria has an even chance of doing much better now, all said and done. The real trick will be slapping the Hungarians hard enough to get them to accept reforms, but if the returning PoWs try for revolution, Austria may hold any assistance hostage to renegotiation of things.
They should anyway.
Austria had a lot of problems after 4 years of expensive war, but the Hapsburgs were now free of Franz Joseph and his stodgy conservatism, so I'd say Austria has an even chance of doing much better now, all said and done. The real trick will be slapping the Hungarians hard enough to get them to accept reforms, but if the returning PoWs try for revolution, Austria may hold any assistance hostage to renegotiation of things.
They should anyway.
Well, yes, but that's not relevant to my point. The Croats were on the losing side, of course they get screwed. The Italians getting screwed in favor of Yugoslavia was just some weird serb-favoritism.
Can't believe how many likes some of these posts have got - really great to see. Didn't think I'd get up to 80+!
Congratulations! May this be a sign of a long timeline, one which will one day win a Turtledove!
I'm a late discoverer of the timeline and am really enjoying it. Likes to follow!