What are some cliches in a Central Powers victory TL?

the french socialists had nowhere near the same splits as the Russians.
The PCF absolutely hated the SFIO and saw them as traitors to the proletarian cause for supporting the war. The French left absolutely had those same splits and they would have been even worse in a WW1 loss
 
The PCF absolutely hated the SFIO and saw them as traitors to the proletarian cause for supporting the war. The French left absolutely had those same splits and they would have been even worse in a WW1 loss
had next to no support until ww2. The PRRRS and SFIO remained the premier french socialist parties until the 1920s even with over a million dead and a cratered economy. The exact same thing will be happening in a CP victory.
 
had next to no support until ww2. The PRRRS and SFIO remained the premier french socialist parties until the 1920s even with over a million dead and a cratered economy. The exact same thing will be happening in a CP victory.
By what logic can you assert this? It just doesn’t pass the sniff test. The lack of support you’re claiming for the PCF is belied by the fact that a majority of the SFIO membership left to form the PCF. And somehow in the wake of the total discrediting of the parties that brought the war, this won’t have any political implications? At least in OTL they could point to Versailles as a political victory, but here they won’t even have that.
 
Last edited:
By what logic can you assert this? It just doesn’t pass the sniff test. The lack of support you’re claiming for the PCF is belied by the fact that a majority of the SFIO membership left to form the PCF. And somehow in the wake of the total discrediting of the parties that brought the war, this won’t have any political implications?
they got 9% of the votes in 1924 when the french economy was its worst, and the people were becoming increasingly radicalized. Managed to increase it by a meager 2% in 1928 after conducting thousands of protests and rallies as the french economy continued to flounder, had its percentile reduced by 3% after the greatest depression in history and after a decade of economic cratering, reached 14% under the personal charisma under Thorez in 1936, and actually managed to gain majority in 1945 through a 1.7% margin after becoming insanely popular during occupation for 4 years. Color me skeptical that the PCF would even get over 20% of the electorate. considering the great otl excuse that germany, austria bulgaria and turkey used to purge their communist parties remains here - 'They didn't support the war, they stabbed us in the backs and as such we lost!'.
The PRRRS would probably lose almost assuredly, but the SFIO? Nope. In fact the loss would embolden the rightists whose views that the leftists were mishandling the war would be validated in a loss. The SFIO schism was caused by the Comintern Membership Crisis, not the war in any form.
 
One cliche is a German intervention in the Russian Civil War.

1. The whole reason why the Germans smuggled Lenin into Russia was because the Bolsheviks were the only ones willing to make peace. The Whites were full of people who had continued the war, even after the Tsar abdicated. A (relatively) friendly Communist Russia is preferable to an outright hostile non-communist one.

2. Assuming that the German victory comes late in the war, Germany is utterly spent. With the end of the war the civilian government would gain power again, and they, being dominated by social democrats, certainly wouldn't agree to such an endeavour. The soldiers wouldn't want to fight either, and so this would remain a pipedream.

3. Ignoring all of this, even if Germany intervenes somehow, why would anyone think they'd be successful? The Entente sent troops against Soviet Russia as well in support of the Whites, and we all knowhow well that ended.

In summary, any Central Power victory occuring after Lenin gets smuggled into Russia will have a Soviet Russia.
 
As for the cliche of certain Kaiser-fanboys that the German Empire would become a happy and democratic constitutional monarchy in the aftermath of the war...

The German Empire was effectively run by a military junta during WW1. With the mobilization for war, Germany (except Bavaria) was formally transformed into a network of decentralised local military regimes. Under the Prussian Law of Siege from 4 June 1851, the fifty-seven Deputy Commanding Generals acted as agents of Wilhelm II. Protests and strikes were repressed by local generals.
A junta may refer to simply an administrative body council, not necessarily by the military. Another user, BTW, said that the government of the German Empire mentioned didn't apply for the junta characteristics. So, it isn't a junta.
If you don't believe me, here's the proof:
First :
There was no coup d'etat, neiter blodddy nor loud nor silent. What could be named "Martial Law" was introduced by the then proper authorities, the legal goverment by fully legal means. The same is valid for every other esp. domestic activity by official persons and/or institutions. Every action was covered by regulations and orders made and given by therefore entitled persons and/or institutions - of mainly civilian make-up.
And where military offices made orders reaching into the civilian sphere they also were entitled to do so by regulations made by the legal civilian goverment.

Second :
A "Junta" usually consists of a group of persons who before comming to power have conspired maily in secrecy to arrange for the "taking of power" and who afterwards continue to discuss measures to attune single actions as well as general courses of actions and politics between them to be presented as between them unifyed positions.
Well, there are no evidences at all that conspirational meetings, discussions, collusions ever happend esp. between the Deputy Commanding Generals ("DCG")of later or between them and members of the General Staff or the War Ministry or any other member of the goverment or persons near the goverment of the Reich.
Also that there were any such councils later on for coordination of single actions as well as general courses of actions and politics about and for reaction to the course of events of the war in the fireld of domestic, economical or foreign politics. Possibly rather to the disadvantage of the Reich as the already mentioned DCGs - at least at the beginning of the war - responded veery individually on the challenges their compared to the times the position was defined (1851)in its scope, responsibilites and effects now much enlarged and different assignments. The actions one DCG made not seldomly were almost contrary to those of the DCG right next their neighbour.
 
Last edited:
Another one is that the RN protects the colonies anywhere, and that Germany can’t threaten them.
With France gone, these troops could and would be used to relieve any remaining allies in Italy, Greece, Mesopotamia or Palestine, the latter of which threatens English control of the Suez and the Nile.
 
Top