What if Austria had unified Germany instead of Prussia in 1871?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Adolf

Banned
As most of you that know a little bit about Europe or Germany history you will know that the unification of Germany did not come till as late as 1871 in which it was primarily Prussian led, by Otto Von Bismark.

My question is do you think WW2 would have even happened if Austria had won Prussia in 1866 as dominance over the unified idea of Greater Germany, unfortunately this did not happen and Austria was excluded from the German Empire.

Austria was part of The Holy Roman Empire of the German nation until 1806 and then the Congress of Vienna seen the German Confederation take place which is when in the 1800's the Pan-Germanism idea was hitting its peak, then in the German war Prussia firmly excluded all Austrian lands out of Germany and in 1918 you seen "The Republic of German Austria" want to become legally part of the new-German Republic but the Treaty of Versailles forbid this union between the two countries, in 1938 according to sources 99% of Austrians voted to become part of Nazi Germany, and Hitler an Austrian by birth himself had made his native home country become legally part of the German Reich and even he fought in WW1 in the German army and always identified himself as German, as most Austrians did pre-1945.

But the whole reason WW2 started is because the Nazis wanted "living space" and to re-occupy all pre-German lands such as Austria, Sudetenland, Danzig, and so on... and whilst the German massacres by the Polish in Danzig made Hitler even more angry and determined to invade Poland he offered an agreement for that land to become part of Germany, the same as in 1934 the Anschluss was attempted but stopped by the Italians but was allowed in 1938.

Do you think if Greater Germany had unified Germany WW1/WW2 would have even happened? People blame the Treaty of Versailles partially for the WW2 outbreak.

To be fair, although post-1945 Austrians do not like to be identified as German their do speak German and Austrians are ethnic Germans and do not want to become part of Germany anymore due to the prime attachment and negative stigma with Hitler and Nazism, but do you think that if Austria had booted Prussia out from Germany it would have made anything different in the 1900's?
 
You'd need an earlier POD than 1871 or even the mid-century for Austria to do so, which in and of itself would change the conditions that lead to WWI...so I suppose by definition yes, Austria doing so would mean no WWI or WWII.
 
If Austria becomes the German power I doubt that there would even be an WW2 because even if there is an WW1 it would be different enough from ours so that the factors that created WW2 wouldn't be present.
 

Adolf

Banned
See many people think that Hitler was all to blame for WW2, now don't get me wrong the man did do a gamble by going into Poland but the man had a good enough well reason to, Danzig ethnic Germans were getting massacred and he even offered them to give back Danzig "Polish corridor" but the Poles refused and correct me if I'm wrong but I've read this quote all over the place;

"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." (Polish Marshal Rydz-Smigly as reported in the Daily Mail, August 6th, 1939)"

Problem is, many people accuse you of being a racist and so on for having an open mind and pointing out facts rather than hear-say.
 
If Austria becomes the German power I doubt that there would even be an WW2 because even if there is an WW1 it would be different enough from ours so that the factors that created WW2 wouldn't be present.

If Austria does unify Germany, would Prussia be the rump state then?
 
See many people think that Hitler was all to blame for WW2,:confused: now don't get me wrong the man did do a gamble by going into Poland but the man had a good enough well reason to, Danzig ethnic Germans were getting massacred:confused: and he even offered them to give back Danzig "Polish corridor" but the Poles refused and correct me if I'm wrong but I've read this quote all over the place;

"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." (Polish Marshal Rydz-Smigly as reported in the Daily Mail, August 6th, 1939)"

Problem is, many people accuse you of being a racist and so on for having an open mind and pointing out facts rather than hear-say.

So Hitler wasn't to blame for WW2? Also - any sources on Danzig ethnic Germans getting massacred?
 
For Austria to unite Germany on her own you'll have to have a POD in the 1848 period, if not earlier.

For Austria to unite Germany with limited foreign aid the best bet would be the French joining in the Austro-Prussia War, and then a favorable outcome to Austria. Perhaps two semi-loose confederations of the German and non-German territories, both united by the Hapsburgs in Vienna. This would, at least on paper, give the Hapsburg crown an empire stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea :eek:
 
For Austria to unite Germany on her own you'll have to have a POD in the 1848 period, if not earlier.

For Austria to unite Germany with limited foreign aid the best bet would be the French joining in the Austro-Prussia War, and then a favorable outcome to Austria. Perhaps two semi-loose confederations of the German and non-German territories, both united by the Hapsburgs in Vienna. This would, at least on paper, give the Hapsburg crown an empire stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea :eek:

1848, probably the Revolutions of 1848 succeeds and the Hungarians succeed in breaking out of the Habsburg Empire, leading it to an early collapse.
 
IMO your best bet for a Habsburg unification of Germany would involve the Holy Roman Empire not being stripped down by Napoleon.
 
Would that involving having Napoleon having a different life other than the one in his OTL life, or would it involve his early death? I'm not sure if Napoleon's death would prevent the Napoleonic Wars from ever happening.
 
Would that involving having Napoleon having a different life other than the one in his OTL life, or would it involve his early death? I'm not sure if Napoleon's death would prevent the Napoleonic Wars from ever happening.

The former would do. Napoleon not getting proud enough to declare himself emperor would remove the Napoleonic Wars, but they would be known TTL as a continuation of the French Revolutionary Wars.
 
The former would do. Napoleon not getting proud enough to declare himself emperor would remove the Napoleonic Wars, but they would be known TTL as a continuation of the French Revolutionary Wars.

I'm not sure if this was true, but Napoleon had a different ambition that involved a life with the British Navy, right? Or if Napoleon had, let's say, a life with another major power. I saw a thread in this site that involved Napoleon's service to the Ottoman Empire.
 
I'm not sure if this was true, but Napoleon had a different ambition that involved a life with the British Navy, right? Or if Napoleon had, let's say, a life with another major power. I saw a thread in this site that involved Napoleon's service to the Ottoman Empire.

There's also the option of Corsica retaining independence, and a certain Bonaparte (or in this case, Buonaparte) keeping it from being swallowed up.
 
There's also the option of Corsica retaining independence, and a certain Bonaparte (or in this case, Buonaparte) keeping it from being swallowed up.

Napoleon's an ethnic Italian, right? So he could have dedicated his service to a Corsica that became a part of one of the Italian kingdoms.
 
Napoleon's an ethnic Italian, right? So he could have dedicated his service to a Corsica that became a part of one of the Italian kingdoms.

Perhaps. But I don't think Pasquale Paoli will allow, say, Piedmont or Tuscany to take over them - after all they just secured independence from Genoa.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top