Why so much sympathies for Central Powers?

[Rex Romanum]

Maybe this is just my feeling...but it seems that some, if not the majority, of the members are somewhat either apologetic or having good opinions toward the Central Powers (Imperial Germany, Hapsburgs or Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire).

I can think of two main reasons:
1. They were far better than their future counterparts (the Nazis, messed up Balkans, messed up Middle East)
2. They were surprisingly "cool" in WWI, able to hold out the (relatively) superior Entente for four years

Any other reasons for this CP-philia?

Edit: Should be moved to Chat forum, maybe...

 

[ThomasTheviking]

Maybe this is just my feeling...but it seems that some, if not the majority, of the members are somewhat either apologetic or having good opinions toward the Central Powers (Imperial Germany, Hapsburgs or Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire).

I can think of two main reasons:
1. They were far better than their future counterparts (the Nazis, messed up Balkans, messed up Middle East)
2. They were surprisingly "cool" in WWI, able to hold out the (relatively) superior Entente for four years

Any other reasons for this CP-philia?

Edit: Should be moved to Chat forum, maybe...

3. It is easy to feel a little sympathy for the looser.

Expand on nr. 2: Indeen for the part of the Germans: Better tactics. Better training. Fighting a war on multiple fronts.....I don't think there is much nostalgia about Austria-Hungary due to their poor performance in the war.

 

[NHBL]

No clear bad guys...

I feel some sympathy for the Central Powers for several reasons...
They were not much better or worse, overall, than the Entente--not like in World ar II, when there were some very evil regmes involved (Germany, Japan, and the USSR.)

It's also an interesting time, because the Great War set the pattern for the 20th century.
Also, they were thoroughly screwed by the supposedly neutral United States' thoroughly un neutral bias, allowing Britain to ride roughshod over American rights from day one.

 

[Xgentis]

I don't feel any sympathy for the Central Powers due to the fact that they devastated my country back then...

 

[historyfool]

Beside the fact that a good deal of the members discussing the Central powers come from these countries there are several more general points making them likeable (I will simplify for the sake of shortness):
They did not start the war by a desire to conquer but it was rather a combination of the common power politics of the time and stupidity form both sides.
They and most importantly the Germans as main opponent were no worse than there opponents. In some cases even better than there opponents. For example of all participating states of the war the Russians were the most repressive.
They are a non evil underdog: I mean they fought the whole world with a alliance of a real Great Power with a stupid but funny ruler, a crumbling Has-Been of a Great Power which had one of the most interesting ruling dynasties of all times, a once powerful nation, which was a victim of imperialism and one minor, who was very capable.
They were buttfucked in the end by the winners on the Peace table. Versailles was fairer than the other treaties and we all know how it was perceived by the Germans and even some winners.
And after all they were simply cool: German uniforms of the time have a charme British and French uniforms lack. And people like Lettow-Vorbeck, Graf Luckner or the Red Baron fire the illusion of the interested with there accomplishments.

 

[Mauser]

Beside the fact that a good deal of the members discussing the Central powers come from these countries there are several more general points making them likeable (I will simplify for the sake of shortness):
They did not start the war by a desire to conquer but it was rather a combination of the common power politics of the time and stupidity form both sides.
They and most importantly the Germans as main opponent were no worse than there opponents. In some cases even better than there opponents. For example of all participating states of the war the Russians were the most repressive.
They are a non evil underdog: I mean they fought the whole world with a alliance of a real Great Power with a stupid but funny ruler, a crumbling Has-Been of a Great Power which had one of the most interesting ruling dynasties of all times, a once powerful nation, which was a victim of imperialism and one minor, who was very capable.
They were buttfucked in the end by the winners on the Peace table. Versailles was fairer than the other treaties and we all know how it was perceived by the Germans and even some winners.
And after all they were simply cool: German uniforms of the time have a charme British and French uniforms lack. And people like Lettow-Vorbeck, Graf Luckner or the Red Baron fire the illusion of the interested with there accomplishments.

Agree, let us also not forget who blew that powder-keg back then in 1914 in Sarajevo?

 

[yourworstnightmare]

Never really understood the CP symathies myself. Always thought it had something to do with the Kaiser's moustaches.

 

[Mauser]

Never really understood the CP symathies myself. Always thought it had something to do with the Kaiser's moustaches.

And the Pickelhaube. Nobody could ever forget that helmet.

 

[Sicarius]

Probably a mixture of a.) The CP weren't really any worse than the other guys, it was just Empire vs Empire shithead power plays all around, and b.) It's an alternate history forum, we love talking about the other side winning in most conflicts.

 

[The Oncoming Storm]

As has been said, had WW1 been avoided or if the CP's won a quick victory then the World would have been spared the horrors of the trenches and the outright evil of Fascism and Communism.

It's a seductive idea but one that ignores the fact that colonialism with all it's associated evils would have lasted longer and probably on a greater scale. Also we simply don't know if some other evil ideology just as brutal as Nazism or Stalinism would have sprung up ITTL, France after a 1914 German win might have gone Fascist and who knows what other bloody wars would have been fought.

 

[Caesar Australis]

Because their defeat screwed up the world.

It provided an opening for both Communism to gain a foothold in Europe, and set the stage for the rise of Nazism. Which of course itself set the stage for WW2, further shattering Europe and giving the whole East to Communist stagnation for half a century, while also forcing America to abandon thriving isolation and shoulder the burdens of being a world superpower. And of course the destruction of the Ottoman empire terminally screwed the Middle East.

German domination of Europe would certainly have been exploitative, but it couldn't have been as bad as what ended up happening(except for France, which would admittedly be in a much worse position). For one thing, Germans would have subdued the Communists in Russia and the damage done by a exploitative White puppet regime would be peanuts compared to what Communists did. And of course it avoids the Nazi's and the Holocaust- Germany and Austria would continue to be centers of Jewish population and associated Jewish ingeniousness- think how many great minds were killed or prevented from being born by the Holocaust. As for the Middle East, the surviving Ottomans would mean avoiding the instability and rise of extremism that has plagued it, instead the Ottoman regime would provide continued unity and moderation(and probably much greater economic growth, especially if Germany continued it's plans to invest in the Baghdad to Berlin railroad).

It would probably also mean faster decolonization, since Britain and France were the primary empires and would be severely weakened by defeat.

 

[Mauser]

Because their defeat screwed up the world.

It provided an opening for both Communism to gain a foothold in Europe, and set the stage for the rise of Nazism. Which of course itself set the stage for WW2, further shattering Europe and giving the whole East to Communist stagnation for half a century, while also forcing America to abandon thriving isolation and shoulder the burdens of being a world superpower. And of course the destruction of the Ottoman empire terminally screwed the Middle East.

German domination of Europe would certainly have been exploitative, but it couldn't have been as bad as what ended up happening(except for France, which would admittedly be in a much worse position). For one thing, Germans would have subdued the Communists in Russia and the damage done by a exploitative White puppet regime would be peanuts compared to what Communists did. And of course it avoids the Nazi's and the Holocaust- Germany and Austria would continue to be centers of Jewish population and associated Jewish ingeniousness- think how many great minds were killed or prevented from being born by the Holocaust. As for the Middle East, the surviving Ottomans would mean avoiding the instability and rise of extremism that has plagued it, instead the Ottoman regime would provide continued unity and moderation(and probably much greater economic growth, especially if Germany continued it's plans to invest in the Baghdad to Berlin railroad).

It would probably also mean faster decolonization, since Britain and France were the primary empires and would be severely weakened by defeat.

I'm looking forward to a timeline with the described event. Has anyone make something like this yet? How about Onkel Willie?

 

[duncansa]

Isn't it just more interesting to debate how the world would be if the losers won. Debating if the winners won more comnpletely is pretty sterile.

 

[Kelenas]

I'm looking forward to a timeline with the described event. Has anyone make something like this yet? How about Onkel Willie?

A Shift in Priorities by rast might fit your criteria. It has Germany/the CP winning the Great War by mass-producing what is essentially an early StuG.
Be warned, though, that the TL features prodigious amounts of historical irony.

- Kelenas

 

[The Marauder]

This love for the Central Powers and how the world would have been a better place is fanciful thinking. I can't imagine it being any better than how things turned out, and to say Germany would have stomped out Communism or never given rise to fascism is idealistic, not to mention it ignores that a ton of other problems were already revealed by World War I to show that some sort of revolutionary reaction was going to occur against the order. If anything, Germany could have very well swept the issues under the rug once they won...

 

[mowque]

Isn't it just more interesting to debate how the world would be if the losers won. Debating if the winners won more comnpletely is pretty sterile.

Basically this. Just like the CSA, Nazis, and such.

 

[MrP]

Isn't it just more interesting to debate how the world would be if the losers won. Debating if the winners won more comnpletely is pretty sterile.

To be contrary, if I may, if one generally sees CP victory TLs, one might find that a pretty "sterile" state of affairs and move away from it.

 

[Meadow]

Because when you consider all the great tragedies of the 20th century (the Holocaust, Stalin, Mao, the Khmer Rouge, Vietnam, nuclear weapons, the Second Fucking World War), a very great many of them would have been butterflied away by a German victory in WWI.

Now, while we openly forget that equally awful things could have taken their place in such a universe, the fact is that those hypothetical things didn't happen and the real things did. As a result we react far more strongly against these actual tragedies because of the genuine human cost that even my generation still encounters thanks to all these things which a few different orders on the Marne might have prevented. It's hard to get emotional and teary eyed about the 'revanchist French ethnic cleansing of Algeria' that, er, may have happened somewhere along the line if the Germans won WWI. It's not hard, on the other hand, to go to a Holocaust memorial and think 'if only there were something, anything that could have happened to prevent this'.

 

[Devolved]

Maybe this is just my feeling...but it seems that some, if not the majority, of the members are somewhat either apologetic or having good opinions toward the Central Powers (Imperial Germany, Hapsburgs or Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire).

I can think of two main reasons:
1. They were far better than their future counterparts (the Nazis, messed up Balkans, messed up Middle East)
2. They were surprisingly "cool" in WWI, able to hold out the (relatively) superior Entente for four years

Any other reasons for this CP-philia?

Edit: Should be moved to Chat forum, maybe...

Apart from people who actually come from those countries ( and so they are immediately biased) I think that alot of sympathy for the CP comes from the disatisfaction that many people feel about the world today.

I think some people think that the world may be a better place if the Entente hadn't won etc.

The rise of Communism and Fascism was made possible by WW1. Many believe that the horrors these disgusting ideologies unleashed could have been avoided if only the Entente had rolled over and allowed the Germans to goose step over them.

Finally I think that many who feel sympathy for the CP feel the same about the Nazis but are worried about the reaction they would get so they talk about WW1.

They will also wax lyrical about German technology, training and weaponry and then try to blame people like Jewish bankers, British Imperialists and Serbs for spoiling their party.

 

[Gosing]

Never really understood the CP symathies myself. Always thought it had something to do with the Kaiser's moustaches.

...Whenever I read a WWI TL, I'm always rooting for a German conquest of the United States, with Kaiser Bill personally deposing Woodrow Wilson and replacing him with a suitably mustachioed successor.