WI: Othon de Bismarque

[Cornelis]

[QUOTE="Ultima Ratio, post: 15804003, member: 13943]
What are some ambitious yet realistic goals to achieve in Europe to ensure French dominance. Maintaining the German Confederation and putting down Prussia would be one of the obvious ones, but could Bismarque work together with the Austrians?[/QUOTE]

Break Spain in 1863 and 1867 and annex Catalonia (I mean "allow the free will of catalan people as expressed by the totally legitimate vote of 99% yes") ? Touchy business, but why not ?

Belgium is untouchable. Luxemburg ?

 

[Cornelis]

Conducted by Bismarck? Or under him? Big difference.

I'd say in terms of weapons development France was probably more innovative, what made the Prussian army of the time so fearsome was it's general staff, dont forget the French lost the Franco-Prussian war while fielding a much better rifle than the Prussians.

You are right, I meant "allowed to happen by Bismarck". The Army Reform nearly brought the abdication of the King. Whithout Bismarck's "iron and blood" government, the Reform would be watered down to a small increase.

If the 1860' crisis brought William's abdication, Moltke the Elder could be resigned at the same time by Frederick III. The Prussian Staff would suffer.

France still lacked an efficient breech-loading artillery gun. Krupp was the leading industrialist in that particular field.

 

[Ultima Ratio]

You are right, I meant "allowed to happen by Bismarck". The Army Reform nearly brought the abdication of the King. Whithout Bismarck's "iron and blood" government, the Reform would be watered down to a small increase.

If the 1860' crisis brought William's abdication, Moltke the Elder could be resigned at the same time by Frederick III. The Prussian Staff would suffer.

France still lacked an efficient breech-loading artillery gun. Krupp was the leading industrialist in that particular field.

Well, maybe Bismarque could somehow influence greater industrialization in France? He does come from a not-Junker family after all.

 

[Ultima Ratio]

Break Spain in 1863 and 1867 and annex Catalonia (I mean "allow the free will of catalan people as expressed by the totally legitimate vote of 99% yes") ? Touchy business, but why not ?

Belgium is untouchable. Luxemburg ?

Does France actually want or need Catalonia? I think what she needs is a new "Westphalia", a counterweight to Prussia and Austria in Germany.

For example, France invades Prussia during the Austro-Prussian War and insists on the formation of a third big German state. For example, as a compromise solution with Austria, have Bavaria inherit the Rhineland and other Catholic states under Wittelsbach leadership.

 

[Cornelis]

Does France actually want or need Catalonia? I think what she needs is a new "Westphalia", a counterweight to Prussia and Austria in Germany.

For example, France invades Prussia during the Austro-Prussian War and insists on the formation of a third big German state. For example, as a compromise solution with Austria, have Bavaria inherit the Rhineland and other Catholic states under Wittelsbach leadership.

The situation in Spain is not to be changed by Bismarque being french. The Austro-Prussian war on the other hand could be butterflied away by Bismarck absence. I am not knowledgeable enough in German history to know of Prussian alternatives for his premiership, but, as I understand it, his solution to the 1862 Constitutional Crisis was pretty unique.

 

[Jürgen]

Well first of all Bismarck born in France wouldn't be the same guy as in OTL, next Bismarck wasn't really a guy who gained power through public support. I think in a state without a king to make him PM by fiat, Bismarck would likely end up a powerful civil servant, judge or simply one of those politician who stand behind the head of the government; think Dick Cheney.

 

[Max Sinister]

The emperor could have made him PM by fiat.

 

[Jürgen]

The emperor could have made him PM by fiat.

Could he really? The Prussian Kings was very safe from coups, so they could live with a strong and competent PM. Napoleon III on the other hand really didn't have any legitimate claim to power, any powerful and competent PM is a threat to his power.

 

[lotrian]

Could he really? The Prussian Kings was very safe from coups, so they could live with a strong and competent PM. Napoleon III on the other hand really didn't have any legitimate claim to power, any powerful and competent PM is a threat to his power.

Well, the dude already was the legitimate head of a house which ruled the country less than 40 years ago and which was removed from the throne by foreign powers.
On top of that, he was elected by popular vote with a large margin to presidency.
After that he legitimised his coup by a plebiscite which he would have won even without the use of fraud.
He was far from flawless, but he for sure did not lack legitimacy.

 

[Max Sinister]

Could he really? The Prussian Kings was very safe from coups, so they could live with a strong and competent PM. Napoleon III on the other hand really didn't have any legitimate claim to power, any powerful and competent PM is a threat to his power.

True... but then we'd have no TL.

 

[Jürgen]

Well, the dude already was the legitimate head of a house which ruled the country less than 40 years ago and which was removed from the throne by foreign powers.
On top of that, he was elected by popular vote with a large margin to presidency.
After that he legitimised his coup by a plebiscite which he would have won even without the use of fraud.
He was far from flawless, but he for sure did not lack legitimacy.

When a elected head of government declares himself emperor in a country which have removed 3 King the last century, and those popularity build on his uncle having couped himself to power a half a century earlier and declared himself emperor, your legitimacy are limited and someone will be able to coup you, if he develop enough popularity.

 

[Jürgen]

True... but then we'd have no TL.

It's important to get that a lot of historical politicians power build on them being in the correct cultural and historical context, without Hitler Adenauer would never have become more than the "king" of Cologne. Napoleon ending up in a army of a German or Italian state would in best case have ended up a minister, but most likely he would never have made it to the top. Kennedy in UK would have had limited opportunity to ever become more than a backbencher whose position was bought with his father's money.

 

[Cornelis]

Could he really? The Prussian Kings was very safe from coups, so they could live with a strong and competent PM. Napoleon III on the other hand really didn't have any legitimate claim to power, any powerful and competent PM is a threat to his power.

Napoléon III evolved from a PM-less government to a quasi-parliamentary one (although the FPW prevented the liberal empire to exist for more than a few months). That does not mean some ministers did not have influence even in the first period. Rouher was not nicknamed the "vice-emperor" for nothing ! My proposition for Bismarque's career is for him to become a minister by order in 1855, after a successful senior civil servant career. Around 1860, he is the leading minister (Minister President of the Council of State), around 1870 and the evolution of the regime he is the PM (President of the Council of Ministers).

 

[EmptyChair]

As Mexico was Rouher's brainchild ("the greatest idea of the reign"), Bismarque would be opposed to it.

Not only that, Bismark had a very dim view of colonial overseas adventures.

 

[JackLumber]

You are right, I meant "allowed to happen by Bismarck". The Army Reform nearly brought the abdication of the King. Whithout Bismarck's "iron and blood" government, the Reform would be watered down to a small increase.

If the 1860' crisis brought William's abdication, Moltke the Elder could be resigned at the same time by Frederick III. The Prussian Staff would suffer.

France still lacked an efficient breech-loading artillery gun. Krupp was the leading industrialist in that particular field.

I have no doubt that Prussia will be hurt by Bismark's absence I'm just saying giving France Bismark won't give them Prussia's success.

 

[EmptyChair]

I have no doubt that Prussia will be hurt by Bismark's absence I'm just saying giving France Bismark won't give them Prussia's success.

France doesn't need Prussia's success. Prussia, with its divided territories, geographical vulnerability, weak Navy and relatively low population, was hanging somewhere between being a great power and not being one - and through Bismark's actions (among other things) rose to actual undisputed great power by uniting most of Germans into one state. France doesn't need to do this dramatic jump - France has been already consolidated the way divided German states weren't. Bismark-Era France needs peace at home, divided Germany in the East and maybe some counterbalance for British influence overseas. It does not need to double or triple its territory.

So if Bismark can placate the people with something akin to his Sozialgesetze, keep southern German states from rallying to Prussian banner and cobble a coalition together with southern Germans/Austria against Prussia and avoid pitfalls like his anti-Catholic campaign - he can save France without anyone noticing, so to speak.

 

[JackLumber]

France doesn't need Prussia's success. Prussia, with its divided territories, geographical vulnerability, weak Navy and relatively low population, was hanging somewhere between being a great power and not being one - and through Bismark's actions (among other things) rose to actual undisputed great power by uniting most of Germans into one state. France doesn't need to do this dramatic jump - France has been already consolidated the way divided German states weren't. Bismark-Era France needs peace at home, divided Germany in the East and maybe some counterbalance for British influence overseas. It does not need to double or triple its territory.

So if Bismark can placate the people with something akin to his Sozialgesetze, keep southern German states from rallying to Prussian banner and cobble a coalition together with southern Germans/Austria against Prussia and avoid pitfalls like his anti-Catholic campaign - he can save France without anyone noticing, so to speak.

I didn't say France needs it either, just that it wont have it.

 

[The 48th Ronin]

What about Osman al-Bismarq, the Ottoman foreign minister?

Shouldn't it be Bismarq Pasha?

Not only that, Bismark had a very dim view of colonial overseas adventures.

He's gonna have a different view on colonialism if he didn't end up in Germany. Him viewing German colonies as a pointless endeavor in OTL makes sense because Prussia's fate is tied with Germany. France, on the other hand, is more secured in Europe, and thus more capable of pursuing overseas glory.

 

[Achaemenid Rome]

Shouldn't it be Bismarq Pasha?

Maybe Osman al-Bismarak and Bismarak Pasha.

Also: (totally accurate and informed names below)

Spanish: Oto Bismárquez
Portuguese: Oto Bismarques
Japanese: Udon Bisumaruku
19th century American: Otis Bismark
Ancient Roman: Otius Visimarcius
Russian: Oleg Bimarskaev
Polish: Otto Bizsmarckszky
Czech: Otakar Biszmarcska
Ancient Frank: Odo Bismarcii
Ancient Goth: Odotheus Bismeurgii

 

[Augenis]

What about Otas Bišmarkis, the Lithuanian National Revival figure?