Would The World Have Been Better Off If The Central Powers Won WWI?

Looking at the progress of world history after World War I, the rise of Hitler and all of the horrors that followed, the rise of communism in the Soviet Union and all the horrors that followed. It often makes me wonder if the world, and more specifically Europe, would have been better off if the Central Powers had won World War I. Certainly there would be problems, Austria-Hungary was going to collapse no matter what. Italy was going to leave the war unsatisfied and Mussolini or someone like him was going to happen in Italy. Russia was going to hell in a hand basket with or without communism. However, no Hitler, no Holocaust, no destruction of Europe in a second world war, at least not in any scenario that I can see. You may have a different opinion, I would like to hear your thoughts.
 
On what time scale?

The thirty years or so after WW1 would likely be better - it would be extremely difficult to make them worse! After that OTL improves quite a bit so it's anybody's guess how TTL's (say) 1960s - let alone later decades - would compare.

My feeling is that over centuries it would tend to even out, with some things better than OTL, some worse.
 

Anderman

Donor
The world would only a better of with no WW1 or the CP not losing. If the CP realy wins they would do some stupid stuff just like allies did only different.
 
I believe if the Central Powers were going to win, they would have to win earlier than the Entente won. Less bloodshed and destruction would hopefully lead to less stupid demands of the losers, and most likely Lenin does not get his German sponsored train ride back to Russia.
 
Unfortunately the invention and possibility of nuclear war fare means any other timeline can easily be worse even if it was everywhere superior until then
 
Depends. In the middle east, with no dismantled ottomans, likely with them being too successful for certain acts that would get me banned in Turkey? 1000%.
Workers rights throughout the 20th century? Ehh... imperial Germany was good about this but if the russian revolution kicks off the red scare could even this out.
Democracy is likely to be basically per otl except MAYBE in germany themselves simply because everyone else already had Republicanism
Ethnic rights? Personally I live for any world where britain and France retain their empires with as little legalized racism as possible, kinda like the us. But I also recognize the fundamental issues with the european empires after the conquest of the new world
 
I mean, CP-dominated Europe is going to really really suck...but it hopefully butterflies away the Nazis? Well, hopefully.
 
I mean, CP-dominated Europe is going to really really suck...but it hopefully butterflies away the Nazis? Well, hopefully.

I see no reason for Nazis to rise in Germany, after all the present system has proven to be successful, having successfully defeated France twice in one lifetime as well as defeated Russia and Great Britain.
 

Grimbald

Monthly Donor
I believe it would have led to a better world.

Germany would continue to liberalize albeit slowly.

Russia would avoid Stalin and his crew moving forward under either a republic or a constitutional monarchy.

Britain would keep her colonies longer and the transition to independence would be better.

The US would never be the sole superpower but would have to share with Germany and the UK.

But I have rose colored glasses....
 
The world will be better... here's why

#1: The obvious- no Hitler, no Nazis. Even if a French Hitler rises to power in a worst-case-scenario, he can't do nearly as much damage (the reason being that he can't invade Russia, being simply too far west for that).
#2: Kind of piggybacking off of the above, Russia will be spared the ravages of Operation Barbarossa, meaning that western Russia/Ukraine, etc, will almost certainly be better places than OTL.
#3: With Ukraine in Central Powers hands, Lenin is deprived of one of his main bases in the Russian Civil War, meaning that the USSR may very well never exist TTL.
#4: Germany will almost certainly democratise over time, with it looking a lot like Britain by TTL 2019.
#5: If the Ottoman Empire can reform in the 1920s and strengthen its economy by selling oil, it has a real shot at lasting another century. This obviously butterflies away the various wars and crises in the Middle East of OTL

Of course, there would be serious issues here... for example, the Kaiser might be almost as bad as Stalin for Eastern Europe, for example, and Britain and France going fascist is certainly a minus. Still, I see an overall net positive
 
I see no reason for Nazis to rise in Germany, after all the present system has proven to be successful, having successfully defeated France twice in one lifetime as well as defeated Russia and Great Britain.

True, but it could also significantly empower Erich Ludendorff, who was an early supporter of the Nazis (and also very eccentric).
 
Better? Different, yes, better is in the eye of the beholder. First, Imperial Germany is a democracy, a rather liberal one with a strong socialist party and a growing middle class, the trends are towards a better democracy, a wealthier nation and not unlike the rest of Europe or the USA. Victory alters who and how and when, but pre-war the German economy was top tier, it was orderly, maybe boring and stiff but not oppressive, it had its share of classism, racism, bigotry, intolerance and ugliness, but does not look out of step with her peers. Will victory make it all better?

Depends. We will likely not see the Bolsheviks come to power in a revolution led by Lenin, we then do not see a reactionary spasm of suppression or yet more revolution inspired, so no Fascism, no Nazis, no Soviet Union, none of the intervening blood letting. Germany puts France to the heel, possibly too Russia, maybe breaks up Russia into a smattering of puppets, A-H carries on, so too the Ottomans, no fragmenting the Middle East. Japan stays aligned to the British and struggle to become a better democracy.

We still have the Congo, and the Armenian genocide, Pogroms in Russia, burning of witches, deep distrust between Protestant and Catholic, antisemitism, all of the colonial era, ethnic, racial, religious and other hates galore. Europeans are not the nicest of people, they have fought lots of wars, killed lots of themselves, others, anyone really. Is a German dominated Europe worse off than one dominated by the French, the Romans, the Americans? For some yes, for most it is about the same. I doubt it is anywhere as bad as the Soviet era, but a lot of non-Germans will hate being under that cultural, economic and likely orderly boot. Pride, bragging rights and past greatness will keep the average folks disliking the foreigners, envy, sleights and ignorance will let them dislike one another, but most of them will marry, work, retire, live, laugh, cry, die, new wars, stocks and bonds will fail, transportation and utilities will collapse, politicians will steal, elites will be caught in scandals, taxes will go up, warranties will expire the day before it breaks and that world will be as imperfect as those that we know.

But in all that, maybe, maybe, the course gets shunted to a better track, hatreds fade, hunger subsides, wars fail, humanity organizes its affairs less medieval, hopefully we do not require so much evil to heed the better angels.
 
Depends on when Germany wins and how much they liberalize. I could certainly see a post summer-1916 German win leading to a relatively authoritarian Europe all the way until today so that wouldn't be very good, though I may be misinformed. Also depends on what happens with Germany after they win - if they continue to screw around with their military to secure what they perceive as their interests it may very well backfire at some point. Assuming Germany wins by 1916 and continues to liberalize I'd argue in terms of lives lost and relative freedom and prosperity that the world would be better off as a whole. The one part that would be definitely worse would probably be colonialism lasting significantly longer, though maybe you could throw in some event that accelerates decolonization as well. Assuming Germany wins in 1918 all bets are off since you have a pretty antisemitic Germany with a Baltic settler state, likely a sizeable chunk of Poland to settle, and a military (led by Hindenburg and Ludendorff) empowered to do whatever they like for the next decade or three which would (in my mind) inevitably lead to very questionable events happening in the German client states gained off Brest-Litovsk gains and maybe Belgium too. And though I definitely do not condone UK/French treatment of their colonies, Germany would arguably do worse given their track record.

So IMO victory before 1916 = extremely likely to be better than OTL, victory in 1918 = considerably less likely and depends on your definition of "better than OTL".
 
I'd say it would be better. My main thing is that the strongest power won the war, setting up a 'natural' balance of power compared to OTL where the alliance diverged almost immediately after the war. This superpower balance of power would push warfare down a level to more limited wars, which is way better than global total wars.

True, but it could also significantly empower Erich Ludendorff, who was an early supporter of the Nazis (and also very eccentric).

Ludy became too big for his boots because Germany was losing the war, if Germany was winning the war it's doubtful that the Silent Dictatorship would come to power.

On a side note I think the war wouldn't end earlier than 1917, I think that in alliance warfare it takes a few years to feed in and lose enough resources to get to the end of a country's tether.
 
True, but it could also significantly empower Erich Ludendorff, who was an early supporter of the Nazis (and also very eccentric).

I doubt that Ludendorff is going last long in victorious and surviving German Empire. It was anyway democracy and people would begin demand end to military dictatorship. There is not anymre reason to keep Ludendorff and Hindenburg around. Germany would be strong and recover quickly from Great War. So no reason for rise of ultra-nationalism.

But would world be better if CPs would win? I think that it would depend bit how and when CPs win. Germany would be now most powerful nation on continental Europe. It would see massive economical boost and the country would liberalise and democratise further. If Austria-Hungary survives it would be realtively strong but still junior partner of Germany. The empire would liberalise and federalise (it is only way keep the empire together in long term). But if it collapses things might go beit messy.

Balkans would be hard. It depends much what kind of terms it sees. Serbia would be anyway wrecked. It remain as independent nation but badly damaged. And events depends greatly what will happen to Austria-Hungary.

UK would remain intact when Germany can't do anything with that. It is prossible that relationships improve with Germany during 1920's and 1930's. France surely would be extremely bitter but couldn't do anything. It has lost too many men during the war and after the war it would lost some of its African colonies and some territories on border so France would be much weaker and after defeated on two wars against Prussia/Germany only withing 50 years it French are very unwilling to take third fight. And Germany hardly is going give much of chances for France becoming threat. With Russia things depends how and when it is defeated. But no matter what will happen to Russia it hardly can do anything. Italy greatly depends what it does during the war. If it remains neutral or joins to CPs it will maintain democracy and if A-H collapses it takes from there whatever it wants. But if Italy still joins to Entente there will be Mussolini or someone another fascist leader or even Communist Italy.

Middle East is quiet harder question. Key questions are when CPs win the war and does Ottoman Empire survive. If OE survives it might help to create more stable Middle East. And even if OE collapses things are pretty messy but at least there probably would be more natural borders instead being stupidly drawn by Europeans. There wouldn't be Israel and probably not Western influence so it is possible and quiet probable that there is not extreme Islam and such grudge against the West.

Colonialism in Africa would survive longer but with good luck decolonisation might be betterly handled. But it might be too very messy thing.

United States would maintain as isolationist longer. And there is too one clear bad side effect of lack of WW2. Civil right movement would rise much later so Jim Crow legistature is around in the South longer.

Asia is hard place. Much of depends what will happen to China, what Japan does and how decolonisation goes.

So I would assume that in short term (during next 30 years) world would be better when there wouldn't be WW2 and Holocaust. But it is hard to say what will happen later.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
I mean, CP-dominated Europe is going to really really suck...but it hopefully butterflies away the Nazis? Well, hopefully.
I see no reason for Nazis to rise in Germany, after all the present system has proven to be successful, having successfully defeated France twice in one lifetime as well as defeated Russia and Great Britain.
Nononono, you haven't read your Fritz Fischer and his acoluths (Mombauer etc.) rightly :
OFC there's a straight and unavoidable line in german history and its people
from Arminius to Auschwitz
 

longsword14

Banned
True, but it could also significantly empower Erich Ludendorff, who was an early supporter of the Nazis (and also very eccentric).
Ludendorff got outmanoeuvred by Hitler despite the former being a famous commander and the latter being a relatively new nobody.
I doubt Ludendorff's abilities outside of fighting, he could lend support to a cause by his fame but nothing more.
 
Top