Aftermath of a Central Powers victory

[napoleon IV]

Of course, there's also the fact that the assumption that a different German Emperor would radically change things falls way too far into Great Man Theory. Even assuming that there was an "enlightened" monarch waiting in the wings structural issues limit his influence (this is also the problem that confronts any scenario where Fredrick III survives). For example, the Junker class would still be extremely powerful (as the saying goes "If Prussia ruled Germany than the Junkers ruled Prussia, and through it the Empire itself"), and as reactionaries they're going to oppose any liberal reforms. Similarly, by 1918 Germany was effectively a military dictatorship, with the High Command managing much of government policy and making it so that Chancellors served at their pleasure. The end of WWI presents an opportunity for civilians to regain control over the government, but the military is going to be reluctant to hand over power and has the prestige of having won WWI on their side. Besides, none of the potential Kaisers are going to be particularly willing to challenge the military. Finally, having a pan-European empire and being mortal enemies with Britain is also going to encourage conservativism and militarism as a way to maintain order, as well as stir the general population's sympathies for those ideologies.

Basically, monarchs who want to make massive reforms require a degree of support from elements of the system. Even when it seems like the monarch is just riding roughshod over everyone (like Peter the Great) they're still limited by the system and have to build support for their reforms. And there simply isn't the institutional or popular support for liberal reforms in 1918 Germany.

 

[Ricardolindo]

A Germany that can win the naval war is a Germany that hasn't put enough resources into winning the land war, and vice versa.

Any Germany that loses the war on land, loses the war full stop.

Therefore, any 'Central Powers' victory presupposes a Germany that has triumphed in the East and has at least neutralised France, but has had to consign itself to the loss of its overseas empire to Britain.

There's an interesting idea in https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...nge-german-southwest-africa.57443/post-975334: If a Central Powers victory happens by 1916, the British have not yet fully occupied German East Africa. As they wanted it more than they did German Southwest Africa, could they swap the colonies?

 

[SenatorChickpea]

I doubt it.

Lettow-V's insurgency was irritating, but couldn't and didn't stop the British from controlling all the major ports. For all practical purposes, they occupied German East Africa, and Germany had no capacity to take it back off them.

Nor would the British have wanted to take South-West Africa off the South Africans, any more than they would have forced New Zealand to give up Samoa or Australia New Guinea. It would have meant a confrontation with their Dominions who would have seen their gains traded away for the prestige of the home government, risking the integrity of the empire itself.

 

[Marco Polaris]

Third Reich Lite coming out on top to (1) continue not being democratic (2) empower militarism and their Bloody dreams of Colonial empire and (3) fund their war though plunder and thus shatter the global economy is not a good thing, no.

A plurality, if not an outright majority of the AH love of the idea of a better world following a central powers victory is indistinguishable from the AH trope of "WI the Third Reich but just fascists, not Nazis"

It was my understanding that after WW1 the reparations levied upon the Germans by the British and French bankrupted Germany, which when compounded by the Great Depression caused hyperinflation, absolute poverty for a once mighty nation, causing social unrest, leaving the population broken, ripe to be persuaded by a maniac with a barcode mustache and extreme philosophy promising a return to greatness.

Look at the German kids in the photo, the money was so worthless they made kites out of it.

There are other causes for how Hitler came to power sure. But if the Germans won WW1 then arguably the Third Reich would not have come into being. I wonder if anyone has done AH where the allies lose WW1 instead of WW2. And what the likely replacement WW2 would have looked like.

 

[SenatorChickpea]

First of all, welcome to the site! I can't recall seeing you here before- always good to have someone new in the discussions.

It was my understanding that after WW1 the reparations levied upon the Germans by the British and French bankrupted Germany, which when compounded by the Great Depression caused hyperinflation, absolute poverty for a once mighty nation, causing social unrest, leaving the population broken, ripe to be persuaded by a maniac with a barcode mustache and extreme philosophy promising a return to greatness.

That's... true, but how true is up for debate. Some people believe the reparations were impossibly crippling, others think that's been dramatically over egged.

However, the thing to remember here is that the economic hit is going to be much much worse. First of all, even a victorious Germany is going to have millions of people suffering malnutrition, and no plan to fix it other than looting. Eastern Europe is going to be even worse off than our interwar period, as it will be transferred into feudal client states sending their food and resources west to rebuild Germany.

Belgium, already wrecked by the war, will be lucky to survive the tender mercies of a German peace- certainly there will be no reparations.

France, utterly wrecked. No reparations.

Britain- already in desperate strife in victory, defeat will see trauma, strikes and a loss of investor confidence. Not least because it will still be in massive debt to-

The USA, owed untold millions by France and Britain and now with no chance whatsoever of ever seeing it.

There are other causes for how Hitler came to power sure. But if the Germans won WW1 then arguably the Third Reich would not have come into being. I wonder if anyone has done AH where the allies lose WW1 instead of WW2. And what the likely replacement WW2 would have looked like.

Pop across to alternatehistory.com, there's quite a few there. It's never been my jam- there's apparently plenty of good ones, but I keep trying the ones that turn out to have a weird fondness for the Kaiserreich or that lazily turn France and Britain into mirror images of Italy and Germany in our timeline.

 

[Japhy]

It was my understanding that after WW1 the reparations levied upon the Germans by the British and French bankrupted Germany, which when compounded by the Great Depression caused hyperinflation, absolute poverty for a once mighty nation, causing social unrest, leaving the population broken, ripe to be persuaded by a maniac with a barcode mustache and extreme philosophy promising a return to greatness.

There are other causes for how Hitler came to power sure. But if the Germans won WW1 then arguably the Third Reich would not have come into being. I wonder if anyone has done AH where the allies lose WW1 instead of WW2. And what the likely replacement WW2 would have looked like.

Besides the fact that Hyper-inflation and the Great Depression are two entirely separate events and there were other details just as important to the break down of german civil society, none of this is wrong. Not really sure what it remotely has to do with my points though.

 

[Creekmench]

Ice Cold Take but i would assume a CP victory Germany, and Ottoman State would probably be a mirror for Imperial Japan, like both Germany and Japan had similar constitutions, militarist streaks, being newish players on the colonialist scene, and the Committee of Union and Progress completing their dreams of a "clean" Islamic state minus the Assyrians, Armenians and Pontic Greeks.