Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (http://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   GURPS (http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World? (http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=89121)

Dr Archeville 03-02-2012 08:08 AM

[IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Starting some work on a GURPS Infinite Worlds/Supers game, where PCs will visit an assortment of alternate worlds.

I want to do one that's German-centric, but not Nazi-centric. A world that built upon the cultural and intellectual advances of the country, and which came to an alpha position in the world b/c it really is that good, not b/c some goose-steppers forced it on others. Well, maybe no more forcefully than America's done as it has risen to prominence on the world stage.

One big concern is to figure out how WW I and WWII went there.

This would be a non-hostile alternate Earth -- or at least not overtly hostile -- but as such that'd mean there'd be little reason to feature it, except as a place for dimension-hoppers to vacation or to be invaded for its resources by other worlds (perhaps when one of the Nazi-dominant worlds invades, and the PCs must stop them!).

I mentioned the idea to a historian friend, who gave me this advice:
Quote:

I'd do something with the Hanseatic League. A world where the Mongols conquer the rest of Europe, or maybe the Turks, (avoiding Unfortunate Implications, just saying that all the wars in the area tear them down) but northern Europe escapes intact. As the invaders recede, nations reconstruct themselves along the Hanseatic model.

Hanseatic traders stumble across North America and Hansa cities spring up on the coast, and a couple of centuries later, you get a pretty solidly Hansa world, at least as much as our current world is Anglo-Saxon.
I'd appreciate help on fleshing it out!

Figleaf23 03-02-2012 08:20 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
I've tinkered with similar ideas in several contexts. Some possible ideas for alternates might be:

-Germany (or Prussia) achieve greater military success in WWI or before;

-A demogogue rises in post WWI Germany who turns out to be benevolent instead of monstrous; or

-One of the earlier assassination plots against Hitler succeeds and the Nazi regime is instead aggressively swept aside (perhaps by a rennaiscent old establishment, perhaps not).

martinl 03-02-2012 08:23 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
How about this:
http://decadesofdarkness.alternatehistory.com/

mhd 03-02-2012 08:30 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
I do have the feeling that you would have to branch out later, especially considering the timeline of the book you cited (post-Baroque, mostly). If you've got a dominant Hanseatic world, with the rest of contemporary (and/or historic) Germany out of the game, the end result would probably be closer to Dutch colonialism. (One way out of this would be including the Fugger family somehow)

With your premise, the Prussians might seem a good approach (Can't believe I'm saying that). Let them take a grater part in the Napoleonic wars, with Blücher taking over Wellington's role. Then they take over France, form some coalition with the new US. Then the civil war has some slightly different premise and a radically different outcome. Maybe some kind of protectorate system, although you'd have to be careful not to enter some "Man in the High Castle" situation. For a secure dominant position, Prussia has to take over Russia, of course.

Edit: Maybe another starting point would be a unified Germany (1871) that included the Austro-Hungarian Empire - and then either some grand diplomacy preventing the first World War or winning it.

SolemnGolem 03-02-2012 08:31 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Maybe a pre-WWI Germany that continued to lead the world in philosophy, science, and institutions of higher learning, while developing its industrial and trade potential while France and Britain had to deal with collapsing colonial empires?

It seems like you might be able to handwave a world where Germany was in a leadership position without having to resort to German übermensch, if you assume stable expansion for the Germans and wrenching instability for the other great powers. Russia has its historical setback with Communism, and Britain and France could have had much greater trouble with the secession of their colonies than they did historically.

America could have remained isolationist, renouncing the "old ways of Europe" and assuming a much smaller role on the world stage than it historically did.

Michele 03-02-2012 08:42 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Have you visited the Alternate History discussion forums? You'll certainly find something interesting there.

That said, the quick-and-dirty way to do this is to set up a late steampunk world where the main country is Germany instead of Britain, and that goes through a Central Powers victory in WWI.
The Germans do choke the British through submarine warfare, before the British strangle them thanks to their surface vessels, because the Germans manage not to say anything foolish to the Mexicans and not to sink US ships and nationals. The British cut their losses and negotiate while Italy collapses and the US stay neutral. The French can do nothing about all that and are permanently maimed.

That ends with a bloated, multinational Germany, just like Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, which are both still in the saddle. it would make sense if the Reds are crushed in Russia, so you'll have a (much reduced in its Western ends) Czarist Russia. Germany also gains more colonies, basing rights in China, Indochina and the Ottoman territories, and influence in other countries' colonies.

Of course the British see their mistake in a couple of decades, because the Germans now really have the wherewithal to outbuild the Royal Navy. German hegemony on the European continent, coupled with a Hochseeflotte that has good chances of defeating the British, mean German hegemony over the world.

Of course things are not all that stable, because everybody has internal enemies. For Germany and its allies, that's the nationalists. For Germany's rivals, that's the communists and anarchists. And there are independence movements in most colonies.

If you could choose and your skin isn't black, you'd live in the USA, who are affluent but isolationist; but the center of the world is Berlin.

Turhan's Bey Company 03-02-2012 08:52 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SolemnGolem (Post 1331175)
Maybe a pre-WWI Germany that continued to lead the world in philosophy, science, and institutions of higher learning, while developing its industrial and trade potential while France and Britain had to deal with collapsing colonial empires?

It seems like you might be able to handwave a world where Germany was in a leadership position without having to resort to German übermensch, if you assume stable expansion for the Germans and wrenching instability for the other great powers. Russia has its historical setback with Communism, and Britain and France could have had much greater trouble with the secession of their colonies than they did historically.

America could have remained isolationist, renouncing the "old ways of Europe" and assuming a much smaller role on the world stage than it historically did.

That's probably the direction I'd go. The post-Bismark generation works very hard to keep Europe stable through diplomacy and trade agreements. A succession of business-minded chancellors marginalize the militarily-inclined kaisers in order to pursue a web of treaties with Germany's neighbors each of which grants the Germans considerable flexibility. The nation becomes a center of finance and industry while France bogs itself down in West Africa and Great Britain diverts resources into keeping up a vast but, in this peaceful age, largely useless fleet.

The greatest threat to world peace is the Russian revolution, which inspires socialist uprisings in France, Turkey, and, again, the Balkans. Russia collapses, but the Whites and Reds are largely contained to the old empire's borders. France barely hangs on despite taking nearly three years to recover the second Paris commune and losing most of its overseas colonies. Turkey comes in for a soft landing. The Balkans completely go to pieces, but without a hair-trigger series of military alliances across the continent and the Russians safely out of the picture, the conflict is contained.

Despite its stable borders and its boast of being the only country which has never fought a war, Germany is the undisputed master of the continent. With revolts and independence movements in India and Africa, Britain is technically still the ruler of a quarter of the globe, but it's a hollow shell of an empire. Japan, which controls a sphere of influence encompassing Korea and eastern China, and the United States, whose foreign involvement rarely goes farther than Cuba and Panama, are potential rivals for the future, but for now limit their interests to their own quarters of the globe.

Tinman 03-02-2012 08:56 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
IIRC the write-up of Gernsbeck in 3e IW features a prominant non-natzi germany.

Captain-Captain 03-02-2012 11:04 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SolemnGolem (Post 1331175)
Maybe a pre-WWI Germany that continued to lead the world in philosophy, science, and institutions of higher learning, while developing its industrial and trade potential while France and Britain had to deal with collapsing colonial empires?

It seems like you might be able to handwave a world where Germany was in a leadership position without having to resort to German übermensch, if you assume stable expansion for the Germans and wrenching instability for the other great powers. Russia has its historical setback with Communism, and Britain and France could have had much greater trouble with the secession of their colonies than they did historically.

America could have remained isolationist, renouncing the "old ways of Europe" and assuming a much smaller role on the world stage than it historically did.


The Plague breaks out in England at the start of the Industrial revolution. The plague, somewhat suspiciously, does not jump the channel and it is thought the Cabal may have had something to do with this.

England ends up being an agrarian lower tech state tied up in a civil war with Scotland. There is much secret or not so secret joy in Ireland about this. France & Prussia take the lead in technology until the Franco Prussian War of 1855 in which Germany united wins and makes apolicy of keeping France suppressed. Again Iswat thinks there is a Cabal influence in this and the Constitution Convention of 1850, which fractures the US into the CSA, the new England Federation, the Federal Republic of the Great Lakes, and the Bear Republic of the West Coast, which nominally controls those Western territories not protectorates of the Federal Lakes. (I'll leave the exact make up of the map to you.)

By the current year of 1963, Germany is the undisputed Superpower of the world with the CSA and New England chasing after 2nd place.

Blind Mapmaker 03-02-2012 12:31 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
The problem with a late divergence post-WWI is that a lot of the uglier facets of German identity have already surfaced: Modern Anti-Semitism started in the 1870s in Berlin, Apartheid-like laws were first introduced in German Namibia, the coupling of militarism and ant culture was strengthened in the 1914 Manifesto of the 93 and of course Prussian reactionaries would be on top after the war. There would have been some reforms (universal suffrage in Prussia was promised), but it's kind of hard to justify sweeping changes in such a situation.

The Hansa solution is a more likely scenario, but, as mentioned, it is runs the risk of looking rather non-German without an extra push into the direction of our timeline.

Personally I would diverge in the late 15th century. If something happened to Isabella I of Castille and Ferdinand of Aragon the Spanish kingdoms would remain separate for a longer time and Charles V would not become Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain. That would keep Austria weaker and the Reformation more interesting. It would preclude heavy-handed crushing of the Protestant opposition and necessitate a more open dialogue.

The following centuries could see the Empire grow into a real Confederation (maybe after a Swiss model) with Imperial cities as important seats of learning and trade. The Swiss and the Dutch might stay inside the Empire and strengthen it. The main problem would be how to neutralise the French, but by making the French Wars of Religion much worse that could be achieved. At the same time the German model of tolerance might have even greater influence. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was already on that way in our timeline and here they might be more heavily influenced by German thought. The end result might be a smaller-scaled more federated Europe. The largest danger in the later centuries would probably be a strong Russia, but without Austria and Prussia waiting to dismember it the Commonwealth could maybe defeat them and open up Eastern Europe for German influence.

Of course, this approach also makes a lot of optimistic assumptions, but it's pretty neat to think of non-Prussian dominant German culture.

mhd 03-02-2012 12:44 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1331300)
Of course, this approach also makes a lot of optimistic assumptions, but it's pretty neat to think of non-Prussian dominant German culture.

Yes, indeed. ;)

Anders 03-02-2012 12:54 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
The German Empire fared very badly in the Thirty Years' War. There were plenty of attempts at peace before the Peace of Westphalia. What if the peace left the central power strengthened rather than weakened?

jason taylor 03-02-2012 01:16 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1331172)

With your premise, the Prussians might seem a good approach (Can't believe I'm saying that).

Why can't you believe it? Does being born on the northeastern border of Germany somehow endow you with a magic spell of infinite wickedness?

Dr Archeville 03-02-2012 01:25 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
I'm floored at how fast and detailed these replies are coming in! Thank you all so much, and, please, keep them coming!

Rasputin 03-02-2012 02:13 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
My pet alt-history would lead to just this world.

March 1917, February Revolution in Russia, a land so backwards it wasn't yet March. Alexander Kerensky heads the Provisional Government. In our timeline, he's a total nitwit: he keeps Russia in the war to get support from England and France. In the alt-timeline, he gets a clue: he pulls Russia out of the war. Germany gets Courland and some of Poland (use the border the Nazis used for Poland proper), independent Poland and Lithuania get German kings, the Habsburgs get some of Western Ukraine.

Then it's mop up work for where things are going well for the Central Powers: Romania loses a little borderland to Hungary and Dobruja to Bulgaria but gets Bessarabia from Russia. Serbia and Montenegro are incorporated into the Triple Monarchy, the Kingdom of Jugoslavia being Montenegro, Croatia-Slavonia, Dalmatia, Bosnia-Hercegovina and Serbia other than Kosovo, which goes to Albania, and Macedonia, which goes to Bulgaria, which also gets some of Greek Macedonia. Austria gets some of Venice that it lost in the 1860s.

Now the troops rush to the Western Front. The Americans are still getting ready, so England and France get the picture after a few one-sided battles, England settling early so it keeps it's colonial empire intact. France now feels back stabbed and loses some of its colonies to Germany, and England, France and Germany decide they care about Armenia after all, carving up the Ottoman Empire.

Now you have a ticked off France, which allies with Italy and Russia to start a war 20 years later. Sound familiar? England, America and Germany win, the Habsburg Empire implodes, Germany and Russia deal with the pieces, France is divided. There might have been a Holocaust; Russia is traditionally the most anti-Jewish country in Europe. Aristocratic Germany and the Anglo-American alliance spar over France for decades.

Fred Brackin 03-02-2012 03:30 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1331300)
The problem with a late divergence post-WWI is that a lot of the uglier facets of German identity have already surfaced:

Personally I would diverge in the late 15th century. .

Yes, if I wanted to have a modern German nation-state without the sort of baggage the RW one does I would want to alter to founding conditions so that the German nation-state formed earlier and not in the wake of Prussian military victories.

So how about we fragment France after the Hundred Years' War while forestalling the Thirty Years War(s)? Religion could divide France into Catholic and Hugenot on a permanent basis whiel somehow Germany unifies into a new nation-state with a new Protestant identity.

You can fracture England during its' Civil War too if you want.

Then you make Germany focus on economics rather than militarism (giving it a character much like modern Germany actually) while French and British successor states squabble for colonies, partially because they are all playing second fiddle to Germany in Continental economics. The Indistrial Revolution acerbates all of this.

RyanW 03-02-2012 04:04 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1331172)
For a secure dominant position, Prussia has to take over Russia, of course.

My advice might be to make some dynastic changes that somehow hand the Russian and Austrian crowns to the Kaiser. That could do anything from making WWI unnecessary (Germany isn't likely to declare war on Germany to prevent Germany from attacking Germany) to changing the sides around tremendously.

The ethno-religious aspects would be complicated (isn't it always?) with a Protestant German ruling Catholic Poles and Orthodox Russians.

mhd 03-02-2012 04:08 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jason taylor (Post 1331318)
Why can't you believe it? Does being born on the northeastern border of Germany somehow endow you with a magic spell of infinite wickedness?

I'm Bavarian, where "Prussian" is basically the equivalent of "Yankee", and defined as anyone living above the Danube (i.e. our Mason-Dixon line). So yeah, what you've said ;)

Lord Carnifex 03-02-2012 04:26 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
I see basically four divergence points.

1. Charles V/I/II manages to hold his collected domains together better. Perhaps he manages to suppress the autonomy of the Lutheran princes, or he influences the Pope to permit Henry VIII's annulment thus allowing England to be a greater counterweight to France.

2. Prevent the Thirty Years war. Either by this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1331364)
So how about we fragment France after the Hundred Years' War while forestalling the Thirty Years War(s)? Religion could divide France into Catholic and Huguenot on a permanent basis while somehow Germany unifies into a new nation-state with a new Protestant identity.

[corrected slightly for typos]

Or assassinate Cardinal Richelieu, maybe at the hands of a Gascon extremist. Without the Thirty Years war, Germany (as the HRE) manages to get into the overseas colony game earlier and enters the 18th century a unified nation-state.

3. Let the Germans do better against Napoleon. Maybe an Austrian or Prussian general takes a preeminent role in the Alliance, supplanting Wellington. To go way out there, if Napoleon never invades Russia, then the Russians enter the 20th century either stronger or less-prepared for invasion. If the later, the Germans in WWI walk over the Russians and then turn their eastern army against France before the U.S. gets involved. This forces France and the U.K. to sue for peace which leaves Austria-Hungary intact and Germany much stronger (and much more stable). Alternately, the Germans never attack Russia and do better against France overall.

4. The at the end of the Franco-Prussian war, the Prussians annex large chunks of France and incorporate them into the Prussian Empire. France never really recovers or achieves Great Power status, knocking them out of WWI before it starts. WWI happens much differently (if at all), and the Prussian Empire survives to be much stronger.

Rasputin 03-02-2012 05:04 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1331300)
The problem with a late divergence post-WWI is that a lot of the uglier facets of German identity have already surfaced: Modern Anti-Semitism started in the 1870s in Berlin, Apartheid-like laws were first introduced in German Namibia, the coupling of militarism and ant culture was strengthened in the 1914 Manifesto of the 93 and of course Prussian reactionaries would be on top after the war. There would have been some reforms (universal suffrage in Prussia was promised), but it's kind of hard to justify sweeping changes in such a situation.

Problem with that assumption set is that so much of that is true elsewhere in Europe. Colonial genocide? The Belgians in the Congo. That didn't lead to European genocide. Germany was very progressive with Jews before Hitler, as opposed to France, with the Dreyfus Affair (which happened in part because Dreyfus, as an Alsatian Jew, was deemed to be someone who would thus have been a likely German spy); France wasn't the country that wiped out 5.6 million Jews. And in 1914, France was pining for war, as well as Russia, both with utterly fantastic plans for the post-war situation. None of this is unique at all to Germany. Not even the rise of fascism after the war: all nations in Europe had such movements, and quasi-fascist (at least both conservative and nationalistic) movements ruled the Baltic States (including Poland in this) at times in the 1930s.

Hence change the victor in the Great War, and there is, for once, a clear point when this could have happened. Fascism still happens, just next door. The German aristocracy (not just Prussian; none of the other sets of conservative German aristocrats were actually any better, just less powerful) takes the place of the Bolsheviks in the Cold War.

Rasputin 03-02-2012 05:16 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331389)
WWI happens much differently (if at all), and the Prussian Empire survives to be much stronger.

You have to switch much more than the Franco-Prussian War (and Germany couldn't even pretend to get more land than it did; the only reason it got what it got was that Elsaß and Lothingren were German-speaking) to stop the Great War. The immediate cause—assassination of Franz Ferdinand—happened due to conflicting interests in the Balkans, Austro-Hungarian and Russian (Serbia had a coup in 1904 that brought to power a pro-Russian monarchy). The Habsburgs didn't want their non-German and Hungarian subjects breaking off as the Ottomans were having happen (great powers just hate independent actors), and the Russians wanted free access to warm-water ports by controlling the Bosporus and Dardanelles. (In the end, Josef Stalin and Nicholas Romanov had the same basic foreign policy: control Eastern Europe, control Turkey) The powers almost came to a head after the annexation crisis in 1908; they all were just cruising for a bruising by the end. A.J.P. Taylor had it best: the last date to stop the Great War was to not reverse the Treaty of San Stefano, which let there be a pro-Russia Greater Bulgaria in the Balkans.

Again, Germany wins the Great War, or somehow unifies along the lines England and France did. The Kaiser wins the Investiture Controversy, perhaps?

Lord Carnifex 03-02-2012 06:39 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Hmm...

I guess part of the question in my mind is, how big does the Great War have to get before it's great?

My thinking, more-or-less, was that without France as a Great Power, there's no pact between France and Russia that leads France to declare war on Germany after Germany declares war on Russia. And without France, would the U.K. really go it alone against Germany? For the purposes of the end goal here, I assume not*. Now, without France, does Russia declare war on Austria-Hungary? Maybe, maybe not. If they do, they might get steamrollered by Germany which is only fighting a one front war (assuming the Germans don't go after Italy, which seems unlikely). Would that be a war great enough to be a Great War? Maybe.

Otherwise, Russia decides that discretion is the better part of valour, and hangs the Serbs out to dry, and WWI fizzles before it lights off.

About the only thing I think leads to greater Prussian annexation of France after the Franco-Prussian war is if the French, instead of agreeing to an Armstice to end the seige of Paris, choose to fight it out to the bitter end. At which point Germany does pretty much whatever they want with it.

* I can see England, and especially the house of Hannover, deciding they have more in common with Germany than either Russia or a rather denuded France. So they stay out of what they feel is a 'Continental War' that doesn't concern them.

Rasputin 03-02-2012 09:23 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331472)
My thinking, more-or-less, was that without France as a Great Power, there's no pact between France and Russia that leads France to declare war on Germany after Germany declares war on Russia.

I need to have a reason to not count France as a great power. France and Germany simply have loads and loads of natural resources, including an abundance of arable land (other than eastern Germany). Losing the Moselle department to Germany after the war in 1870 hurt France and boosted Germany, sure, but France has a long seacoast and thus easily established colonies. Germany, since it took so long to unify and didn't have a long western seacoast, had to regard eastern Europe as its colonial playground—as did Russia.

Even if France and environs are split—say, Holland and Flanders and Alsace and Lorraine go to Germany, Walloons and Burgundy and Brittany are independent polities or at least separate of France, southern France goes to Spain—someone is going to have control of those resources. Spain? I can see a super-Spain with Spain, Portugal, and the Langue d'Oc parts of France, but now it controls resources and stays a great power. But it's a different power, more rural. I presume it holds onto Gibraltar, which boosts its prestige and saps England's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331472)
And without France, would the U.K. really go it alone against Germany? For the purposes of the end goal here, I assume not*. Now, without France, does Russia declare war on Austria-Hungary? Maybe, maybe not.

This isn't a maybe; Russia and Austria-Hungary have conflicting interests in the Balkans (Russia needs warm-water ports, Austria-Hungary needs to keep its empire together and every resource it can muster to compete with France and England and Germany). They will fight, in the end, if both have the same interests in the region. Russia wins the Crimean War, perhaps? That's a big blow to England too, and might weaken the Anglo-Ottoman alliance, though they did ultimately wind up on opposite sides in the Great War.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331472)
Otherwise, Russia decides that discretion is the better part of valour, and hangs the Serbs out to dry, and WWI fizzles before it lights off.

Serbia isn't that independent an actor in these times. After the coup of 1904, Serbia was more and more a proxy for Russia in the region, Bulgaria becoming more and more independent. The Black Hand's assassination plot had supporters in Petrograd. It's seriously debatable that the assassination would have gone on had it lacked that support, or even moved to that point. I don't buy Irving's assertion that there was a Russian plot to destroy Germany (or anything else Irving says), but there was Russian involvement in the assassination plot, and Serbian foreign policy was based on having Russia as its protector.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331472)
About the only thing I think leads to greater Prussian annexation of France after the Franco-Prussian war is if the French, instead of agreeing to an Armstice to end the seige of Paris, choose to fight it out to the bitter end. At which point Germany does pretty much whatever they want with it.

It's one thing to beat a country, another thing to occupy it or annex it. It gets expensive; it's why Nazi Germany initially didn't occupy southern France in 1940, and probably would have withdrawn from most of northern France if the UK had come to terms. (As an aside, it's my biggest issue with the CSA mockumentary other than that there weren't enough slaves for the Northerners to avoid the slave tax. The non-industrial South would have been pressed to hold the industrial North, given inevitable Northern resistance and the serious desire of France and the UK to keep the two separate if they could, and they could have.) The acquisition of Elsaß-Lothingren was predicated on the fact that the residents were German speakers, and Lothingren was incorporated into France through a dodgy deal with a failed candidate for King of Poland.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex (Post 1331472)
* I can see England, and especially the house of Hannover, deciding they have more in common with Germany than either Russia or a rather denuded France. So they stay out of what they feel is a 'Continental War' that doesn't concern them.

That's always a joker, and was in 1914: England's longstanding desire to keep Russia out of the Mediterranean was overridden by its fear of the growing German Navy, the construction of which was a huge strategic error on the part of the Kaiser. Germany keeps its naval ambitions limited to the Baltic, perhaps?

So some points of divergence. This is interesting:

* I can't see the Reformation being stemmed, since, regardless of whatever theological issues, there was too much to gain for so many states to split from Rome. You have make Germany more independent of Rome first. (I'm sure you can dig up other places, but I'll again pitch the Investiture Controversy.) Regardless, Germany is sprawling, but Habsburg-dominated and generally unified.

* Richelieu somehow botches the Thirty Years War, which unifies Germany under Habsburg domination. The capital of Germany is Vienna and it includes Bohemia and the Low Countries but not Poland; Prussia proper (or, as they used to say in Germany, Altpreussen), oddly enough, is probably also left outside, but still German-speaking. France is sapped, to the weal of Germany and Spain and to a lesser extent England.

* Prussia joins the Third Coalition, helping England, Austria and Russia defeat France and the Holy Roman Empire stays intact. Germany is probably still bipolar as it is (modern Germany being essentially the remains of Prussia and its those southern lands that basically gave up their independence, and modern Austria being south Germany), though Austria would dominate Bavaria, Swabia, Saxony and the Rhineland, maybe Hanover and Oldenburg (or those go to the British crown in some sort of loose union with the UK), leaving Prussia to itself and Mecklenburg and Holstein, and maybe Hanover and Oldenburg. Or, the events of the 1860s happen to the benefit of Austria, not Prussia (which becomes the lesser allied satellite). Russia wouldn't dare to move into the Balkans to upset this state, and negotiates some help from Germany and Prussia (wow, that's weird to type) in the Russo-Japanese war to keep Russian interests away from the region.

* Germany doesn't bother to build up its navy in the 1890s or at least limits it to the Baltic, keeping England at least neutral, though this also probably keeps the Ottomans out of any conflict.

* Kerensky thinks of Russia and not France and throws in the towel in 1917, letting Germany and Austria-Hungary mop up in Italy and the Balkans and move all troops into France before the Americans can send troops. Fascism takes hold in France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Romania rather than Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Hungary and Romania, leading to Germany being allied with England and America in the inevitable anti-fascist war, with Russia being the wild card yet again, or going fascist itself.

martinl 03-03-2012 03:05 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Archeville (Post 1331161)
I want to do one that's German-centric, but not Nazi-centric. A world that built upon the cultural and intellectual advances of the country, and which came to an alpha position in the world b/c it really is that good, not b/c some goose-steppers forced it on others.

Took me a while to find it (forgot the name), but here's one with a POD in 1196:
http://www.shwi.alternatehistory.com...ead.php?t=2687

The Cardinal 03-03-2012 03:30 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
maybe a successful revolution in 1848? 12 years later a young unified and democratic Germany sides with the North vs. the "slavekeeper states" of the South, thus leading to a "special relationship" with the Union. Add some german colonies (esp. in the Pacific and Africa) and let it cook for a few decades...

Rasputin 03-03-2012 07:22 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Cardinal (Post 1331633)
maybe a successful revolution in 1848? 12 years later a young unified and democratic Germany sides with the North vs. the "slavekeeper states" of the South, thus leading to a "special relationship" with the Union. Add some german colonies (esp. in the Pacific and Africa) and let it cook for a few decades...

Alright ... how do the liberals win in 1848? The reactionaries won all throughout Europe. If they win in Germany only, there will be about the same reaction the monarchs of Europe had to the French Revolution. Do they win in all of Europe? This might lead to a German-led (having the most industrial production) United States of Europe, excluding England and Russia and the Ottomans.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, but there needs to be a clear reason why history doesn't happen this way.

Blind Mapmaker 03-03-2012 08:06 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331410)
Problem with that assumption set is that so much of that is true elsewhere in Europe.

I attended a couple of lectures and seminars on these topics and while I agree that things were not always much better elsewhere there does seem to be an especially entrenched racist/anti-Semite element in German upper-class and upper middle-class (Bildungsbürgertum) thinking. Some of this was certainly due to pretty liberal treatment of Jews in post-1848 Germany.

Its manifestations might not have been so different from earlier anti-Jewish sentiment, but there was a strong biologist component to German racism. I don't want to say Goldhagen and Fischer are right, but there is certainly some continuity that makes me doubtful of a really positive German parallel.

I am not saying that a "good guy" Germany would not be possible or indeed likely with a different outcome of WWI, but visitors from our timeline would still have to contend with quite a few opinions and customs that would come rather close to Nazi thinking. Victory also precludes the need for re-orientation and self-examination like it took place in post-WWII Germany

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331671)
Alright ... how do the liberals win in 1848? The reactionaries won all throughout Europe.

You would probably have to occupy Prussia elsewhere and if possible Austria too. A more successful Polish Independence movement should do the trick. Whether it manages to stay independent in the first place or somehow stages a massive uprising is irrelevant, as is whether it exists for more than a year. It just has to begin a bit earlier to draw out troops into the Polish areas. That would give the revolutionaries a better chance in the capitals and would also make it impossible for the Prussians to intervene quickly in South and West Germany. You'd probably have to boost the revolutionaries a bit and make them a bit less willing to work with the monarchs, but it's not really much more likely than a German victory in WWI (at least once the UK joined in).

An 1848 divergence point would have the advantage that you don't have to make up that many new German artists, scientists and philosophers. The end result would be easily recognisable. You should include a lot of infighting between different members of the new confederation, though. But that makes for good stories and a healthy political culture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1331380)
I'm Bavarian, where "Prussian" is basically the equivalent of "Yankee", and defined as anyone living above the Danube (i.e. our Mason-Dixon line). So yeah, what you've said ;)

I our case it's the Main (with Frankfurt being sort of neutral ground). Do you guys really hate the Franconians so much as to call them "Saupreußen"? ^^


One general point about the scenarios arguing for greater power, expansion or more unified German state. I may be prejudiced in this regard, but I think loose confederations are more conductive to both scientific and cultural achievements. It might not hold up to scientific scrutiny in every case, but it certainly makes for a good narrative trope to distinguish "Culture Germany" from "Power Germany".

This might even work if some other power conquers them in the end. The Baltic Germans were very influential in the Russian Empire, for example, and they were a tiny minority. Think of what could have happened if Russia conquered everything to the Rhine and then found it couldn't hope to govern without extensive help from the conquered. It's just like the "defeated Greece conquered Rome" scenario.

whswhs 03-03-2012 08:18 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Actually, now that I think of it, Iron, one of the timelines in GURPS Steampunk, could plausibly be described as German-dominant, though the United States, Japan, and Sweden are important secondary powers imitating the German model as far as possible. There's a backstory involving the UK and France going to war over the Fashoda Incident and Friedrich Engels meeting Charles Babbage, among other things.

Bill Stoddard

wellspring 03-03-2012 08:27 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Kaiser Wilhelm II has an uneventful birth, and grows up strong, healthy, and deeply influenced by (rather than hostile to) his equally fun British cousins. This ended up having a profound impact on the young man. Without a disfigurement to over-compensate for, his impetuousness was channeled into a sharp satirical wit and playboy lifestyle rather than hot-tempered militarism.

Upon taking the throne, the new Kaiser largely left the day-to-day operations of the throne to Bismarck. Under Bismarck, Germany increasingly sought to tie the great powers together with a series of complex and entangling alliances, designed to prevent an alliance directed against him. Wilhelm's early efforts were largely directed at suppressing pro-democratic forces to provide cover for Bismarck's supposedly "timid" policies. As Bismarck did, he attempted to defuse democratic sentiments by buying the public off with ambitious entitlement programs. It largely worked. The militant German nationalist press condemned him as a "meek, besotted dilletante", and history has largely seen his reign as a wasted opportunity.

In particular, they decry his botched handling of the assassination of his dear friend, the Archduke Ferdinand. In the end, the Russo-Austrian war of 1918 proved to be a comic collision of two powers incapable of harming each other, but more than capable of smashing themselves into oblivion. The farce spiraled out of control and ended with both empires collapsing. One fell to communism, while Austria became a network of smaller states, under heavy german influence but nominally independent. What might have been a golden opportunity to double the size of the German Empire, became a major communist rival and a festering sore of ethnic bloodshed in the Balkans that took more than two decades to quell.

Meanwhile, German industrialization, technology and demographic advantages made it the dominant power in Europe, despite its leaders' timidity. At a time when England might otherwise have turned against it, a combination of French petulance and the personal relationship between Wilhelm and the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (especially his childhood friend King Edward) lead to England staying on the sidelines as Germany consolidated its power. He and Edward are remembered as "the Playboy Kings".

Democracy in the modern world is considered a peculiar Anglo-Saxon institution. The British Empire remains strong but sclerotic. The Americans remain isolationist but heavily industrialized; while they may well be the most powerful country in the world, the other European powers would be surprised to hear it (so would the Americans). France remains a basket case, as a series of leaders still follow the model of Louis Napoleon and are still bewildered that they get the same results. Russia remains backward and still struggles to escape international isolation; under Stalin, their main concern is uniting nationalist and internationalist socialism under a single (russian-lead) banner. Incredibly, the Ottoman empire clings to life.

German's main role in the international community is to keep all the teetering and out-of-control powers on their border from destroying themselves and their neighbors. It's an economic powerhouse, politically stable and (finally) nationally self-confident.

Antisemitism, always a feature of European culture, remains rife but relatively benign compared to what the Nazis brought. Actual violence is limited to Russia, where purges never target Jews directly, but always seem to hit them the hardest. Anti-Jewish laws were mostly repealed in the 20's, but discrimination remains common and socially acceptable. Einstein and other jewish scientists remained in Germany or its satellites, and Germany retains its position as the world leader in both science and technology.

Games in this world should center on European countries other than Germany. France, Spain and Italy are constantly swinging between revolutions. Conspiracies, terrorist cells, and radical student movements embrace any and every cause. In Eastern Europe, it's Cold War adventure-- only this time, it's between the German Empire and the Soviet Union, and the gloves are off on both sides. Adventures in the ottoman empire are a mix of the two: separatists and revolutionary movements contend with Great Power skullduggery. Upperclass Germans, Englishmen, and now some Americans often go on a wanderjahr that includes idealistic or opportunistic meddling in local politics.

jason taylor 03-03-2012 09:00 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1331380)
I'm Bavarian, where "Prussian" is basically the equivalent of "Yankee", and defined as anyone living above the Danube (i.e. our Mason-Dixon line). So yeah, what you've said ;)

Ah! Works for me.

jason taylor 03-03-2012 09:05 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331410)
Problem with that assumption set is that so much of that is true elsewhere in Europe. Colonial genocide? The Belgians in the Congo. That didn't lead to European genocide. Germany was very progressive with Jews before Hitler, as opposed to France, with the Dreyfus Affair (which happened in part because Dreyfus, as an Alsatian Jew, was deemed to be someone who would thus have been a likely German spy); France wasn't the country that wiped out 5.6 million Jews. And in 1914, France was pining for war, as well as Russia, both with utterly fantastic plans for the post-war situation. None of this is unique at all to Germany. Not even the rise of fascism after the war: all nations in Europe had such movements, and quasi-fascist (at least both conservative and nationalistic) movements ruled the Baltic States (including Poland in this) at times in the 1930s.

Hence change the victor in the Great War, and there is, for once, a clear point when this could have happened. Fascism still happens, just next door. The German aristocracy (not just Prussian; none of the other sets of conservative German aristocrats were actually any better, just less powerful) takes the place of the Bolsheviks in the Cold War.

And any of those things could have taken place without what happened happening. Hitler was an unexplainable phenomenon.

Lord Carnifex 03-03-2012 09:29 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Archeville (Post 1331161)

I want to do one that's German-centric, but not Nazi-centric. A world that built upon the cultural and intellectual advances of the country, and which came to an alpha position in the world b/c it really is that good, not b/c some goose-steppers forced it on others. Well, maybe no more forcefully than America's done as it has risen to prominence on the world stage.

As someone half-heartedly following the current European financial stickiness, don't we live in this world already? :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker
One general point about the scenarios arguing for greater power, expansion or more unified German state. I may be prejudiced in this regard, but I think loose confederations are more conductive to both scientific and cultural achievements. It might not hold up to scientific scrutiny in every case, but it certainly makes for a good narrative trope to distinguish "Culture Germany" from "Power Germany".

Mmm... maybe. Germans of the last three centuries do seem to tend to an quasi-national inferiority complex, as if the inability to form a coherent nation-state as early as other regions indicated some sort of lack of national character. In some senses, the Romantic movement in Germany and many that follwed can look like the Germans attempting to prove that their culture was as good as anyones. This same sense of shared inferiority may have led to much of the militaristic adventures of the years since. So giving them a loose confederation might only aggravate the problem and force an even stronger reaction, for good or ill.

malloyd 03-03-2012 09:40 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331671)
Alright ... how do the liberals win in 1848? The reactionaries won all throughout Europe. If they win in Germany only, there will be about the same reaction the monarchs of Europe had to the French Revolution. Do they win in all of Europe? This might lead to a German-led (having the most industrial production) United States of Europe, excluding England and Russia and the Ottomans.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, but there needs to be a clear reason why history doesn't happen this way.

It's a mistake to think of 1848 strictly as a "liberal" revoluton. In the German states, it was at least as much pan-German as it was bourgoise, and the triggering event in Bavaria was a conservative Catholic protest against a liberal Protestant prime minister. Nor was it everywhere exactly crushed, the princes of Prussia and Austria both ended up abdicating. It's not too hard to envision a timeline in which Frederick-William temporarily gives in (and accepts the crown offered by the Vorparlament), the parliament is so paralyzed it can't come out with a constitution and the state ends up with one imposed by the monarch. This is almost what happened in Prussia itself after all. He can probably come out of it with a fairly strong German monarchy by supporting pan-Germanism, giving in to some minor reforms and ignoring most of the rest of the liberal platform.

roguebfl 03-03-2012 10:08 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
One option is German manged to guard the development of the printing press, and limited it to printing German language only publications. And maintained this long enough to to keep an edge in the age of enlightenment such the other nation need to learn German much like they do now with English.

while the printing press will eventual spread, though the the use of trade Germany contrasting on maintenance of its lead such that it becomes the center of the industrial revolution.

With the stronger emphasis on trade WWI is avoided. Without being dragged into A war in Europe the Romanovs can concentrate on domestic issues and undergoes Reform rather than Revolution.

France probably will still have a civil war between the Catholics and the Protestants, which in interests of trade Germany stays neutral an eventual abjurator.

None that will probably stop the Asia component of WWII, which Colonial interest will At least drag England into.

Blind Mapmaker 03-03-2012 10:32 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by roguebfl (Post 1331740)
One option is German manged to guard the development of the printing press, and limited it to printing German language only publications. And maintained this long enough to to keep an edge in the age of enlightenment such the other nation need to learn German much like they do now with English.

Interesting idea, but guarding the secret of new inventions is notoriously hard. Making the invention come a little earlier and in a more stolidly German area (the areas next to the Rhine just begged for easy proliferation). Making the press an Austrian or East German invention would slow its spread into the Netherlands, France and England. It might also be a good idea to have its secret protected by an important noble, bishop or merchant house.

Quote:

With the stronger emphasis on trade WWI is avoided. Without being dragged into A war in Europe the Romanovs can concentrate on domestic issues and undergoes Reform rather than Revolution.
I'm not quite sure where you are going with this. Global trade was at its height before WWI. In fact, the global economy did not regain this level of interconnectedness until the 1970s. If you mean that a trade-oriented Germany would have seen how things like arms races and territorial expansion negatively a nation then yes that should be hoped for.

David Johnston2 03-03-2012 10:43 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
It is not necessary for Germany to succeed. It would be sufficient for everyone else to fail.

Eliminate the United States by never having them agree on a Constitution, so that that the post-revolutionary United States never consolidates. Have Britain and France bogged down in a bankrupting attempt to take and hold their colonial empires so that eventually they go the way of Spain. Britain finds it's unable to continue to finance a world-dominating fleet. Let Germany fight a couple of successful wars against French and Russian attackers, and build a great mercantile empire. Voila, a dominant Germany only slightly worried by a moribund but still large Russia.

roguebfl 03-03-2012 11:58 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1331742)
I'm not quite sure where you are going with this. Global trade was at its height before WWI. In fact, the global economy did not regain this level of interconnectedness until the 1970s. If you mean that a trade-oriented Germany would have seen how things like arms races and territorial expansion negatively a nation then yes that should be hoped for.

Yes that's what I mean. they get the befits of territorial expansion from cultural dominance and as the trade hub that can only be weaken by war. Though they probably still an arms race but Germany having the science edge it others who have to hurt their economies to keep up. But trade focused Germany turns it to protect trade and maintain their boarders rather than expanding them.

With the brian drain working in Germanies favor as the best and brightest via for spots in German universities.

Rasputin 03-03-2012 12:16 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1331692)
I attended a couple of lectures and seminars on these topics and while I agree that things were not always much better elsewhere there does seem to be an especially entrenched racist/anti-Semite element in German upper-class and upper middle-class (Bildungsbürgertum) thinking. Some of this was certainly due to pretty liberal treatment of Jews in post-1848 Germany.

Its manifestations might not have been so different from earlier anti-Jewish sentiment, but there was a strong biologist component to German racism. I don't want to say Goldhagen and Fischer are right, but there is certainly some continuity that makes me doubtful of a really positive German parallel.

My personal thesis is that the sudden role reversal for the Jews (the German Jews, that is; nobody liked the Ostjuden, not even the German Jews) was part of a radical rethinking of how to define the group of "Germans." Sociology teaches that when we make a group, we not only define who is in a group, but who is NOT in a group, and with the creation of an independent Poland in Posen and Westpreussen (as opposed to just Congress Poland), the most obvious group for "non-Germans," the Poles, were no longer in Germany, which allowed the anti-Jewish stream of German nationalism to gain a foothold. This was helped by the stream of Ostjuden, radically different from the German Jews in every way but religion, migrating from Russia to Germany to escape the anti-Jewish pogroms that were basically a rite of passage for each generation of Russians until the Bolsheviks, making something akin to the immigration issues in today's America. Throw in a humiliating loss and having the nation (instead of the a segment of the nation, like the government or the aristocracy) blamed in a treaty for it.

Incidentally, I'm not sure the Nazis or some other far-right group were fated to rise to the top in Germany until the Dawes Plan in 1923. That brought an influx of American capital to Germany, and led to the conservative businessmen to manage the chaos that happened when the American stock market to collapse, and sided with a group of guys they would use as strike breakers and Commie-killers. If the German response to the French occupation of the Ruhr is more violent -- strangely, more in line with what Hitler wanted -- you could have less sympathy for Germany in England and America, reducing the amount of foreign capital to right-wing German businessmen. The German economy doesn't rebuild in part during the 1920s, and the KPD comes to power. It certainly doesn't change the prospect of a war, which became inevitable after the occupation of the Ruhr and the contrasting revocation of the Treaty of Sèvres after Turkey made an impressive show of force in the same year. You wouldn't have racial-based genocide, but the Bolsheviks were never ones to shirk from killing, so history might not have been that different. Have them win, and you do have the basic criteria satisfied: Germany dominant, not a Nazi state.

Anders 03-03-2012 12:21 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jason taylor (Post 1331721)
And any of those things could have taken place without what happened happening. Hitler was an unexplainable phenomenon.

Not really. Here's Martin Luther's recommendations on how to treat the Jews:
  1. for Jewish synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground, and the remnants buried out of sight;
  2. for houses owned by Jews to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
  3. for their religious writings to be taken away;
  4. for rabbis to be forbidden to preach, and to be executed if they do;
  5. for safe conduct on the roads to be abolished for Jews;
  6. for usury to be prohibited, and for all silver and gold to be removed and "put aside for safekeeping"; and
  7. for the Jewish population to be put to work as agricultural slave labor.

That's pretty bad. And he was in no way unique.

Rasputin 03-03-2012 12:48 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Asta Kask (Post 1331781)
Not really. Here's Martin Luther's recommendations on how to treat the Jews

But he wasn't unique to Germany, either. Outside of the Ottoman Empire, which is not coincidentally the one non-Christian nation in Europe at the time, you have loads and loads of folks with this sentiment, even in religiously-tolerant Poland. Luther is notable only that he was famous, and had held the opposite position early in his career.

I don't think, in the end, that the targets were that important to the decision to kill 'em all, but the desire to kill 'em all. The interviews in Nuremberg Diaries reveal a lot of folks who weren't prejudiced against Jews but were perfectly willing to go along with the idea to kill them in the name of insane progress. Given the decision by even the Wehrmacht, which was comparatively sane next to the rest of the government, to gleefully embrace the plan to liquidate all 4 million residents of greater Leningrad, and the 43,000 executions in Germany in 1943 (that is, they were given a trial, with lawyers and judges, and I guarantee you they weren't Jews or Poles), I can't imagine killing all the Jews sating the desire of the Nazis to kill.

Anders 03-03-2012 12:51 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Yeah, you're probably right. Hitler was a Catholic anyway.

Michael Cule 03-03-2012 01:30 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
The earlier the divergence point the greater the difference in now.

I'm pretty ignorant of German history but the obvious points (which have all been touched on in the thread) for divergence would seem to be:

1) The Reformation. If it doesn't happen or starts somewhere else or is successful enough to actually reform Western Christianity entirely then things turn out very differently. If Luther becomes Pope (to take an extreme example but Kingsley Amis imagined it in THE TRANSFORMATION, so why not?) then we have a culturally united Western Europe with Germany having a huge cultural 'one-up' on the rest of Christendom.

2) The Thirty Years War. If there were a win for either Catholic or Protestant (which seems unlikely but possible) then a forced cultural unity under a dynamic Imperial dynasty could produce a long period of growth and gradually growing integration. Or the war could be resolved on a basis that doesn't leave the doctrine of cuijus regio eijus religio in place but rather a genuine stab at religious toleration and liberty. I suspect however that would only emerge after an even longer and bloodier war. A strong and dynamic Imperial line is needed again.

3) The Napoleonic Wars. This is probably the last chance for a change that doesn't leave the Prussians leading the drive to German unification. If Napoleon doesn't happen,for whatever reason, then one could conceivably see an entirely civilian movement to greater German unity. Perhaps the links to the British Royal Family would be stronger and perhaps some sort of co-operation in.... Steampunktech! Railways! Postal unions! Boring civilian but useful stuff like that.

4) 1848. I'm not sure that I agree that the autocratic governments of Europe would rise up to crush the new regime. The autocratic governments can well remember what happened the last time they tried to crush a popular revolution: it just spread the infection and mess about a lot. Perhaps they try to get the starry-eyed idealists 'on side'. Invite them to the 19th Century equivalent of the Bilderberg meetings or whatever.

5) 1870: The Franco-Prussian War. What if the Prussians lose? Badly? There's no limit to the supply of military pride and overconfidence. Who else might step forward.

Anything after that (though I like the vision someone had of a healthy, sane Kaiser Bill) is a bit too late to make enough difference, in my estimation. You have to make a lot of optimistic assumptions instead of just one or two.

nondescript handle 03-03-2012 02:55 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Cule (Post 1331803)
[...]
4) 1848. I'm not sure that I agree that the autocratic governments of Europe would rise up to crush the new regime. [...]

Russian troops operated inside the borders of the Austrian Empire during the revolution. They eliminated the revolution in Hungary. There is no doubt about it that the czar would intervene: he actually did.

But given how the musket equipped Russian troops fared against the Minié ball equipped British troops in the Crimean War, it is not inconceivable that a popular German army at least partly equipped with the needle-fired rifle (which was a top secret Prussian weapon in 1848) could stood it's ground.
A truly republican-democratic leadership could have liberated the non-Russian countries.
When the dust settles Germany could be the de-facto leader of an republican anti-Russian block (Poland, Belorussia, the Baltic, Finland, part of the the Balkans). "The enemy of my enemy" and all that.

Re: your #5: Not quite sure how loosing to Napoleon III in 1871 will help.

Another divergence point: the 1525 "Peasant's War." It they win you've get a centralized Holy Roman Empire as a constitutional (elected) monarchy with a (rudimentary) bill of rights...

jason taylor 03-03-2012 07:59 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Asta Kask (Post 1331781)
Not really. Here's Martin Luther's recommendations on how to treat the Jews:
  1. for Jewish synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground, and the remnants buried out of sight;
  2. for houses owned by Jews to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
  3. for their religious writings to be taken away;
  4. for rabbis to be forbidden to preach, and to be executed if they do;
  5. for safe conduct on the roads to be abolished for Jews;
  6. for usury to be prohibited, and for all silver and gold to be removed and "put aside for safekeeping"; and
  7. for the Jewish population to be put to work as agricultural slave labor.

That's pretty bad. And he was in no way unique.

Martin Luther, kind of, you know, lived several centuries earlier. Hitler was unique for the political climate of Western Europe in the early twentieth century. It is hard to think of any political circumstance at the time other then Hitler coming to power that would have ended in an anti-Jewish genocide sponsored by a Western European state.

For the matter of that, anti-jewish genocides on that scale never took place in Martin Luther's time. Displacements did and local pograms did. But Jews were considered valueable by various princes and Catholics, Protestants, and Moslems were really more interested in exterminating each other then in exterminating Jews.

adm 03-03-2012 09:23 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
One late timeline change that could have major implications is if Fredrick III (Kaiser Wilhelm II's father) did not have throat cancer and reigned more than 99 days. If he had stayed in power longer Imperial Germany would most likely have avoided the naval build up that so annoyed the U.K.

Blind Mapmaker 03-04-2012 03:20 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by adm (Post 1331934)
One late timeline change that could have major implications is if Fredrick III (Kaiser Wilhelm II's father) did not have throat cancer and reigned more than 99 days. If he had stayed in power longer Imperial Germany would most likely have avoided the naval build up that so annoyed the U.K.

Yep, that one is a favourite "good" Prussian divergence. It would probably lead to a close Anglo-German alliance, though. For a German-dominated parallel you'd probably need something bad to happen to Britain that doesn't happen to Germany at the same time. Maybe an inadvisable involvement in the American Civil War through the Trent Affair? That would likely mean a very powerful USA, but with Britain less powerful the German element in the US (which was strong before WWI) could maybe achieve parity with the Anglo-American element.

sn0wball 03-04-2012 06:41 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Prussia is defated in the German War of 1866 with the help of US military technology (e.g. repeating rifles and superior tactics) and a Bavarian dominated Central European Confederation is created, built upon communitarian, libertarian and anarcho-syndicalist principles (think swiss meets republican spain).

If an alternative history is good enough for literature (An den Feuern der Leyermark, by Carl Amery, no english translation, to my knowledge), it is surely good enough for roleplaying.

Blind Mapmaker 03-04-2012 07:27 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332023)
Prussia is defated in the German War of 1866 with the help of US military technology (e.g. repeating rifles and superior tactics) and a Bavarian dominated Central European Confederation is created, built upon communitarian, libertarian and anarcho-syndicalist principles (think swiss meets republican spain).

If an alternative history is good enough for literature (An den Feuern der Leyermark, by Carl Amery, no english translation, to my knowledge), it is surely good enough for roleplaying.

Wow, Bavarian alternate history authors I've never heard of. Thanks for the reading suggestion. Though, I feel compelled to add that alternate history in literature (in the widest sense) does often fall short of what would be even remotely likely (e.g. S. M. Stirling's Draka series).

mhd 03-04-2012 07:29 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332023)
Prussia is defated in the German War of 1866 with the help of US military technology (e.g. repeating rifles and superior tactics)

Huh? What are we talking about here or is this one part of the alternative history?

johndallman 03-04-2012 07:54 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1332029)
Huh? What are we talking about here or is this one part of the alternative history?

Part of the alternate history, although I don't quite see how the Central European Confederation ends up Bavarian-dominated, given that Austria is the major power on the winning side.

The Cardinal 03-04-2012 09:43 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nondescript handle (Post 1331817)

But given how the musket equipped Russian troops fared against the Minié ball equipped British troops in the Crimean War, it is not inconceivable that a popular German army at least partly equipped with the needle-fired rifle (which was a top secret Prussian weapon in 1848) could stood it's ground.
A truly republican-democratic leadership could have liberated the non-Russian countries.
When the dust settles Germany could be the de-facto leader of an republican anti-Russian block (Poland, Belorussia, the Baltic, Finland, part of the the Balkans). "The enemy of my enemy" and all that.


I really like that option: a german-lead "Eastern Bloc" of republican and democratic nations. Together with a liberal mindset this could result in a "eastern renaissance" driven by educated jewish/german intellectuals... - which would also be a massive loss to the US of A, since thousands of east-european jews would have no reason to leave their homelands...

robkelk 03-04-2012 10:19 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker (Post 1332028)
Though, I feel compelled to add that alternate history in literature (in the widest sense) does often fall short of what would be even remotely likely (e.g. S. M. Stirling's Draka series).

As Infinite Worlds: Britannica-6 points out, the reign of Queen Victoria falls short of what would be even remotely likely - but it still happened.

I don't see this as a valid objection to any alternate history. If something couldn't happen at all, that's a good objection, but if something was merely "extremely unlikely," then one need to recognize that unlikely things do happen.

Phil Masters 03-04-2012 10:33 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by robkelk (Post 1332082)
As Infinite Worlds: Britannica-6 points out, the reign of Queen Victoria falls short of what would be even remotely likely - but it still happened.

One odd roll of the genetic and/or political dice - like Vicky (or more precisely, the demise of Princess Charlotte and her child) - is one thing. A whole string of improbabilities is quite another.

Not saying that this makes any alternate history good or bad. Just that different criteria apply.

Hans Rancke-Madsen 03-04-2012 11:07 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331410)
Germany was very progressive with Jews before Hitler...

I read a book once that claimed that the German Jews had assimilated to a degree not seen anywhere else except Scandinavia.


Hans

sn0wball 03-04-2012 11:30 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mhd (Post 1332029)
Huh? What are we talking about here or is this one part of the alternative history?

Err, yes, what else ?

The backstory is that a Bavarian military bureaucrat is ordering a few hundred (fictional) repeating rifles from the US. His english isn´t good enough to realize that the advertisment was not for plain weapons, but for the rilfemen as well, hardened and experienced civil war veterans, who not only birng superior firepower, but also tactics unheard of in central europe at the time.

Fred Brackin 03-04-2012 11:41 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332102)
Err, yes, what else ?

The backstory is that a Bavarian military bureaucrat is ordering a few hundred (fictional) repeating rifles from the US.

What fiction do you need? The Henry was actually uised in the Civil War and the Winchester model 1866 which ironed most of the kinks out of the Henry was brand new in 1866.

The fiction might be about the tactics. The US military doesn't seem to have realized the potential of magazine-fed rapid-fire rifles for many, many years. They wouldn't have issued all those trap-door Springfields if they had.

Captain-Captain 03-04-2012 12:00 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1332111)
What fiction do you need? The Henry was actually uised in the Civil War and the Winchester model 1866 which ironed most of the kinks out of the Henry was brand new in 1866.

The fiction might be about the tactics. The US military doesn't seem to have realized the potential of magazine-fed rapid-fire rifles for many, many years. They wouldn't have issued all those trap-door Springfields if they had.

IIRC the Spencer passed all US Army testing in 1857. The War department grogs came up with the possibility soldiers with repeating rifles wuld waste ammo as the excuse to stay with muskets. The Henry got the go ahead because Lincoln personally test fired it and told the Army to get them.

SimonAce 03-04-2012 02:46 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1332111)
What fiction do you need? The Henry was actually uised in the Civil War and the Winchester model 1866 which ironed most of the kinks out of the Henry was brand new in 1866.

The fiction might be about the tactics. The US military doesn't seem to have realized the potential of magazine-fed rapid-fire rifles for many, many years. They wouldn't have issued all those trap-door Springfields if they had.

For the US it was as much a money issue as anything. The Federal government of the time was chronically cash starved and had few ways of raising revenue. Heck the ACW was the 1st time there was an income tax and it was tiny by any standards.

Also the Dreyus needle gun was used extensively in the Austria-Prussian war of 1866 It was the forerunner of the modern bolt rifle and for the period had a lot of firepower. I don't think the shorter range pistol carbines would have made that great difference.

One caveat though, its perfectly plausible technological leap to the more modern bolt action rifle design gained from exploration of the two technologies might have made a difference. A fast loading 5 shot Jaeger rifle with stripper clips and modern ammo would have been deadly till powder fouling caught up with it.

sn0wball 03-04-2012 11:58 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1332111)
What fiction do you need? The Henry was actually uised in the Civil War and the Winchester model 1866 which ironed most of the kinks out of the Henry was brand new in 1866.

The fiction might be about the tactics. The US military doesn't seem to have realized the potential of magazine-fed rapid-fire rifles for many, many years. They wouldn't have issued all those trap-door Springfields if they had.

I dug out my copy of the novel and had a quick look into it. The guns are called Rodney-Rifles and described as straight-action (translation ? meaning ? don´t ask me.) 20 shot repeaters. They were invented in 1865 by a confederate gunsmith. The advertisement says they have a range of 2000 yard, but thats an advertisement. From what I read in High-Tech they are similiar, but more reliable and powerful than the Volcanic Rifle.

The main reason the author used a fictional gun was probably that he used the inventors backstory.

RyanW 03-05-2012 05:31 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332335)
described as straight-action (translation ? meaning ? don´t ask me.)

I would guess a straight-pull bolt action, but 1866 is (AFAIK) a very early alternate history appearance.

Blind Mapmaker 03-05-2012 06:58 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Masters (Post 1332085)
Not saying that this makes any alternate history good or bad. Just that different criteria apply.

I wasn't trying to imply that an unlikely chain of events make for a bad read or a bad campaign. Even highly unlikely ones can be fun. Heck, they can even be used for historical analysis. One of my professors suggested that even miracle alternatives like Napoleon getting the nuclear bomb could be used to compare international systems.

jason taylor 03-05-2012 10:06 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain (Post 1332122)
IIRC the Spencer passed all US Army testing in 1857. The War department grogs came up with the possibility soldiers with repeating rifles wuld waste ammo as the excuse to stay with muskets. The Henry got the go ahead because Lincoln personally test fired it and told the Army to get them.

After one campaign there would have been no need for ammo.

Verjigorm 03-05-2012 10:37 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
The 10th of June, 1190, Emperor Frederick Barbarossa is encamped on the shores of the mighty Saleph river in Turkey. His advance scouts have secured the river crossing, and his well-watered army crosses over the river, with the emperor surviving, rather than drowning to death as in history. The vast german army marches into Northern Syria, and the French and English kings are overawed by it's majesty, and also the authority of the 68 year old emperor.

The massive Crusader army, unified by the Authority of the emperor marches on Jersalem, and Saladin is powerless to stop him. The Holy City falls, and Outremer is given an extended lease on life. Richard I of england, overawed by the beauty of the land, is appointed Holy Protector of the Sepulchur by Frederick, and the emperor returns home.

It's a nice place to start... :)

Michele 03-05-2012 11:12 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1331410)
Problem with that assumption set is that so much of that is true elsewhere in Europe. Colonial genocide? The Belgians in the Congo. That didn't lead to European genocide.

Sorry if I didn't keep up with this interesting thread but... I just wanted to say that I agree with you, in the above and in several of your following comments.

I can see a world where the dominant culture is German and those having a lingering bad reputation for concentration camps are... the British. The Boer War and all of that. Never mind that those camps, bad as they were, weren't what comes to our minds today when we hear or read those two words.

The predominant German state and culture will be racist, jingoistic, and colonialist. That's not unlike most other states and cultures, be they steampunk or from our own past around the 1890s.

roguebfl 03-05-2012 11:30 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michele (Post 1332517)
The predominant German state and culture will be racist, jingoistic, and colonialist. That's not unlike most other states and cultures, be they steampunk or from our own past around the 1890s.

Actully the will depend what time equivalent you look at. In my proposed trade/tech focus Germany becomes a trade hub which me common close associations with other cultures which if look at port town completed to rural centers history has shown such association goes a long way in diminishing such tenacities. Sure like your history the improvements are probable not without insistence, but I would not exect such triats would be any stronger in modern equivalent of that time line than they are in how people precision the US. prideful and willing to use the economic and technological edge to make international issues more favorable to their own interests.

sn0wball 03-05-2012 11:55 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW (Post 1332388)
I would guess a straight-pull bolt action, but 1866 is (AFAIK) a very early alternate history appearance.

Would you care to elaborate ? What would be a real-life counterpart ? And what would that mean in terms of ROF or other game terms ?

sn0wball 03-06-2012 12:16 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
An ultimately successful German revolution of 1848 leads to the Prussian king Friedrich Wilhelm IV accepting the title of German Kaiser from the hands of the Frankfurt parliament. Germany (excluding Austria) is turned into a constitutional, elective monarchy. He is a weak Kaiser, leaving the day to day governmental affairs in the hands of a row of rather successful chancellors. The wars of 1866 and 1870 are avoided. No tradition of Prussian military prowess is formed. Relations with Imperial Austria are usually bad, which also avoids WWI as we knew it. With the one most progressive constitutions regarding civil rights and liberties, Germany takes the European lead in science, technology and economy.

Not all is well, though. Germany has aspirations to unite the whole area of the medieval Reich. Sooner or later there will be a conflict with relatively backwards Austria. The same could be true for a conflict with France over the Alsace.

nondescript handle 03-06-2012 01:20 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332870)
[...] What would be a real-life counterpart ? [...]

Famous Geradezugrepetierer are the Austrian Steyr-Mannlicher Model 1895 and the Swiss Schmidt-Rubin series (1889-1957).

I think the first issued straight pull rifle was the Steyr-Mannlicher Model 1885.

Astromancer 03-06-2012 06:18 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Archeville (Post 1331161)
Starting some work on a GURPS Infinite Worlds/Supers game, where PCs will visit an assortment of alternate worlds.

I want to do one that's German-centric, but not Nazi-centric. A world that built upon the cultural and intellectual advances of the country, and which came to an alpha position in the world b/c it really is that good, not b/c some goose-steppers forced it on others. Well, maybe no more forcefully than America's done as it has risen to prominence on the world stage.

One shot might be to split off early. Try this, when South German townsmen ask Charles V to settle in Argentina, the nobles of Castle don't hear about it until it's a done deal. In our history the Castilians saw the whole of the new world as exclusively Castilian property. In this world, German towns are planted in Argentina before even the Roanoke settlement.

Silberland flourishes. Durring the Thirty-Years war vast numbers of Germans flee to Silberland. The different livestyles of the Germans leads them to have larger families and more ecconomic growth than the Spanish and their strong preference for temperate farmlands means they have less of a problem with disease. Thus their population growth is very high. Durring the Napoleanic period they also break free of Spain and become independent.

Durring the 19th century, Silberland agressively recruites scholars from Germany to staff their Universities. Thus creating a Germanic "USA" in the South Atlantic. Silberland could be neutral in WWI and fiercely anti-fascist in WWII. Have them combine the reasources of Argentina, Paraguay, Uraguay, Bolivia, and Chile, with a sophistocated Social Democratic government and a first rate educational system.

Such a nation would be very powerful and influential.

Rasputin 03-06-2012 07:02 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332873)
An ultimately successful German revolution of 1848 leads to the Prussian king Friedrich Wilhelm IV accepting the title of German Kaiser from the hands of the Frankfurt parliament.

This is definitely a good start. I'm a little fuzzy on why he would do this: in our timeline, he thought they would cave to him and, in the end, he was right. A better showing somewhere, or an extra revolt or two, especially in the Rhineland.

Xenarthral 03-06-2012 08:11 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sn0wball (Post 1332102)
...hardened and experienced civil war veterans, who not only birng superior firepower, but also tactics unheard of in central europe at the time.

Would it be impertinent to mention that, judging by discussions on related
subjects over on the alternative history discussion board, American Civil
War tactics appears to have been unheard of in Europe (Central or otherwise)
more in terms of "I hadn't heard anybody still used those." than "Wow, I
never knew you could do that."

roguebfl 03-06-2012 08:20 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenarthral (Post 1333020)
Would it be impertinent to mention that, judging by discussions on related
subjects over on the alternative history discussion board, American Civil
War tactics appears to have been unheard of in Europe (Central or otherwise)
more in terms of "I hadn't heard anybody still used those." than "Wow, I
never knew you could do that."

Um I doubt that. As for it was the first War which weapons like the Gatling gun was used in. So no i don't think their tactics will be "old hat" in Europe, and one of the first wars of the "industrial" age

Fred Brackin 03-06-2012 08:25 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by roguebfl (Post 1333027)
Um I doubt that. As for it was the first War which weapons like the Gatling gun was used in. So no i don't think their tactics will be "old hat" in Europe, and one of the first wars of the "industrial" age

Essentially, the Gatling gun _wasn't_ used in the ACW. There weren't enough of them in exisitence to even _show_ to half the troops imnnvolved.

roguebfl 03-06-2012 08:31 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1333031)
Essentially, the Gatling gun _wasn't_ used in the ACW. There weren't enough of them in exisitence to even _show_ to half the troops imnnvolved.

No they weren't standard equipment, but they DID impact tactics and would deftly be in minds of vets. for that another big change the ACW brought, photography and the telegraph meant news and impact was know far wider than "those that were there"

sn0wball 03-06-2012 10:19 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasputin (Post 1332993)
This is definitely a good start. I'm a little fuzzy on why he would do this: in our timeline, he thought they would cave to him and, in the end, he was right. A better showing somewhere, or an extra revolt or two, especially in the Rhineland.

As I have read, many influential people of his court were in favor of accepting the crown, including his brother Wilhelm I and Alexander von Humboldt. Especially the latter might have succeeded. Friedrich Wilhelm explained his decision by stating that he was no Friedrich the Great. Somebody might have convince him otherwise.

sn0wball 03-06-2012 10:30 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenarthral (Post 1333020)
Would it be impertinent to mention that, judging by discussions on related
subjects over on the alternative history discussion board, American Civil
War tactics appears to have been unheard of in Europe (Central or otherwise)
more in terms of "I hadn't heard anybody still used those." than "Wow, I
never knew you could do that."

I don´t remember any specifics from the book or whether the author supplied any. It probably wasn´t about civil war tactics as such. Godfreys Rifles was a company of mounted riflemen or raiders or whatever. I tried to look it up in the book, but it is written in first person desciption in bavarian dialect, so I did´t find any quick answers. Maybe it was simply firepower and bravado that helped them to send the Prussian Garde Du Corps running.

I always have this western in mind, of whose title I can´t remember. Some civil war veterans with their winchesters are hired by the Mexican emperor (?) and fight with Austrian or Spanish or French curassiers over some gold train or whatever. Was it starring James Stewart or Robert Mitchum as a Confederate officer ?

RyanW 03-06-2012 11:37 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenarthral (Post 1333020)
Would it be impertinent to mention that, judging by discussions on related
subjects over on the alternative history discussion board, American Civil
War tactics appears to have been unheard of in Europe (Central or otherwise)
more in terms of "I hadn't heard anybody still used those." than "Wow, I
never knew you could do that."

Some of the clever commanders (mostly Mexican-American War veterans) realized that the old tactics were no longer valid, while the less clever ones got a lot of their own men killed by following the books written a generation before by people who had studied the warfare of the generation before them.

Pretty much the same lesson that has to be relearned in every war.

wellspring 03-06-2012 11:39 AM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW (Post 1333099)
Some of the clever commanders (mostly Mexican-American War veterans) realized that the old tactics were no longer valid, while the less clever ones got a lot of their own men killed by following the books written a generation before by people who had studied the warfare of the generation before them.

Pretty much the same lesson that has to be relearned in every war.

This is why I believe Strategy should be a TL skill.

roguebfl 03-06-2012 12:03 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW (Post 1333099)
Some of the clever commanders (mostly Mexican-American War veterans) realized that the old tactics were no longer valid, while the less clever ones got a lot of their own men killed by following the books written a generation before by people who had studied the warfare of the generation before them.

Pretty much the same lesson that has to be relearned in every war.

"Those who study warfare only in the light of history think of the next war in terms of the last. But those who neglect history deprive themselves of a yardstick by which theory can be measured. "
— Cyril Falls

"If there is one attitude more dangerous than to assume that a future war will be just like the last one, it is to imagine that it will be so utterly different we can afford to ignore all the lessons of the last one. "
— John C. Slessor

Fred Brackin 03-06-2012 03:19 PM

Re: [IW] Non-Nazi Germany-Dominant World?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by roguebfl (Post 1333034)
No they weren't standard equipment, but they DID impact tactics and would deftly be in minds of vets. for that another big change the ACW brought, photography and the telegraph meant news and impact was know far wider than "those that were there"

Go read HT p.127. Of the M1862 model, _12_ were acquired by General Butler of the Union Army and used in the war. 3 were obtained by the New York Times and used during the 1863 Draft Riots.

You might better look for people aware of possible gatling gun tactics among the civillly disobediant (or possilby just irate newspaper subscribers) in the NYC area. They'd be a lot more concentrated than those who saw the 12 Union Army gatling guns spread out among the general population of hundreds of thousands of war vets.

I beleive you to be factually incorrect in any assertion that the gatling gun affected tactics in the ACW. If you wish to defend your position I suggest you provide cites.

Historically i do not beleive that the implications of any sort of rapid fire weapon were sinking in to anyone until late in 1914.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.