Could a Central Powers Victory result in a worse world overall?

Deleted member 96212

Something that's been on my mind for a while is what exactly the effects of a Central Powers Victory would have in the long-term. Obviously, there would be no WWII, no Hitler, no Nazis, and no Holocaust. But could something equally terrible - or even worse than that - take place after the Germans win the "Great War"? What are some ways it could get worse, and if you don't think it could, is there a particular reason why?

Partially inspired by this common trope in speculative fiction: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HitlersTimeTravelExemptionAct
 
Something that's been on my mind for a while is what exactly the effects of a Central Powers Victory would have in the long-term. Obviously, there would be no WWII, no Hitler, no Nazis, and no Holocaust. But could something equally terrible - or even worse than that - take place after the Germans win the "Great War"? What are some ways it could get worse, and if you don't think it could, is there a particular reason why?

Partially inspired by this common trope in speculative fiction: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HitlersTimeTravelExemptionAct

Personally, I think the long-term solidification of Imperial Mercantilism / Autarky that's likely to emerge in a CP victory scenario, in which the global economy never really develops, would be a subtly terrible consequence that would retard the lifting the vast areas of the world and global population out of abject poverty. Presuming the continued existance of the British Empire (Which most CP victories do), and growing rivalries between but inability to effectively project power against the various poles of political influence in the world, and you have all the ingredients for what is effectively an eternal cold war, as all industrial powers increasingly close their Empires off and formally incorporate and jealously guard the few zones of Free Trade left, since every economic change would have vast political, social, and military consquences that their governments woulden't want to risk. Yet, nobody wants to risk the required war (Remembering The Great War) that would be needed to shake-up this protectionist system, since experiance would say "The only way to win the game is not to play it".

This, of course, means that nobody wants to be dependent on anybody else for anything they might need, since economic leverage would be the one real effective tool, and so would exploit their Empires as mere raw resource extractors with increasing desperation and brutality. Maybe you'd also see proxy wars in some regions as the powers try to "snipe" strategic points from one another that always end up short of an actual major war breaking out, which leads to Vietnam style "Circular firing squads" dominating states along the periphery of everybody's SOI and so lots of incidental death and retardation of development outside the various powers' "Cores"; where all the best jobs and goods are getting funneled into in order to keep the actual voting and technologically-armed and organized populations placated. It's a world where you don't have "Holocaust" spikes of cruelty and major destruction, but one in which general misery becomes an accepted norm precisely because things never get so bad as to shake the bulk of people out of their malase.
 
Last edited:
Something that's been on my mind for a while is what exactly the effects of a Central Powers Victory would have in the long-term. Obviously, there would be no WWII, no Hitler, no Nazis, and no Holocaust. But could something equally terrible - or even worse than that - take place after the Germans win the "Great War"? What are some ways it could get worse, and if you don't think it could, is there a particular reason why?




On what time scale? Given sufficient time, surely some horrible things will happen on any time line at some point - as of course many good things will.

If we are only looking at the next thirty years or so, then I would say better, as Hitler and Stalin would be difficult to surpass on the atrocities front [1]. Longer term, who knows.

[1] Though of course the TTL people would not be aware of this. If, say, Russia gets a highly anti-Semitic "White" government, we might have 2018 WIers arguing that "if only" the Entente had won, this would have saved the lives of the 200,000 Jews murdered in the (TTL) Holocaust. They probably couldn't even conceive of the scale of the OTL one.
 
Last edited:
I think the possibility of genocide not be revealed as a horrific act could lead to a more successful genocide with more modern technological at some future point.
 
Thanks to loosing WWI, germGer never had the task of decolonisation.
If France is defeated in 1914/15 and Germany gets part of the French colonial Empire, I predict very fierce and bloody colonial wars.

The Hehero genocide would just be a prelude.
 
It is hard to say would world be worse or better place. Pretty it depends about writer.

But probably this mean bit more conservative Central and Western Europe. Probably women's rights would be so advanced as in OTL. And racism and eugenism would are more acceptable things. Antisemitism would be more common but not in such scale as with Nazis. I doubt that even fascist Russia and France even combined would be so terrible. And decolonisation process would be very different. Probably we would see more colonial wars.

But WW2 at least would be very unlikely. France and Russia are unable going against Mitteleuropa. Ottoman Empire might be still around and so there would be more stable Middle East.

Generally world would be partially better and partially worse depending whom you are asking.
 
You can end up with a 1984 like scenario. Soviet Russia will almost certainly occur if the CP win given Russia's internal problems, America will be isolationist ( but having a red scare and civil rights issues), Britain and France are probably separate empires blaming each other for the loss and the CP powers are busy repressing their minority populations. Everyone is scared of a round two so a series of incidents and rebellions ( helped covertly by hostile powers ) around the edges with increased repression/militarization all round.
Global trade will be much lower and trade barriers high splitting it into sections, no real globalization or movement of people. Tech will probably be as OTL for military applications but lower for civil ( budgets being more focused on military spending ). Empires and Colonies will still be the norm ( including informal ones like the Philippines for the US ) as powers are scared of independent countries being swayed by their competitors. Indeed most neutrals will be slowly coerced by the major powers into their blocks ( bit like the OTL Warsaw Pact ).
Pretty grim all round to be honest.
 
Obviously, there would be no WWII
That might not be a given. It depends what one means by 'CP victory'. Given that German and Hapsburg policy-makers had confused notions of what they really wanted, it's hard to say what the specifics of a CP victory would be. But we can be fairly sure that the Entente powers would remain in existence - there would still be a Russia, a France and a Britain, with their fundamental interests, and the fundamental strengths unimpaired. All three would be very aggrieved - even if there were changes in regime/ state form (e.g. fascist or communist Russia/ France). What is to stop a war of revanche, or a war arising from new tensions, sometime around 1940 or 1950? Not any sense of restraint among Berlin or Viennese policy-makers, surely, since they would have learned that war works as a means of addressing one's problems. And if the war were to break out around 1950, it might be atomic.
 
One thing is for sure: Germany lost because the US joined the war with their millions of fresh soldiers and their economic power. Even if Germany wins, and the US stay out (or enter too late), at a later time another US president might get the idea to attack the overstretched German empire.

Maybe if Bismarck had made an alliance with the US, as suggested in one Gurps TL...
 
Could a Central Powers Victory result in a worse world overall?
Of course it could. Or a abetter one, or one that's overall much the same.
 
That might not be a given. It depends what one means by 'CP victory'. Given that German and Hapsburg policy-makers had confused notions of what they really wanted, it's hard to say what the specifics of a CP victory would be. But we can be fairly sure that the Entente powers would remain in existence - there would still be a Russia, a France and a Britain, with their fundamental interests, and the fundamental strengths unimpaired. All three would be very aggrieved - even if there were changes in regime/ state form (e.g. fascist or communist Russia/ France). What is to stop a war of revanche, or a war arising from new tensions, sometime around 1940 or 1950? Not any sense of restraint among Berlin or Viennese policy-makers, surely, since they would have learned that war works as a means of addressing one's problems. And if the war were to break out around 1950, it might be atomic.

I'd argue that France's fundamental strengths would certainly be impaired in a CP victory scenario; demographically her already rough numbers just took another huge blow, the nation is drowning in debt to the US and Britain, her industrial core just got wrecked, and as the rest of the world goes into an economic turtleing strategy her Empire is incapable of sustaining a Great Power level of production (She's trying to throw a champagne reception on a beer budget, to use a turn of phrase I've come to enjoy). Assuming the French try to cling to the ghost, I think its more likely she just slowly gets more and more miserable for at least the next couple of decades. America is not going to be pumping money into the continent like it did following the other World Wars, and Germany and Britain have their own Empires to worry about, which I imagine leaves the unaligned powers to suffer from the "Big Sucking Sound"/Capital vortex of debt-slavery.
 
What I tend to see is the notion that a CPs victory must lead to a worse off world, it comforts us to think that despite the tragedy that is the balance of our 20th century, it could be worse, the past was as good as it gets, we are lucky to have gotten here. One can spin dystopian narratives out of any embers, antisemitism, bigotry, genocide, war, these and more thread through history, before 1914 it was the Belgians who had in fact committed one of the very worst atrocities of genocide, the public reaction in Germany to events in Southwest Africa was revulsion and changes came, the Dreyfus Affair shows that justice can prevail over the antisemitism pulsing in liberal France, it is in Russia that the progrom was born, in the Opium War it was British business that championed a war to sell drugs, the United States was built upon the extermination of Natives and the enslavement of Africans, its own path paved in misery. To simply paint Germans as habitual villains is bigotry. They committed villainy and are no innocents, just like the remainder of the actors in this tragedy. To me it is tragic that we hear arguments that we need the next war and its suffering to make us better. I see too much hindsight and a lot of apology in that. i look at the trends before the war as a dim illumination into the future, events during the war upended many, chose new paths, it is the overall path that remains.

I am an unabashed cynic and do not believe that mankind will chose the high road unless lost. Colonialism will end, the British ideals will uproot it, but it would persist longer. German industrialism was creating a highly socialistic populace and a merger of industry and worker and state. Russian absolutism was fueling violent revolution to bring changes that had stagnated too long ago. Germany was already the largest or one of the largest trade partners with each of its enemies, it could not survive in autarky. Britain was already becoming a service economy rather than an industrial one. A CPs victory is not going to be better, but will it be any worse? I think it really just looks as bad, the damage to each nation is great, a generation of youth is lost, political reform is coming, social changes are coming, reactionaries are trying to halt it, revolutionaries are trying to hasten it. We can have a right-wing Russia or France, a Communist Britain or Germany, we can have another war, the paths are there, or we can see Russia stumble in between to evolve into a functioning democracy, we can see the Social Democrats reform Germany, we can see Britain accepting that colonialism is at odds with its ideals, the USA might end Jim Crow without having to liberate Dachau. The Congo might be the last crime of genocide, the war might be the last one to settle petty arguments of Kings and politicians, the path to yet more evil is really how we see ourselves in the mirror.
 
That might not be a given. It depends what one means by 'CP victory'. Given that German and Hapsburg policy-makers had confused notions of what they really wanted, it's hard to say what the specifics of a CP victory would be. But we can be fairly sure that the Entente powers would remain in existence - there would still be a Russia, a France and a Britain, with their fundamental interests, and the fundamental strengths unimpaired. All three would be very aggrieved - even if there were changes in regime/ state form (e.g. fascist or communist Russia/ France). What is to stop a war of revanche, or a war arising from new tensions, sometime around 1940 or 1950? Not any sense of restraint among Berlin or Viennese policy-makers, surely, since they would have learned that war works as a means of addressing one's problems. And if the war were to break out around 1950, it might be atomic.

France would lost in CP victory scenario more of its mine capacity and it would be strategically weaker. And France is not willingful fight third time over E-L when it has lost twice only in 50 years. And even population wouldn't be willingful fight again. Even in OTL there was some mutinies against war so just imaginate how bad things are if France would lost war. And Germany is not going allow France becoming strong enough being problem.

United Kingdom probably would show being stronger in seas and it even can keep all its colonies and capture all non-African German colonies. UK has not any reason go against Germany.

Russia is unable do anything. It would lost Ukraine which would make Russia weaker and it can't go war alone.

One thing is for sure: Germany lost because the US joined the war with their millions of fresh soldiers and their economic power. Even if Germany wins, and the US stay out (or enter too late), at a later time another US president might get the idea to attack the overstretched German empire.

Maybe if Bismarck had made an alliance with the US, as suggested in one Gurps TL...

I doubt that United States would go against Germany if it was neutral or joined to war too late. It hasn't reason go war against Germany without very good reason. Germany can't even challenge USA and they know that.
 

TruthfulPanda

Gone Fishin'
Thanks to loosing WWI, germGer never had the task of decolonisation.
If France is defeated in 1914/15 and Germany gets part of the French colonial Empire, I predict very fierce and bloody colonial wars.
The Hehero genocide would just be a prelude.
The Herero genocide was run of the mill of that age. All colonial country's did same or worse.
Germany's decolonisation wars need not be any bloodier than those of other Powers.
 

Deleted member 96212

Could a Central Powers Victory result in a worse world overall?
Of course it could. Or a abetter one, or one that's overall much the same.

:rolleyes:

One can spin dystopian narratives out of any embers, antisemitism, bigotry, genocide, war, these and more thread through history, before 1914 it was the Belgians who had in fact committed one of the very worst atrocities of genocide, the public reaction in Germany to events in Southwest Africa was revulsion and changes came, the Dreyfus Affair shows that justice can prevail over the antisemitism pulsing in liberal France, it is in Russia that the progrom was born, in the Opium War it was British business that championed a war to sell drugs, the United States was built upon the extermination of Natives and the enslavement of Africans, its own path paved in misery. To simply paint Germans as habitual villains is bigotry. They committed villainy and are no innocents, just like the remainder of the actors in this tragedy.

But I'm not, and neither is anyone here, to my understanding.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
During the OTL Cold War there were multiple false alarms of an enemy nuclear attack on both sides. But since the time a missile would take to reache CONUS from the USSR or vice versa was about half an hour, there was enough time to realize it was a false alarm. CP victory would probably lead to a British-German cold war, and both sides would eventually develop nuclear weapons. The time a missile would take from Britain to Germany or vice versa is only about five minutes, so there would be no time for hesitation. The moment an enemy attack was suspected there would be no choice but to retaliate. Due to the sheer size of the United States and the USSR, both sides knew that an attack from the other side would involve thousands of missiles, so if they detected an attack with a smaller number then they would suspect it as being a false alarm. It would only take a few hundred missiles to destroy the metropoles of Britain and Germany though, so they would not suspect that to be a false alarm.
 
But I'm not, and neither is anyone here, to my understanding.

And my apology if it sounded as a direct insult, in its way it does read that way although not intended. The question rather begs the trope, if Germany wins it must be worse than our own history, a trope I find too sanctimonious. A CP victory is going to be different, maybe far more different than we can see, maybe better, maybe worse, but I am not convinced that it must out shit show the 20th century and beyond.
 
During the OTL Cold War there were multiple false alarms of an enemy nuclear attack on both sides. But since the time a missile would take to reache CONUS from the USSR or vice versa was about half an hour, there was enough time to realize it was a false alarm. CP victory would probably lead to a British-German cold war, and both sides would eventually develop nuclear weapons. The time a missile would take from Britain to Germany or vice versa is only about five minutes, so there would be no time for hesitation. The moment an enemy attack was suspected there would be no choice but to retaliate. Due to the sheer size of the United States and the USSR, both sides knew that an attack from the other side would involve thousands of missiles, so if they detected an attack with a smaller number then they would suspect it as being a false alarm. It would only take a few hundred missiles to destroy the metropoles of Britain and Germany though, so they would not suspect that to be a false alarm.

Without the limitations of Versailles the pursuit of rocketry might be rather delayed, we might see the bomber come of age as it did and with manned bombers the reaction cycle has more ability to back off the brink. A British and German cold war is likely but also subject to shifting rather more than I feel could the USA and USSR. Both have as much to gain in detente as they do in perpetual opposition, the arrival of atomic weaponry can up the ante enough to stabilize Europe finally, one might find they have too much in common to persist in a genuine cold war after all. Thus the parallel between the USA versus USSR is not good enough for me to commit to.
 
Top