# Would the World Have Been Better if Germany Had Won World War I? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2011, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183 "2011-01-11T02:39:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/101 "2011-01-13T14:31:47Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > You bet your life France and the UK were going to seek reparations, and put limits on the armed forces of the century’s most bellicose nation. What century would that be? 1814-1914? Germany wasn’t even a nation until 1871, for Christ’s sake. During that same century, both France and the UK were actually the ones who could fairly lay claim the to title of “Most Bellicose Nation”. (USA is 2nd runner-up.) ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/102 "2011-01-13T14:34:25Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > Yes, I’m aware. You’re presumably unaware of Germany turning a regional war into a World War by needlessly invading France, Luxembourg and Belgium—something it had no treaty obligation to do—and bringing the UK, along with its empire, into it, before the US finally got involved. You’re presumably aware of Russia turning a regional war into a World War by needlessly mobilizing against Austria-Hungary, right? ---
**Author:** ![Doughbag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Doughbag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doughbag)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/103 "2011-01-13T15:10:10Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > You’re presumably aware of Russia turning a regional war into a World War by needlessly mobilizing against Austria-Hungary, right? No, No , No…it’s all the Nazi’s fault… [The German Empire 1871-1918](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire) ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/104 "2011-01-13T15:19:22Z")
> [@Doughbag](#): > > No, No , No…it’s all the Nazi’s fault… > > [The German Empire 1871-1918](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire) Sorry, I’m slow today! Is this a whoosh? ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/105 "2011-01-13T15:30:35Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > You’re presumably aware of Russia turning a regional war into a World War by needlessly mobilizing against Austria-Hungary, right? Needlessly in what sense? As in not supporting an ally, Serbia, that was about to be dismembered by A-H despite having caved in completely to A-H’s ultimatum. Note I am not defending Russia or any of the other powers - they had all successfully constructed a powder keg of interlocking treaties to sit on and were all happily puffing on their cigars. They all living on the edge but I’ve argued before that it was Germany that has to take the majority of the blame for turning a regional conflict into the Great War. > [@](#): > > Assigning “full blame” to one country is pushing it but there is a very good case to be made that Germany was responsible for WW1 breaking out when it did in 1914. Actually, Germany’s responsibility has been the subject of heated debate amongst historians since the war itself. During the war and at the Versailles peace conference the entente powers put the blame for the war squarely on Germany. Historians between the wars looked to explanations for the outbreak of the war based on the workings of “the old diplomacy” or just on muddle and mistake. After the Second World War, for which it was generally accepted that the responsibility lay with Germany, the debate turned to how far the First World War and its settlement had led to the second. It was in the sixties that the German historian Fritz Fischer’s work reinforced the view that there was continuity between Germany’s aims in the First and Second World Wars and proposed that Germany had deliberately gone to war in 1914 to solve a number of domestic problems, the so called Primat der Innenpoliitik . > > Germany had a very direct involvement in the outbreak of the war. Soon after the assassination Berchold, the Austrian foreign Minister, decided to eliminate Serbia as a significant factor in the Balkans. To do this he needed the backing of Germany both to prevent Russian interference and to ensure Hungarian support. The Hungarian Prime Minister, Tisza, had no wish to see more Serbs added to the already complex mix of nationalities within the empire but would not oppose something urged by Germany, which in many ways was regarded by the Hungarians as a closer ally than Austria. William II, without any political or military consultation promised Germany’s full support even if it came to a war with Russia. This was confirmed by the Chancellor, Bethmann, who said, “… whatever Austria’s decision, she could count with certainty upon it, that Germany will stand behind her as an ally.” > > When the Austrians rejected the Serbian reply to their ultimatum it was Germany who urged a rapid start to the war to avoid any compromise and, when Russia heightened her state of military readiness, threatened to mobilise if Russia did. Russia refused to be intimidated and mobilised. Germany then responded by ordering her own mobilisation. It was at this point that the First World War became inevitable. Unlike the other powers Germany’s mobilisation plan did not gather the armies at the border and pause, the logic of the Schlieffen plan to eliminate France rapidly before turning on Russia dictated that the armies must keep going, through Luxembourg and Belgium into France. > > There were a number of key actions that led inexorably to the outbreak of the First World War. As I see it these were; Austria-Hungary’s decision to destroy Serbia, Germany’s guarantee of support for Austria-Hungary, Serbia’s rejection of a small part of the Austrian ultimatum, Russia’s decision to support Serbia and finally Germany’s decision to mobilise and carry out a full scale attack on France through neutral Belgium. Of these the one that ensured that the First World War would break out in 1914 rather than another limited Balkan war was the German decision to mobilise and attack France in a way that led to directly to British involvement. It therefore makes sense to argue that Germany was more responsible than any other power for the outbreak of the First World War. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/106 "2011-01-13T15:46:19Z")
Just a quick look at the thread and I saw it as would the beer have been better if the Germans won WW1 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/107 "2011-01-13T15:54:29Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Just a quick look at the thread and I saw it as would the beer have been better if the Germans won WW1 😃 That goes without saying. But France won and we’ve been stuck with wine snobbery ever since. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/108 "2011-01-13T16:02:44Z")
> [@MarcusF](#): > > Needlessly in what sense? As in not supporting an ally, Serbia, that was about to be dismembered by A-H despite having caved in completely to A-H’s ultimatum. That’s one way to look at it. But mostly I am objecting to **CRSP** ’s use of the modifier “needlessly” applying to only Germany’s actions. From a certain standpoint, _all_ of the Great Powers’ actions directly leading to the War were needless, not just Germany’s. Russia’s national integrity was not at stake when they threatened the Austro-Hungarians. Nor was Britain’s at stake when Germany invaded Belgium. France’s was after Germany mobilized, but they knew the risks when they agreed to an alliance with the Romanovs. > [@](#): > > Note I am not defending Russia or any of the other powers - they had all successfully constructed a powder keg of interlocking treaties to sit on and were all happily puffing on their cigars. They all living on the edge but I’ve argued before that it was Germany that has to take the majority of the blame for turning a regional conflict into the Great War. Personally, I would assign about a third of the blame to Germany, a third to Russia, and a third to Britain & France. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/109 "2011-01-13T16:05:43Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > That goes without saying. But France won and we’ve been stuck with wine snobbery ever since. No, no. You’re both wrong. It would have been for the best if [Belgium](http://www.lindemans.be/start/framboise/en) had conquered the Continent. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Doughbag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Doughbag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doughbag)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/110 "2011-01-13T16:12:34Z")
> [@MarcusF](#): > > Sorry, I’m slow today! Is this a whoosh? Well…maybe. The thing is that Germany gets now judged for WW1 by what happened in WW2. It is sure, that the winner writes history in their view. But people forget that the other parties involved in WW1 where no angels, even by a long shot. Germany was crucified for WW1, every other nation claims to be completely innocent and have absolutely nothing to do with what happened to Germany afterwards. When Germany lost the war it got raped, spit in the face and left to fend for itself. Germany got up again and when the economy crashed in 1929 got striped again for everything they had by the French. Things changed after WW2, the Allies (all except the Soviets) helped Germany to be rebuilt…aka the Berlin Airbridge…and become strong allies. Germany became a member of Nato, EU… well one of the world powers these days… and all without war. So, what is the difference between end of WW1 and WW2? Clearly what happened in WW2 was way worse then WW1. They moved on and the US told the other Allies not to do the same mistake again, which they asked for right after WW1, but the Allies of WW1 wanted to make an example of Germany – which was Versailles. ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/111 "2011-01-13T16:15:49Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > That’s one way to look at it. But mostly I am objecting to **CRSP** ’s use of the modifier “needlessly” applying to only Germany’s actions. From a certain standpoint, _all_ of the Great Powers’ actions directly leading to the War were needless, not just Germany’s. Russia’s national integrity was not at stake when they threatened the Austro-Hungarians. Nor was Britain’s at stake when Germany invaded Belgium. France’s was after Germany mobilized, but they knew the risks when they agreed to an alliance with the Romanovs. An alliance that was made necessary by the alliances already made by Germany, and resulting in the total political isolation of France after the Franco-Prussian war. Look, you and I are just talking in circles here depending on what we feel is the truth. You seem more convinced by the absolute truth of your arguments than I am of my owns, but in the end we’re just debating the very same points already debated on the Treaty of Versailles wiki page, \*\*Historical assesments \*\* part, except with far less talent. Therefore I can only encourage people to go take a look there. > **[Treaty of Versailles | Territorial changes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles#Territorial_changes)** > > The treaty stripped Germany of 65,000 km2 (25,000 sq mi) of territory and 7 million people. It also required Germany to give up the gains made via the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and grant independence to the protectorates that had been established. > In Western Europe, Germany was required to recognize Belgian sovereignty over Moresnet and cede control of the Eupen-Malmedy area. Within six months of the transfer, Belgium was required to conduct a plebiscite on whether the citizens of the region wa In ... ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/112 "2011-01-13T16:16:11Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Personally, I would assign about a third of the blame to Germany, a third to Russia, and a third to Britain & France. What happened to the Austrians? (I leave out the Hungarians - they had no great wish to see Serbia annexed.) ---
**Author:** ![Doughbag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Doughbag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doughbag)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/113 "2011-01-13T16:16:22Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Personally, I would assign about a third of the blame to Germany, a third to Russia, and a third to Britain & France. I can live with that. > [@MarcusF](#): > > What happened to the Austrians? (I leave out the Hungarians - they had no great wish to see Serbia annexed.) …of cos, they claim, they had absolutly nothing to do with it… ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/114 "2011-01-13T16:46:11Z")
> [@Doughbag](#): > > When Germany lost the war it got raped, spit in the face and left to fend for itself. > Germany got up again and when the economy crashed in 1929 got striped again for everything they had by the French. I don’t want to open up a whole new discussion so let’s just say I believe you’re mistaken. You could try the the Wiki article on [Reparations](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_reparations) which gives an over view of the whole process. > [@](#): > > Things changed after WW2, the Allies (all except the Soviets) helped Germany to be rebuilt…aka the Berlin Airbridge…and become strong allies. > Germany became a member of Nato, EU… well one of the world powers these days… and all without war. > So, what is the difference between end of WW1 and WW2? Clearly what happened in WW2 was way worse then WW1. They moved on and the US told the other Allies not to do the same mistake again, which they asked for right after WW1, but the Allies of WW1 wanted to make an example of Germany – which was Versailles. Again this is a gross over simplification. Just to take one factor: After WW2, an issue for the western Allies was clearly the Soviet threat and the start of the Cold War was a major factor in the different treatment of West Germany post 1945 to post 1918. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/115 "2011-01-13T17:17:29Z")
> [@MarcusF](#): > > What happened to the Austrians? (I leave out the Hungarians - they had no great wish to see Serbia annexed.) Well, we were considering the actions of the Great Powers which transformed a regional war into a World War. I had assumed that as Serbia and Austria-Hungary were the belligerents of that regional war, that they would be precluded from such a discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/116 "2011-01-13T17:19:40Z")
> [@Capitaine\_Zombie](#): > > An alliance that was made necessary by the alliances already made by Germany, and resulting in the total political isolation of France after the Franco-Prussian war. An alliance that ensured that if Germany went to war with Russia (as it almost inevitably would at some point, as long as hothead Wilhelm II was calling the shots), it would also have to fight France at the same time. In hindsight, it seems that going with political isolation might have been a wiser course for the French. (Interestingly, if Wilhelm II had listened to Bismarck, Russia would have been, at worst, isolated themselves, and at best, _allies_ of Germany.) > [@](#): > > Look, you and I are just talking in circles here depending on what we feel is the truth. > You seem more convinced by the absolute truth of your arguments than I am of my owns, but in the end we’re just debating the very same points already debated on the Treaty of Versailles wiki page, \*\*Historical assesments \*\* part, except with far less talent. Therefore I can only encourage people to go take a look there. > > [Treaty of Versailles - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles#Territorial_changes) The only absolute truth of which I am convinced is that Germany was not some uniquely evil society. Everything thing else is up for discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Doughbag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Doughbag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doughbag)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/117 "2011-01-13T17:35:36Z")
> [@MarcusF](#): > > I don’t want to open up a whole new discussion so let’s just say I believe you’re mistaken. You could try the the Wiki article on [Reparations](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_reparations) which gives an over view of the whole process. I like to point out this sentence from your cite to you: _…a sum that many economists at the time deemed to be excessive_ > [@MarcusF](#): > > Again this is a gross over simplification. Just to take one factor: After WW2, an issue for the western Allies was clearly the Soviet threat and the start of the Cold War was a major factor in the different treatment of West Germany post 1945 to post 1918. Of cos it is a simplification, no argument there. Historians argue about it, but the end of WW2 and the treatment of Germany then had something (maybe not the main factor) to do with how WW1 ended… and what happened afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/118 "2011-01-13T17:36:43Z")
no contribution here other than I just want to pop in to say that, every time I see this thread reappear in bold and at the top of the forum, I keep reading it as “World War II” carry on! ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/119 "2011-01-13T18:20:48Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > One could easily say the same things about the United Kingdom and France of the same period, if you changed the phrase “two crushing defeats” to “two exhausting victories”. I wouldn’t argue much with that. I’m no fan of any of those countries. But the context is somewhat different. ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2011, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183/120 "2011-01-13T18:40:39Z")
OK…I will take a stab. Germany wins WWI say in early 1916. Russia is knocked out of the war in 1915. This erodes Frances will to fight and they sue for peace. England follows suit. Now, Germany would not take peace without access to colonies. She would demand colonies from France/Denmark/Low Countries and push to aquire more of them. This puts Germany and England as opponents. England will do what she can to try to solidify enemies of Germany on the continent. I would imagine this would be France (again) as well as Italy. Italy should be alarmed at German strength and would most likely edge toward the British camp. However, Italy will want colonies as well when Germany starts grabbing them and will be eyeing a weakened France which will also irritate England as well as Germany. I predict some conflicts if not a major war between Germany and England/Italyand possibly France in the 20th century. Austia-Hungary will still have a tough time of it. I think she will still be torn apart by internal nationalistic forces. This will leave the Balkans a relative vacuum. Another source of tension between Germany and Italy/England. I envision many conflicts between Serbia/Greece/Romania etc during the 20th century as that gets straightened out. Japan is still out there also wanting colonies. She will be eyeing areas. However, the colonies will not be as weak as some of the French/Danish ones will be German. Japan will also probably have nibbled some colonies away from France/Denmark etc…but I imagine the Chinese/Japanese war still goes pretty much as planned. England will not be weak in the area as she got out of WWI relatively unscathed and is alarmed and more determined to be strong. The United States will look at this colony grabbing with disgust and alarm…but will probably not do much about it. In short - I suspect the World might be ‘better off’ in not having a huge major war like WWII…but there will definitely be chills in the air throughout the 20th century. I also think that colonization will be much stronger in the 20th century as the new players with strength and vigor enter the colony game. Colonization will most likely still be going strong to this day. South America could be interesting. With colonization going strong, I could see players trying to re-enter South America. However, this would concern the U.S. and so might not be tried with vigor. The 3rd world will not be happy with this exploitation and will most likely have some major rebellions/nationalistic movements during the 20th century…but this would eventually be crushed. Nukes will come along…a bit later…probably in the 60’s. This will curtail any major wars between the big powers. Sea power will more emphasized in the militaries. Militarism will be more prevalent/in fashion even in the United States. No Vietnam or equivalent for the U.S. unless they get into the colony game which I don’t think they would do. The U.S. might be a thorn to the other major powers by trying to support 3rd world rebellions when they do happen. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-the-world-have-been-better-if-germany-had-won-world-war-i/567183.md?page=7)