Replies

Compare Fukuyama's article with this one by Taki, on the same subject. Fukuyama is a neoconservative, Taki something of a paleo. Which do you think is right?

I disagree with both, in the sense that the 20th century would have been just as bloody, in some other way. I'm not sure that communism wouldn't have erupted in Russia any way. I'm more sympathetic with Taki. Fukuyama is way off base to claim the 20th century would have been dominated by Germany had they conquered France. U.S. and U.K. would be unaffected.

The likeliest event would have been the Brit's still fighting Germany to a standstill in France until the U.S. forces hit like a ton of bricks. In other words, had the Germans won at the Somne, WW I would then be more like WW II, although maybe without a Dunkirk.

All these arguments pining for a German victory in 1914 assume that a victorious Germany would have used its victory wisely. In fact, it would have been a victory for the very worst in Germany. A swaggering, militaristic Germany would have been the insufferable bully of Europe, leading to decades of warfare before it collapsed as Napoleon's empire did.

BTTT

If Germany had crushed France, an atmosphere similar to that of Weimar Germany would have spread in France. The loss of Alsace and Lorraine in 1871 had already brought France a distance along the road to tyranny and revenge-war. It's likely that further exactions by Germany would have been harsh and excessive, which would have provoked French bitterness, anger and hostility. A humiliated France would seek allies to get its own back.

Also, the nationalities question in the East would not have been solved. Would the Hapsburg, Ottoman and Romanov empires have collapsed or unravelled by themselves? Would they have turned repressive with the support of Germany or other outside powers? Would the subject peoples have risen and sought outside assistance for their revolts?

It's probably true that what would have happened had Germany won -- especially after a short war -- would have been much more benign than what actually did happen. It would have to have been better, given all that the war set into motion. But in 1914 or 1918 one couldn't forsee what would happen a generation later. Indeed, in 1914 one couldn't even forsee what would happen before the year was out. Even today we can't say what would have happened by the year 2002 had Germany won the First World War. And people at the time would have had to rely on what they did in fact know at the time.

This discussion reminds me a bit of the Civil War threads. In both cases, people blame the war leaders for things that actually took place later. This is much more understandable in the case of WWI, since the war did set into motion the Russian Revolution, Fascism, Hitler, Stalin, WWII, the Shoah, and the Cold War. The First World War was a great tragedy which made the Second possible.

The other contributing factor, though, was that the post-WWI generation of leaders did not take the steps necessary to move beyond hatred, as the post-WWII leaders did. A firm committment to German-French reconciliation throughout the post-WWI period could have done wonders. And though I hate to admit it, it's possible that a drive towards European Union and free-trade might have prevented what was to come.

Given the arrogance of Wilhelmine Germany, the bitterness of the French, and the instability caused by the nationalities question, it's unlikely that Europe would have taken steps towards long-term peace had Germany won, either. Anything would have been better than what did happen, but if Nazism, Stalinism and a genocidal war never happened, people would not realize how lucky they really were.

Thanks for the interesting article. Taki is just reversing what happened and saying it would be better. Fukuyama looks a little more deeply, and asks the question about how the non-white world would be affected. Perhaps a German victory would have stifled "progressive" and revolutionary forces there. The other side, though, is that if France and Belgium were crushed and Britain defeated, their authority in the colonies would have been shaken and revolutionaries there would take encouragement from the defeat of the mother countries, though the hope of overthrowing the yoke might have been even less than it was in our history.

BUMP