A Central World

It's no coincidence that the countries which lost the most after WWI also wound up with the most extreme leaders and forms of government by 1940. With the instability that France suffered during the interwar period it's not a great leap to think that a bruised ego and reparations would push them towards a charismatic leader who promises to fix everything.

>Since both sides wanted the complete annihilation of the other
Patently false.
Only France wanted the destruction of Germany. The UK preferred Germany to remain in order to compete with France as the continental superpower.

WWII would be started by the French, Russia trying to get back at Germany. Austria would be a shit show with ethic-nationalities trying to break a part just like with the Ottoman Empire.

The end result would be: US becoming hegemon via trade/entering the war on Germany's side. Japan still getting nuked. German Empire is shrunk, Ottoman Empire is broken up, France calms down, British Empire is broken up, Austrian Empire is broken up, Russia become influential in Europe.

There wouldn't be any commies though.

>The UK preferred Germany to remain in order to compete with France as the continental superpower
That's why they were in full support of destroying the German empire?

If they were in favour of destroying the German empire, the German empire would be destroyed.

Compare German territorial losses with those of Austria, of the Ottomans, or of Russia. Germany got off easy, extremely easy.

Wut.

My dude, British foreign policy was fully in favour of placating Germany at Versailles and during the interwar period.

It was destroyed
They lost all colonial possessions, a good part of their continental possessions, they imposed insanely heavy fines upon Germany, and when Germany failed to pay they occupied the industrial zone on the Rhine, their army and navy were reduced to virtually non existent levels, Germany was absolutely fucked by the treaty of Versailles. The reason why they were able to dismantle the Austrohungarian and the Ottoman empires is because they used the self determination of the people as an excuse to balkanize them, while there was no major minority in Germany to give independence to, other than the parts that were ceded to Czechoslovakia, France and Poland

Nigger, Germany was nominally a federation of equals under the suzerainty of the Kaiser. If Britain wanted a balkanized Germany they could "liberate" it's constituent states and forbid them from joining together.

Not if its constituent states didn't want independence. In Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and the Russian Empire, minorities had been after independence even before the war, and as far as I'm aware there weren't any major separatist movements in the German Empire.

You're saying that as if the Allied powers wouldn't just occupy and force a balkanization if they really wanted it. Look at the Saarland, look at Danzig, look at Trianon, the Allies didn't give a shit as long as their political goals were met.

French fascist groups in France managed to topple a government in 1934, and this is when they'd won the war, if they lost it'd be even worse

Actually the UK was mostly concerned with the knock on effects it would gave on their own economy, the cheap coal from Germany in reparations alone devastated British coal mines which led directly to the 1926 General Strike

>he seriously thinks that the Entente couldn't have used the self-determination argument to dismantle Germany if they so desired

Also, the reparations imposed on Germany were relatively small for the amount of damage they caused, considering the fact that their industry was left intact by the war, dishonestly deflated their currency to pay as little as they could, and despite all of that, they defaulted on them.

Versailles was a mere slap on the hand, and the Germans blatantly disregarded the Treaty in any case. They should have been slapped straight for their impunity, but the world was experiencing a global recession and did not have to stomach for more military conflict. Which is a shame, imagine how many lives could have been saved had the UK followed France's suit and actually imposed the Treaty on the Germans instead of sheepishly trying to placate them at every turn.

Kaiserreich without meme shit like syndicalism.

>italy
>lost
and still produced mussolini

spain wasn't even in the war and still had franco, so either hitler would still happen in germany or not much would change as in things would just go back to how they were pre war

As I said in another thread a while back, the world would be more reactionary (monarchism and old-school autocracy less discredited) but less totalitarian (Whites most likely win Civil War with German aid, France may adopt some alternate form of fascism but would be far too weak to threaten Germany).

With a smaller Second World War or none at all, decolonization is a slower process, the US is likely more isolationist, and Europe maintains a large Jewish population. Plenty of other factors (the stability of the Middle East, China, Japan, US's relationship with Germany, etc.) could go many ways.

Mussolini and Franco were pretty tame compared to the Nazis and the Bolsheviks.

>ww1 victory
>reichaboos
fuck off CUNT

What do you call a ww1 boo?

Kaiserboo

I like KR's take on an alternate timeline, but the second battle of Jutland shit was really dumb.

>and forbid them from joining together.
it was forbidden to austria to join germany, but it still did, so that doesn't work

>Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences.

There is some possibility that some form of Polish state would have happened anyway, but allied with Central Powers and with Piłsudzki in charge from the beginning, who planned to form Polish state with help of Central powers, unlike other people who planned the same allied with Entente.

Because people didn't want another war with Germany. A war with Wurttemburg is a different story.

>Polish border strip
>They were going to do the very same exact thing Stalin later did to them
is this karma?

Big Germany coercing little Austria is one thing. It'd be very different if you had Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, Wurttemberg and Austria all competing for dominance in the German sphere

>Polish border strip
>They were going to do the very same exact thing Stalin later did to them
Was this effect of karma?

What did he mean by this?

>You lost, Reichaboos. Deal with it.

>le 56% face
It's probably a butthurt frenchie or an eternally assblasted p*le

But then, they wouldn't abide by the German desire for self-determination...

With what? French Farmers?
England would probably loose a few African colonial holdings, Asia would probably remain the same, a bunch of new states would be carved out of Russia, The United States would be untouched.
So the United States, and the United Kingdom would probably stay out of it, France would have become a largely agrarian state from the Germans taking all of their resource rich lands in the north.
The collapse of the Ottomans and the AH-Empire would be a bigger concern then France could ever be.
The Soviets might strike at Eastern Europe but that would probably bring the United Kingdom in on the side of Germany. Even if it didn't, a worst case scenario is Soviet Union+France+Italy against a dieing AH/OE and Germany+ Puppets. France would be trounced again. The Soviet Union would be a much harder fight since they actually have a strong industrial base, but short of AH and the Ottomans dissolving mid war and pulling away vital troops it is doubtful they could win.

If Hitler had tried to overthrow the government in Imperial Germany he would have been shot not just jailed.
Granted with the instability in Austro-Hungaria even in a win situation he may cease power in his home country.