Alternate History discussion

281 views
What if Germany had won World War I?

Comments Showing 1-16 of 16 (16 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Loren (new)

Loren | 5 comments I know there's alot of books about Nazi Germany winning and the Turtledove Series following the US/CS had the US/Germany winning World War I setting the stage for a Nazi-CSA, but does anyone know of any books where germany wins world war I? And does anyone know or have a thought about how the world would look in that universe?


message 2: by Patricrk (new)

Patricrk patrick | 22 comments Mod
Loren wrote: "I know there's alot of books about Nazi Germany winning and the Turtledove Series following the US/CS had the US/Germany winning World War I setting the stage for a Nazi-CSA, but does anyone know o..."

I asked that same question over on a History Book group and got the same answer you gave. Try Turtledove. I've read most of Turtledove and I don't recall any with this premise.

My personal thoughts on the matter are. That if you assume that Germany wins early and the diplomats patch up a piece, then there will be no communist dictatorship in Russia, no communist movement in the world. The Ottoman empire remains intact and the bulk of the world oil reserves are now controlled by it. Germany remains the dominant nation in Europe and gradually moves to a monarchy patterned after
England. Austria retains a large hold on the Balkans.
China remains locked in a struggle between the war lords and the Republic. Japan refuses to return German's colonies and there is a naval war between these two countries for several years which finally ends with Japan triumphant and more aggressive than ever. The USA never have gotten into the war remains a third rate power with an even more isolationist outlook. The British empire remains as is. France becomes dominated by a very conservative government but is unable to do anything about revenge due to the overwhelming power of Germany. There is no Israel nor holocaust and the major power blocs are a British and German Empire alliance against the Ottomans.


message 3: by Josh (new)

Josh Liller (joshism) Ottoman Empire was going to fail - it was just a matter of time. Also, the Ottoman Empire in 1914 did not control Arabia except for loose control of the Red Sea shore. So while they would have the oil fields in modern Iraq, nearly all those in modern Saudi Arabia (and modern Iran) were outside Ottoman control.

Austria too was weakening to the point where internal nationalist forces would surely have been a problem eventually.

No Israel and probably no League Of Nations to set the stage for the United Nations could be significant.

Russian monarchy's survival is probably not as sure a thing either: Russia has still been beaten again and the people are still unhappy. It wouldn't go down like it did in 1917 by any means, but continued discontent among the populace - especially if it spread to the army - could lead to an eventual toppling of the Romanov dynasty. Whether the Communists could have capitalized on that slower upheaval is more doubtful.

US-Japan war probably still happens.


message 4: by Patricrk (new)

Patricrk patrick | 22 comments Mod
Josh wrote: "Ottoman Empire was going to fail - it was just a matter of time. Also, the Ottoman Empire in 1914 did not control Arabia except for loose control of the Red Sea shore. So while they would have th..."

Since the Ottoman Empire had been sick for several hundred years but still functioning, I don't think its early demise can be assumed. Especially if the young Turks come to influence and shape the extended empire. Without British backing of the Arabs I sort of assumed the Turks would reconquer the Arabs especially as their German advisers and suppliers would be plentiful. It is really hard to pull together convincing arguments on what-if scenarios and I can't really argue with anything you have stated.


message 5: by Dave (last edited Nov 15, 2010 09:48AM) (new)

Dave (Thag) | 8 comments Mod
I am not sure it was a possibility. They simply did not have the manpower to make a breakout move on the Western Front nor did they have the naval power to contest the Royal Navy. That said, Imperial Germany certainly could have fought to a stalemate and as Britain bled itself white with incompetent generalship and the French army was rocked with massive mutinies this is exactly would have happened - EXCEPTING of course the warmonger Woodrow Wilson looking out for the Wall Street bankers who had ill-advisedly backed the British and French with unsustainable war loans. Wilson's intervention (in spite of a US electorate that firmly against involvement in the bloodbath of the Western Front) set the table for the dramatic turn in fortunes for Great Britain and France and the revenge orgy that became the Versailles Treaty and thus paved the way for just about everything else that went wrong for the remainder of the 20th Century.

Funny how Wilson's "I will not send American boys to fight in a European War" campaign rhetoric of 1916 sounds so similar to FDR's 1940 promises and LBJ's 1964 promises.

Suggested follow-up (albeit NOT Speculative Fiction):
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62...


message 6: by Patricrk (new)

Patricrk patrick | 22 comments Mod
Dave wrote: "I am not sure it was a possibility. They simply did not have the manpower to make a breakout move on the Western Front nor did they have the naval power to contest the Royal Navy. That said, Impe..."

I think there were two periods where the Germans came very close to winning the war. At the first before the western front became deadlocked with trenches. And, the second after they were able to transfer the bulk of the Eastern Army to the western front. The alternate history I suggested was assuming they won it at the start of the war. If they won it at the end of the war, you probably get Stalin but not Hitler.


message 7: by Mike Briggs (last edited Sep 28, 2012 01:43PM) (new)

Mike Briggs (mikebriggs) I'm not sure if anyone in this thread is even still around, but:

"I asked that same question over on a History Book group and got the same answer you gave. Try Turtledove. I've read most of Turtledove and I don't recall any with this premise."

Turtledove did have a book wherein Germany won WWI. It is a young adult book published before this thread started. The story is set long afterwards, though, at some point in the 21st century.

"Turtledove, Harry. Curious Notions
Divergence: 1914 CE
What if: The Schlieffen plan worked and Germany knocked France and Britain out of the Great War quickly, then went on to dominate Europe by the end of the 1930s and defeat the USA in an atomic war in the 1950s.
Summary: Crosstime traders get into trouble in late 21st century San Francisco, when both the German Feldgendarmerie and the Chinese Triads notice their odd activities.
Series note: Second volume of Crosstime Traffic."

I only mention it for the Turtledove connection and the comment in this thread from 2 years ago.

I'm very timely with my responses.

eta: And even with my "timely response" I still need to edit it after posting. Ian R. MacLeod's The Summer Isles also involves Germany winning WWI. Book is set in 1940. Divergence came in 1918.
"What if: Germany's Spring Offensive in 1918 broke the French-British line and Germany won World War I. Subsequently, Britain went fascist following further poltical and economic reversals.
Summary: In 1940, an Oxford professor is invited to the 50th birthday celebration of John Arthur, dictator of Britain. But the professor knows the true origin of Arthur, and unhappy with where the nation is headed, is determined to kill him."


message 8: by Jack (new)

Jack | 11 comments There is a book, I can't remember the name but it's about how Germany won WW1 and invades the USA.


message 9: by Lance (new)

Lance H | 1 comments Its called 1920 by robert conroy. Pretty interesting take. I liked it.


message 10: by James (new)

James (birchoverjames) | 10 comments I have read this and it is an interesting story.


message 11: by Thom (new)

Thom Haneline | 13 comments Yes, I liked it too - I'm preferring Conroy over Turtledove. Turtledove turns topics into long series that barely touch on historical characters, relying on military descriptions like Tom Clancy, using the same blue collar type characters who don't really advance the story. Conroy writes single, stand alone books, that play with historical characters more - like Custer, in "Custer in Chains", which imagines a Custer Presidency.


message 12: by Jack (new)

Jack | 11 comments I have read a couple of turtledoves books the only complaint I have for him is that his books seem rather dry. Great ideas but the plot takes a lot of time to build up. The first book in his timeline 191 series is like this I didn't read the rest of the series because of the first book.


message 13: by Thom (new)

Thom Haneline | 13 comments I agree.


message 14: by David (new)

David King (davourak) | 3 comments The Conroy books look interesting, I shall have a look at 1920.


message 15: by Lincoln (new)

Lincoln | 1 comments I feel that because of the scarcity of alt history WW1 books, we should take it upon ourselves to ask somebody to write or even ourselves write an Alt History on WW1.


message 16: by Andrew (new)

Andrew J. | 1 comments There is at least one more alternate history in which Germany wins the First World War: Gray Tide in the East (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07....) The history, I believe, compares favorably with anything Conroy ever wrote.


back to top