What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#1

Post by Futurist » 01 Jan 2016, 03:13

What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880 (say, as a result of falling down the stairs, hitting his head extremely hard on something as a result of this fall, and dying as a result of excessive internal bleeding shortly afterwards) and Wilhelm's younger brother Heinrich becomes the new German Kaiser in 1888 instead (after the death of both his grandfather and his father)?

Any thoughts on this? Would Kaiser Heinrich be a better Kaiser than Kaiser Wilhelm II was in real life? After all, unlike Wilhelm II, Heinrich did not have a crippled arm, an inferiority complex, or ADHD (attention deficit hyperactive disorder). :)

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#2

Post by Futurist » 01 Jan 2016, 03:46

Also, here are three especially crucial questions in regards to this:

1. Is Kaiser Heinrich likely to likewise significantly expand the German Navy in a way that is provocative to Britain?

2. Is World War I likely to eventually break out in this TL, and if so, when?

3. Is Kaiser Heinrich going to prefer the Schlieffen Plan or Moltke the Elder's plan in the event that World War I will still eventually break out in this TL?

Any thoughts on this?


PF
Member
Posts: 2123
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 14:19
Location: USA

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#3

Post by PF » 20 Jan 2016, 22:32

Hopefully whoever was German Emperor would contiuned Bismarck Policy of a balence between World Powers and leaving France diplomatically isolated....or having Alsace-Lorraine voting under a neutral power {not France or Germany} as to which country to belong to...or of creating a buffer state along the German eastern border/Russia of a self governing commonwealth of a Duchy of Poland..or after the Assissination of Archdule Ferdinard and his wife..not by writing a blank check of Miltiary assistance to Austria...but being a chairperson of a Internationl Conference of what ot do about the latest Balken Trouble...checkmating both France and Russia...of course the crux of the problem was Wilhelm II ....who should have been a Duke instead of a Emperor...

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#4

Post by Futurist » 09 Feb 2016, 12:06

PF wrote:Hopefully whoever was German Emperor would contiuned Bismarck Policy of a balence between World Powers and leaving France diplomatically isolated....
Frankly, it might have been too late for this; after all, Russia began receiving French loans in 1888, two years before the collapse of the Reinsurance Treaty:

https://books.google.com/books?id=1Pp6B ... 88&f=false
or having Alsace-Lorraine voting under a neutral power {not France or Germany} as to which country to belong to...
That might work with a sufficiently courageous German Kaiser and Chancellor. :)
or of creating a buffer state along the German eastern border/Russia of a self governing commonwealth of a Duchy of Poland..
Wouldn't such a move be strongly opposed by German nationalists due to the fact that it would involve a German loss of Posen, though? Plus, are you sure that Russia would actually be willing to go along with such a plan?
or after the Assissination of Archdule Ferdinard and his wife..not by writing a blank check of Miltiary assistance to Austria...but being a chairperson of a Internationl Conference of what ot do about the latest Balken Trouble...checkmating both France and Russia...
Agreed.
of course the crux of the problem was Wilhelm II ....who should have been a Duke instead of a Emperor...
Agreed.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#5

Post by michael mills » 12 Feb 2016, 08:46

Futurist, you are attributing far too much power to Wilhelm II as a person determining the course of events.

Although under the constitution of the German Empire the Kaiser was given wide executive powers, similar to those of the President of the United States, in reality Germany was dominated by a ruling class consisting of a coalition of large eastern landowners and western industrialists, who were able to exercise decisive influence on the policies of the German Government. Furthermore, although the Kaiser and his ministers were not responsible to the Reichstag elected by universal male adult suffrage, they were constrained by the Reichstag's control over the Government's finances, which it did use on occasion to block actions by the Executive, such as placing financial limitations on the expansion of the army.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#6

Post by Futurist » 13 Feb 2016, 00:45

michael mills wrote:Futurist, you are attributing far too much power to Wilhelm II as a person determining the course of events.
Maybe. However, I would like to remind you that we are talking about the German Kaiser who (successfully) fired Alfred von Waldersee, the Chief of the Imperial German General Staff, for defeating him (the Kaiser) in war games in 1891. Indeed, a German Kaiser who is able to fire his top military man for something like that and to get away with it certainly appears to have had a good amount of power.
Although under the constitution of the German Empire the Kaiser was given wide executive powers, similar to those of the President of the United States, in reality Germany was dominated by a ruling class consisting of a coalition of large eastern landowners and western industrialists, who were able to exercise decisive influence on the policies of the German Government.
That certainly makes sense. However, here is a question for you, Michael--did either the Junkers or west German industrialists strongly want a German naval arms race with Britain? Or was the Anglo-German naval arms race something that largely occurred on the initiative of Kaiser Wilhelm II and Alfred von Tirpitz?
Furthermore, although the Kaiser and his ministers were not responsible to the Reichstag elected by universal male adult suffrage, they were constrained by the Reichstag's control over the Government's finances, which it did use on occasion to block actions by the Executive, such as placing financial limitations on the expansion of the army.
Yes; correct! However, at the same time, there were certain decisions (such as having Germany avoid antagonizing Britain) which didn't require the approval of the German Reichstag.

Also, I would like to point out that even if holding a sovereignty plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine (so that a German-French rapprochement can occur) and having Germany dump Austria-Hungary in favor of Russia would have both been unacceptable decisions for a different German Kaiser, a different German Kaiser could have avoided antagonizing Britain (such as by making German naval expansion seem less threatening to Britain and by avoiding foreign policy blunders such as the two Moroccan Crises and the disastrous 1908 Daily Telegraph interview) and could have appointed military men who supported Moltke the Elder's Plan for a two-front war (defense in the West and a limited offensive followed by defense in the East) rather than Schlieffen's Plan for a two-front war (quickly try knocking out France and then focus almost all of Germany's forces towards fighting Russia in the East). In turn, British neutrality in World War I means U.S. neutrality in World War I, and if World War I still breaks out in 1914 (or perhaps even in 1915 or 1916) in this scenario, then Germany would have almost certainly won World War I in this scenario. After all, it was Britain and the U.S. who gave Germany the "death blow" in World War I in real life (specifically by starving Germany and by very likely giving the Entente/Allies the necessary numbers to successfully overpower Germany on the battlefield).

Indeed, do you agree with me that a different German Kaiser in the late 19th and early 20th century could have kept Britain and thus the U.S. out of World War I and could have thus ensured a German victory in World War I, Michael?

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#7

Post by michael mills » 13 Feb 2016, 03:27

Indeed, do you agree with me that a different German Kaiser in the late 19th and early 20th century could have kept Britain and thus the U.S. out of World War I and could have thus ensured a German victory in World War I, Michael?
I doubt that a different ruler of Germany could have prevented the rise of antagonism between that country and Britain, since the antagonism was not caused by anything the ruler did or said, but rather by the challenge that the rapid economic development of Germany was posing to British dominance of World trade. The British aim in fighting Germany was to cripple German industry and commerce so that it could no longer compete successfully with those of Britain.

That is clearly shown by the British Government's attitude toward the economic conference held in Paris in June 1916, which proposed the post-war suppression of German economic power by excluding it from World trade through a system of trade barriers. Although the proposed restrictions on trade were directly to Britain's traditional policy of Free Trade, the British Parliament accepted the proposals of the Paris conference on the grounds that the economic suppression of Germany was more important than maintaining Free Trade. In presenting the proposals to Parliament, Foreign Secretary Grey stated that he had always been a strong supporter of Free Trade, but now supported the restrictions to be placed on Germany for political reasons.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#8

Post by Futurist » 13 Feb 2016, 03:41

michael mills wrote:
Indeed, do you agree with me that a different German Kaiser in the late 19th and early 20th century could have kept Britain and thus the U.S. out of World War I and could have thus ensured a German victory in World War I, Michael?
I doubt that a different ruler of Germany could have prevented the rise of antagonism between that country and Britain, since the antagonism was not caused by anything the ruler did or said, but rather by the challenge that the rapid economic development of Germany was posing to British dominance of World trade. The British aim in fighting Germany was to cripple German industry and commerce so that it could no longer compete successfully with those of Britain.
By that logic, though, wouldn't Britain have wanted to fight the U.S. even more than it wanted to fight Germany? After all, the U.S. was industrializing at an even more rapid pace than Germany was industrializing during this time.
That is clearly shown by the British Government's attitude toward the economic conference held in Paris in June 1916, which proposed the post-war suppression of German economic power by excluding it from World trade through a system of trade barriers. Although the proposed restrictions on trade were directly to Britain's traditional policy of Free Trade, the British Parliament accepted the proposals of the Paris conference on the grounds that the economic suppression of Germany was more important than maintaining Free Trade. In presenting the proposals to Parliament, Foreign Secretary Grey stated that he had always been a strong supporter of Free Trade, but now supported the restrictions to be placed on Germany for political reasons.
That conference was held in the middle of World War I and after years of Anglo-German tensions over German naval expansion, though. Thus, I certainly don't think that Britain's attitude during this conference can be compared to Britain's attitude towards Germany in 1888 in this scenario when a new Kaiser (Heinrich--Wilhelm's younger brother) will come to power in Germany.

In addition to this, didn't Britain offer Germany a five year defensive alliance sometime in the 1898-1901 time period? After all, I seem to recall that Joseph Chamberlain (Neville Chamberlain's father!) was actively seeking such an alliance during this time.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#9

Post by Futurist » 13 Feb 2016, 03:42

Also, didn't rapid German industrialization begin in either the 1870s or the 1860s? If so, then why exactly did it take until the early 20th century for significant Anglo-German tensions to develop?

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015, 01:02
Location: SoCal

Re: What if the future Kaiser Wilhelm II dies in 1880?

#10

Post by Futurist » 14 Feb 2016, 04:07

Indeed, based on the information here, it appears that Germany did blow an opportunity for an alliance and for better relations with Britain in the 1898-1901 time period in real life:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Ch ... st_attempt

Post Reply

Return to “What if”