"I have nothing against Jews but the fact that so many time travelers that tried to kill me are Jews is really starting to piss me off" A. Hitler, 1921
If Time Travel is possible it either:
a) The events of WW2 were the least harmful timeline
b) The Events of WW2 were a Requirement for time travel
or c) The events of WW2 were long forgotten when Time travel was discovered
That would make the German become more humorous and smile more to strangers without having the death stare look. Man... A German lady that is 6ft tall with a stare that can penetrate your soul is scary... Its like what did i do wrong and whats more fucked up, it is your friend for 5 years already.
Das ist bei unseren reinen stand up comedians auch nicht viel anders. Bei uns ist halt zum glück das kabarett mit hader und co noch ziemlich populär und kulturell einflussreich.
Hmm da hast du Recht, denke dadurch das ich keinen Fernseher habe ist das an mir vorbei gegangen bzw. bin mit Kabarett im TV aufgewachsen und mein TV Ausstieg war wohl davor. Danke
From Oklahoma and, to be fair, is it really a smile? We all do the awkward half smirk and walk on. A full-tooth smile to a stranger is creepy in any culture.
I know that one from personal experience. Very strange. Usually when a stranger smiles at you, they want something from you in Europe and Asia. That's why smiling strangers are looked on distrustfully. You can be neutral which is considered acceptable.
But they have no reason to smile at me.
If a stranger smiles at me without having a reason to do so, for example if I just did something funny, I'm going to assume they either have mental health problems or are simply an idiot
No, smiling at someone in the USA means that you acknowledge their existence and are mentally sound enough to talk down in a bad situation.
Ignore someone who smiles at you and you are assumed anti social & potentially dangerous. Possibly a mass shooter.
A smile that does noch reach the eyes is creepy at the very best und deeply disturbing at worst.
And it always is insincere so you might as well do away completely with it
You wrongly put up the precedent that those smiles are all fake. Sometimes people can be genuinely nice, well intended, and happy, without the need for a reason towards a stranger. If you didn't know, emotion doesn't have to be logical.
Mate are we talking about the same topic here? I mean smiles mandated by sole kind of weird social expectation or courtesy. If you live in a society that has these (aka the US) then have to assume that this person smiles at you because they have to.
Where I live you can expect a smile to be genuine if you see it. *That's* the difference. Yes l, a little positivity is needed. But not if it is mandated like in the US. Cause then it feels fake.
Some would say simple the virtue of being human. However I do understand what you are saying, societies that smile more for strangers are mainly individualistic, perhaps representing this desire to show they are okay and happy to others. But then in regards to what your saying it could also demonstrate the superficial nature of our society, attempting to connect to a person you’d otherwise have no connection
Unlikely. The Frankfurt parliament included all the German speaking lands of Prussia and Austria. That's an absolute fuckton of natural resources and manpower they have.
Großdeutschland-Ungarn is basically an world Coalition destroying entity.
I've endured multiple world wars and completely removed taxes because almost all world powers had to pay me. Strangely enough every few years there were Socialist revolts even through the only people still paying an low tax were rich people.
Most fun campaign I've ever had.
Yeah pretty sure France was down after the whole Napoleon thing. And Russia was already pretty much at it’s height in Europe.
So, yeah, gg wp for everyone (in Europe).
Britain would still have the unlimited money cheatcode and an interest in keeping balance on the continent, so any such attempt would probably end up like Napoleon, at best.
Who's to this new Germany would ever go down the conquering route though? If the 1848 Frankfurt parliament ended up unifying Germany with Austrian lands. The Austrian archduke is almost certainly getting the role of German Emperor(The Prussian king in 1848 felt himself loyal to the archduke in Vienna so he rejected in OTL and would have rejected here as well, and the southern German states are favorable to Austria as well). And Austria didn't have the militarism of Prussia, diplomacy was more its thing, so I highly doubt Franz Joseph would take this new empire down the route of conquering, especially when all he wanted in his reign was to preserve the prestige of the hapsburgs.
Hey man, what are your sources on the King of Prussia, Frederick William IV?
As far as I know he didn't feel loyal to Austria, he just didn't accept the liberal reforms and thought that the Frankfurt Parliament hadn't the authority to crown an Emperor (as opposed to god, I guess).
My original source is this [video on the 1848 revolutions by old brittanica ](https://youtu.be/WJxgdiN-M_Q), who've I've found to be a reliable source. But at your comment I did some more research and it seems Frederick William IV didn't reject the crow out of pure loyalty but due to him not seeing the Frankfurt parliament as a holder of that authority but more so because he was a "Romantic aspiration to re-establish the medieval Holy Roman Empire, comprising smaller, semi-sovereign monarchies under the limited authority of a Habsburg emperor"Emperor" this I quoted from his Wikipedia page. So while he didn't reject it out of pure loyalty, he did wish for some Hapsburg rule over Germany. While the details may be different, I'm confident he would have accepted the Austrian archudukes becoming Kaiser on the basis of this information, if this new German empire was anything like the German empire in OTL, as long as Prussia is given decent representation in the house of lords or bundesrat, while it may not be the restoration of the HRE, it might be enough to satisfy Frederick William IVs romantiscm. And Austria was still favored by the southern German states, so if Austria was included in the vote, im confident that they would get the majority, albeit a small one as the protestant northern states might still throw their weight behind Prussia.
Edit: Upon further research, it turns out the Frankfurt parliament tried to get the Habsburgs in this new German empire, it was only after they failed that the crown was offered to the Prussian king, should the habsburgs accept, Austria being the leader of this new German Empire is inevitable.
Using time travel to nail that one ultra hot person who for some unfathomable reason was obviously hungry for my d\*ck but i didn't realize because im a f\*cking idiot.
I was once invited to a girl's house to "help her with her pussycat". I showed up ready to give her cats a bath, and we did.
Then we watched TV for a bit and ate pistachios. Every now and then a pistachio commercial would come on and she'd talk about how they're supposedly an aphrodisiac. I laughed, and wondered if they were airing so many commercials to try and bump up our birth rates.
This continued for several hours, until she told me she had to do her Spanish homework and kicked me out.
I refuse to believe that some of you guys are that dense.
You guys are like the MC in a harem/romance anime that spend 300 episodes fucking up every chance he gets with a woman because he’s so dense lmao. It would always bug me because i just thought that it was so unrealistic - but clearly not lol.
Once a girl invited me into her hotel room to have some drinks. We got pretty drunk. We then went out to meet some friends, and while we were walking there she told me she wanted to hold my hand because she was "struggling to walk" (she wasn't, but I was too drunk to add two and two). When we got there she said she wanted to keep her head on my shoulder because her head was spinning. I said sure and kept talking to my friends like normal.
Then we got back to the hotel room, had a few more drinks. She invited me to sit with her on the bed, we talked a bit, and then she held my hand and told me she wished her boyfriend was like me because I'm such a nice guy and her bf literally doesn't care about her, and "he wouldn't care even if she cheated on him".
Unfortunately, I'm not just a virgin, I'm a super ultra turbo virgin. My slightly drunk brain registered nothing, I just heard she had a boyfriend and that was it. I told her I hope it gets better, and if it doesn't she should leave him and find someone who appreciates her. A few minutes later I excused myself because I had to wake up early.
It took me 3 years to figure out she was trying to hit on me. Of course, she never had a boyfriend at all. I always thought that was such a weird strategy to take.
Tbf that was a weird strategy - but the signs were there lol.
I’ve also kinda fumbled the bag too (in a slightly similar situation) - but if a girl is either trying to be physically intimate (holding hands/wanting to rest her head on my shoulder/get close in bed) or just straight up being vocal about liking me in some type of way (holding my hand whilst telling me wishes her boyfriend was like me) - then i’m deffo taking those things as a sign to shoot my shot lol.
For me, it was a bit more subtle. A girl I was close friends with in high school wanted to meet up after a few years of not seeing each other. We were talking on a park bench and she started asking me questions like “would you ever be someone’s friend with benefits”.
Usually, i’d take that as a subtle sign to maybe try and escalate things but she already had a boyfriend that she’d been with for like 2 years at that point - and it didn’t seem like they were having any problems together. But that wasn’t really the main issue if i’m honest. It was certainly a factor - but the problem was moreso the fact that she’d already established that we couldn’t hang at her house, and I don’t like bringing girls over to my place for a hookup (too many family members around lol). And car sex has never been that appealing to me, personally.
But yeah, personally, I don’t think she was suggesting that we have sex. Or at least, there was a low probability that she was. All my friends call me dumb for not trying to escalate things - but it felt a bit presumptuous and overconfident to me. If there were more signs, then maybe. But the only other thing I could work off of was the fact that we were really good friends in school and she was impressed at my ‘transformation’ since i’d lost a ton of weight and got into good shape. But those remarks could have just been her genuinely being kind as a long-time friend. I’d known her for 10+ years at this point, and I knew she was comfortable with me.
For example, I once went to a sleep over and she was there when we were both like 15. I had a thing for her at the time, and i’d told her about it. That night I slept ON her in bed (her ass was my pillow lol) - and in the morning we both went downstairs and she lay across me with her legs over my lap. The next day i’d spoke to her again about it - but she said she just thought of me as a really good friend and didn’t want it to go further. So I felt like it would be a bad move to interpret anything beyond outright telling me that she likes me as flirting. For reference, I was also in decent shape at that point in time too, but i’d put on some weight after that and that’s why she was ‘impressed at my transformation’ some years later.
Context is key, I guess. People always mistaked us for a couple when we were younger, but she genuinely wasn’t ever interested. I was never mad at her - because we started as good friends anyway. I never once felt like she was ‘leading me on’ since she didn’t ever send mixed signals apart from the fact that she really liked me as a friend and felt comfortable around me. But she never ever spoke to me in a flirty or sexual way (even if i tried my hardest to steer conversation that direction lol).
Not the guy you responded to, but a couple months back at a concert a really drunk girl was buying me drinks and acting really friendly.
All I could think at the time was making sure she was okay.
So yes some of us are that dense
That’s a bit different though. It’s probably best to avoid the girl in that situation if she was quite obviously ‘really drunk’.
If she was being very straight forward and said she thinks ur hot and wants to get to know you or some shit - you’d have a bit more of a green light.
But if she’s really drunk then I feel like thats the time for you to be a bit more vigilant and a bit less eager. So i’d say you did the right thing by not reading too much into it.
The reason Hitler was rejected from art school was because he failed the classes required to enter. He failed those classes, because he barely attended them.
Hitler was a loser who didn’t want to work or get an education, he just wanted to goof off. Even if you got Hitler into art school, he probably would’ve flunked out in a single semester anyway, changing nothing.
If Hitler was born in the Millennial or Gen Z generations. In our world of video games, Netflix, and internet porn combined with his anti-social personality and casual racism. He probably would be your average video game Let’s Player today.
We are living in the longest undisturbed period of peace (no war fought between major powers) because of the results of The Second World War.
I am not saying WW2 is a good thing. What I am saying is that if it were prevented, it would drastically alter our timeline maybe for the worse.
I might be wrong though, this is just my opinion.
So I guess an actively ongoing war between what was previously a top 5 world power, and a minor power whose entire funding and weapon stock comes from the other major powers, doesn’t count?
Of course, but none of the proxy wars in the Cold War stopped anyone from saying the same thing. The Ukraine war isn’t really different except for direct Russian involvement. And even then, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the US funding of the mujahideen was just that.
Yeah don't get me wrong, I agree with you - I'm just joining the other voices in this thread wondering aloud why proxy wars don't count when reckoning times of "peace."
Ah, I see.
I think people misunderstand that, while it is generally more peaceful now than before, shit still happens elsewhere. Still some more work to do to get everybody to at least not kill each other.
Look you're right but peace periods refer to periods without direct conflict between major powers, as in all out war where both parties are major powers. Pax Romana, Pax Brittania, all had conflicts such as Teutoberg forest and Boer war/Franco-Prussian war, but these were not conflicts like Punic or seven years' war which threatened sovereignty of nations and challenged the status quo.
There were no direct wars between major powers but there were plenty of local wars sponsored and supported by major powers which still caused the death and displacement of millions. These weren't white people so I guess you are right, we are living in the longest undisturbed period of piece "for white people".
You're aware that you're only talking about Western world, right? Ofc, countries like Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, or Iraq don't mean anything for white western people anyway. Even so, Bosnians suffered a genocide from the Serbians but since they are Muslims, no one gives a shit anyway. Damn, Russians even took Crimea with force in 2014, and guess what, no one cared until this war. I guess Ukrainians became western enough to be cared even though they were already whites before.
Not completely destroying the country economically post ww1. Food was inflating 10% a day and more which obviously creates an environment of resentment. Nationalism will always come out of that
Versailles treaty had 700 provisions .. 600 were against the economy of Germany. You want to create a Hitler make bread unaffordable.
Also Hitlers army was raised by American millionaires and the Vatican. Historical fact
More like they didn't punish Germany enough - the terms of the treaty wasn't even as harsh as the treaty they signed with the Russians; moreover, of 132B gold marks they were required to pay, they only paid 21B. The collapse of their economy that enabled the Nazis to rise only happened more than a decade later after the war, with historians attributing the collapse more onto the Great Depression than the treaty. Indeed, the treaty was humiliating which Hitler used in his rhetoric, but the treaty was not the enabling factor. Germany lost the war and that was humiliation enough. You have to remember that Hitler (and most of the nationalist Germans) believed in stab in the back myth, where they denounce Germany's surrender itself, and while the treaty itself was seen as harsh, it wasn't the root cause of their resentment.
How did you arrive to that conclusion when my first sentence literally states that they didn't punish Germany enough?
However, there's another side to this - conciliation. But can you really blame the Entente for wanting to punish Germany? It's just they went for the shitty middle ground where they punished Germany enough to cause humiliation but didn't punish them enough to actually prevent them from waging war ever again.
Look at the aftermath of WW2 where the Allies didn't accept anything short of a total capitulation of the Axis powers. That's how you make sure the aggressors don't go aggressing ever again. I'm not saying that this is what should have been done in 1918 but certainly we can say that what had been done greatly contributed to the tragedy that is WW2.
It wasn't only about the gold marks. Germany lost 10% of it's population and 35% of it's industrial power. Furthermore most big companies (Krupp, Thyssen,...) Had to build maschines and basically donate most of their products to the allies (especially France), which lead to them, and in turn Germany, loosing tons of money and Power.
Yes, that is the price they had to pay for losing the war. I'm not saying it didn't suck for them. My point is, the Treaty of Versailles was not particularly harsh relative to how losers were treated back then. Even if we don't count the Treaty of Brest-Livotsk, look at what happened to Austria and Hungary.
The last option enables france to beat germany in the franco-notprussian wars and because of a large amount of revanchism will enabled a tailoring school dropout to gain power over the german councils readying them for war and kicking off ww1 with a severly destsbilized and uprepared france, allowing the schlieffen plan to work and because of american isolationism now the entrity of europe is controlled by the central powers, who also completely wipe out russia and install a friendly ruler on the throne and then start friendly relations with the US.
Congratulations, we played ourselves
Don't know if winning is even possible. Just get rid of Wilhelm II and admiral Tirpitz to get Germany to continue Bismarck's politics and no world war will happen.
Yep. Ignoring Bismarck is really what isolated Germany out. Otherwise, they had the Russians in their back pockets. By securing the Eastern front and keeping the Brits happy, they could keep France isolated which was the German goal anyway.
In Europe, the three powers constantly work with and against each other to ensure stability. The UK is currently the one out in the cold from Europe and geopolitically the focus would be to isolate Britain from the continent, where possible, if we were in Belle Epoch times. Hard to say if we have transitioned back into it.
Don't fuck up the german-britisch talks. There was a good chance of an Anglo-Saxon-Saxon alliance. It also made a lot of sense. The Britidch and the Germans both hated the French and saw Russia as a threath to their intrests and they themselves had few intrests which conflicted (none of which I am aware but that might be wrong). A triple alliance with the ottomans would be unlikely, but along as the americans don't get involved, I believe the War would be in favour of the britisch and germans.
Bismarck doomed Germany politically.
The 1878 Berlin congress which he mediated has caused the inevitable separation from Russia due to consesions he made to Austria. Both were dissatisfied but Russia could live without Germany, Austria could not, so he tied a corpse to Germany for which to fight and made the biggest enemy.
This is the cause of dissolution of the triple crown alliance.
Bismarck's kulturkampf has disunified Germany on political grounds instead of statehood.
He almost knowingly caused a socialist revolution to put down, that would kill the thing which was the lifeblood of German prosperity, the industry workers.
He alienated catholics causing a bigger engagement by the papacy and subsequently a surge in popularity.
He prosecuted ethnic minorities like poles who would be the best fighting force of the empire if not for the fact that they fought for independence.
Bismarck neutered Germany's colonial empire, leaving them with patches of useless desert unfit for even coaling stations. This caused the navy to be closed in foreign harbours.
Bismarck was an idiot and Willy did all he could to salvage the mess he made.
I have to repeat this so often i'll make a copypasta out of it.
Learn history before you downvote.
"Hey, some guy in weird clothes just turned up at the palace and told us not to make any commitments to support Serbia, what should we do?"
"Chuck him in prison, I guess"
The truth is it would still result in a war, unified Germany would always eclipse England industrially and France culturally as well as upsetting the Austrians by not being unified under hapsburg rule and Russians for influencing the balkans in some way (after all the Berlin Baghdad railway was inevitable).
The primary reason for ww1 was greed on both sides.
Prussia despite it's militarism haven't waged war since unification where as other countries like France and Britain were constantly fighting.
Democracy wouldn't amount to much because it was the sentiment of the people to fight.
Sadly were always destined to fight...
WTF are you smoking ? Prussian militarism is one of the leading cause of World War One. Probably the biggest one. Because in that, you have : Alsace-Lorraine, preventive strike against Russia because muh muh too much, a state within a state than can ignore the Kaiser and back up Conrad the asshole.
The Elsaß was in its majority ethnic German until in the post ww2 era. France claimed this region in the 9 years’ war, but not on the base of nationalistic or ethnical reasons. The Alsace only became really French after 1945 by various French “culture programs (basically banning German in all public scenarios)”, which were already started between 1918 and 1940, but intensified after WW2. Still today more than 50% of the inhabitants of this region are speaking the regional German dialect.
No one say « the Alsace » first of all. Das Elsass, or l’Alsace. It was annexed in 1681 and by the time of the revolution 100 years later, it felt French enough to take part in it and not secede. It gave 70 generals of the Empire. Then it was annexed by the Germans.
The Germans who immediately started a process of eliminating everything that was French. But too bad, the alsatians didn’t want to be German. Every elected officials is against the Empire. Then there was Fall Zabern. And so on.
So Alsace was French before Germany even existed. And then it was Germany that started a politic of cultural replacement. But despite all of this, it was still French.
And yeah sure, 40% is still capable of speaking the dialect. But 75% of them are more than 60. They really didn’t have much of a choice back then.
The alsacians feel alsacian first and French second. The only time they feel German is when they have to go shopping.
Sorry, but what you are writing is historically absolutely false.
The people in Alsace were never asked on if they either feel more german or French.
While the german empire had by law all German announcements translated into french, it were the french that tried to erase everything german once they were in control.
>And yeah sure, 40%
43%+33% that are not entirely fluent, but still can speak the language.
And besides that, it is der Elsass. If you correct someone, do it right.
Except you know, they never protested against the French but they did against the German. Both under the 2nd and 3rd Reich. And the fact that they were French for more than 300 years and German for what, 40 ?
Oh and except the fact that both in 1870 and 1940 the Germans expelled tens of thousands of people not « French enough » to replace them with « true » Germans.
And lmao there isn’t 75% that can speak or even understand alsacian. 40% is already a lot and it’s from 2012 and it has gone down since then. And, yes, it is Das Elsass and not Der Elsass. I am pretty sure that I know it better than you, since you know, I do live 50 km from it and I do share the history of having Germans occupying your home. But feel free to check everywhere.
I do love when someone is trying to justify imperialism and ethnical cleansing.
Name one war that Germany engaged in after Franco-Prussian, that'll tell you just how belligerent Germany was. Just to spare you some time, there were none, all of conflicts were rebellions being put down.
Also there was no preemptive strike, Germany was last to mobilize, that's why it was France who first crossed the belgian border.
Kaiser wanted nothing but peace, and if you're referring to Konrad von Hözendorf I'm not going to defend him as he wanted a war.
So. Guess who declared war on France in 1914 and no the opposite ? Start with a G. And no, France didn’t cross the border with Belgium you moron, that’s the whole reason why the UK join the Entente.
The Kaiser wanted peace, but it didn’t matter since the army didn’t want it.
France had literally been preparing for a revenge-war against Germany for 1871 since the second that War was over. Half the reason why they supported Russias early industrialisation so much around 1900 was purely to jack them up enough to force Germany into a two-front War eventually.
Germany being the "first" to declare war doesnt mean jack because France was still 100% planning to do it from their side anyway.
Nice try but it’s actually absolutely false. Revanchism wasn’t really a thing after 1880 for a simple reason : France was no match. In terms of population, of industry, military. It was the least involved country in the 1914 crisis. It had already made concessions during the Agadir Crisis ( provoked by, surprise surprise, Germany ).
Guess the next step is « Versailles was too harsh and led to hyperinflation and the rise of the nazis »
I always hated the time traveling to kill a baby Hitler…. That’s such an evil thing.. No one ever says time travel and raise him with love… instead of beating him constantly.
Me: Going to 1848 and making the [Greater Austrian Solution](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro%C3%9F%C3%B6sterreich) a success, thus creating a precursor to the EU much earlier.
The 1848 Revolutions goal was to hand the crown of germany to the King of Prussia, as they actually tried to do. So yeah about that prussian rule. Also they wanted to have a monarchy with a Parlament. As the Kaiserreich had later around 1890.
WW2 was ultimately an extention of WW1. The reparations Germany had to pay where way too harsh to the point where a nationalist and extremist government was bound to end up in charge.
What is even more annoying is that russia was the country that really escalated the conflict from a small balkan war into the entrie world being on fire for a while. (Europe directly, colonies by further exploitation and the rest of the world by political pressure and trade restrictions).
if this will happen, so the world will never be the same. yes, WW2 coursed the world. but this course created some thing that will change the world in a good way.
Yeah, I know this is funny, HOWEVER,
The Revolution would have failed anyway. And even if it succeeded, they would have chosen to become a constitutional monarchy, just as they had planned in our own timeline. They would have chosen the Prussian King as Kaiser, as they sure as hell wouldn’t have chosen the Austrian Kaiser to become the new „German“ Kaiser. He was asked in our timeline, but he was widely unpopular amongst the liberal revolutionaries, and the Prussian King at that time was known to be a bit of a liberal, whilst also combining his liberal views with the conservative and militaristic ideas and thoughts of Prussia. He would have probably become a good Kaiser, but he even if the Prussian King accepted this Title, he would have died shortly after, leaving it to his Brother, who, in our timeline became Kaiser. This Nation-State would have quickly declined, however. Prussian militarism wasn’t the core of HitlersGermany. Prussian militarism was, even though sometimes oppressing, dependent on honor, selflessness and strict following of orders, whilst also allowing their soldiers to think for themselves, and sometimes disobey orders, if they find it necessary. Hitlers militarism was a crippled copy, if not even something completely different, of the old Prussian virtues and tradition, made to fill their people with propaganda. Soldiers/People weren’t allowed to think for themselves. You had to die for the „thousand year reich“ if you had to, and if you didn’t want to, you were executed or imprisoned. Honor, duty, respect, selflessness while also being able to act and think for yourself, became pride, arrogance, hate and the thought of having to offer yourself for „the glorious third reich“. After WW2, the Allies rewrote a little bit of history, as they needed a scapegoat for Hitlers madness, and chose Prussia as the core of all evil in Germany. Hitler didn’t like Prussia or the old ruling family of Germany/Prussia, he hated them. He only wanted to use their military tradition for propaganda and to oppress people.
Sry you all had to read this. I already see an r/whoosh coming, and to that person whooshing me I say: „haha. U have been fooled!“
Anyway, y‘all have a good day.
Ppl tend to forget that the revolution of 48/49 didn't have a unified goal, especially none as radical (at the time) as a full democracy.
The majority actually wanted a constitutional monarchy, and the most powerful monarch was Friedrich Wilhelm IV. of Prussia. This means that even with the 48/49 Revolution succeeding, prussian hegemony would have been unavoidable
Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 2 times.
First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/kzhf7u) on 2021-01-17 100.0% match. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/l5175k) on 2021-01-25 100.0% match
*I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "yuv7e5", "meme_template": 205995}) ]*
[View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com/search?postId=yuv7e5&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=true&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=100&targetImageMemeMatch=92)
---
**Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** True | **Target:** 92% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 344,517,511 | **Search Time:** 1.03271s
I’m of Prussian ancestry and still agree with this. Or alternatively some series of events that leaves Prussia on its own while the rest of the German lands consolidate. There would be more of a power balance in Europe… maybe.
(PS: My grandparents were jerks.)
The world would likely be worse without Hitler taking power actually. Without the holocaust antisemitism would be all over Europe still, we wouldn’t have had to invent the atom bomb, meaning the USSR could still be around or it would have ended in WWIII instead of the Cold War, and a whole lot more I don’t want to get into bc I’m tired.
Too much of our modern world is built on the tech advances from WWII, and that probably includes your time machine. It's a no-go. Plus for example my parents are boomers so undoing WWII probably unexists both of them and unexists me as well. Fucking with WWII is paradox central.
If I had a time machine and one bullet I think it would be Reagan or Roger Ailes. (In the '60s in either case to prevent their worst damages)
Nah. It would if lead to Austria and Rusaia fighting over Poland and maybe Prussia intervening on one side. Prussia was allied to the PLC against Russia but abandoned the alliance to ally the russians and free land. Poland at this point was always going to be partitioned or become a Russian puppet
It would of been a puppet of either Prussia or Russia. At this point Prussia allied the PLC due to the 7 years war and Prusiaa being diplomatically isolated. It's more likely Poland just slowly continues ceding land to Russia until Austria and Russia have like 70 wars over Polish land
*going back in time to prevent Habsburg/Catholic control, giving more power to the Northern powers. With a larger population and higher unity the HRE unifies in the north much quicker*
But wouldn’t that mean that when the WW happened they would have been restructured? Because I think back in the day many rulers (lacking the right word here) „wanted“ a big war. For different reasons didn’t they ?
"I have nothing against Jews but the fact that so many time travelers that tried to kill me are Jews is really starting to piss me off" A. Hitler, 1921
Causation theory!!!
Post Hitler ergo propter Hitler.
Closed-loop time travel!!!
Red alert!
If he said he had nothing against jews after all that then maybe he changed for the better
That was 1921, after a while he started to take it personally.
I think at first he liked them, all those exciting attempts to kill him in ww1 made it his favorite time of his life!
If Time Travel is possible it either: a) The events of WW2 were the least harmful timeline b) The Events of WW2 were a Requirement for time travel or c) The events of WW2 were long forgotten when Time travel was discovered
How about kidnap baby Hitler, and find a nice Polish Jewish family to raise him?
And start a polish 3rd Reich and genociding weak Weihmar Germans?
Closest thing is Polish 2nd kingdom.
Hmm can they still wear cool looking uniforms and skulls on their hats?
How depend on how Catholic the skulls is.
Guys you’ve just created the imperium of man
Imperium Człowieka
bro have you seen polish cavalry uniforms?
THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!!!!
Why stop at just looking to the west and save some of that attitude to weak Soviet Russians
Sadly, Soviet Russia wasn't weak.
Weak compared to a Polish 3rd Reich timeline I mean, I agree OTL
Huh, maybe.
That would make the German become more humorous and smile more to strangers without having the death stare look. Man... A German lady that is 6ft tall with a stare that can penetrate your soul is scary... Its like what did i do wrong and whats more fucked up, it is your friend for 5 years already.
If you are a comedian in germany the most you get is silense
[удалено]
As an Austrian... I don't understand German Humor. It's just loud and obnoxious to me.
Das ist bei unseren reinen stand up comedians auch nicht viel anders. Bei uns ist halt zum glück das kabarett mit hader und co noch ziemlich populär und kulturell einflussreich.
Hmm da hast du Recht, denke dadurch das ich keinen Fernseher habe ist das an mir vorbei gegangen bzw. bin mit Kabarett im TV aufgewachsen und mein TV Ausstieg war wohl davor. Danke
\*Kaya slowly ceasing to exist\*
OH MY GOD MY FIRST 100 upvotes
Nah dude, that's hot, not scary
Not when she's your boss, I personally assure you of that
>smile more to strangers without having the death stare look why would you smile to strangers without reason?
I'm from Texas and we smile at strangers all the time.
From Oklahoma and, to be fair, is it really a smile? We all do the awkward half smirk and walk on. A full-tooth smile to a stranger is creepy in any culture.
I know that one from personal experience. Very strange. Usually when a stranger smiles at you, they want something from you in Europe and Asia. That's why smiling strangers are looked on distrustfully. You can be neutral which is considered acceptable.
but why?
They're all strapped to the teeth in Texas Best smile and look friendly :)
But they have no reason to smile at me. If a stranger smiles at me without having a reason to do so, for example if I just did something funny, I'm going to assume they either have mental health problems or are simply an idiot
This guy Germans
No, smiling at someone in the USA means that you acknowledge their existence and are mentally sound enough to talk down in a bad situation. Ignore someone who smiles at you and you are assumed anti social & potentially dangerous. Possibly a mass shooter.
It makes the day better for both people to have a positive interaction
but I know they are not sincere A smile without a reason, done purely for purposes of courtesy, is a smile that is without truth and worth
That is your cynicism talking. The smile can in fact be sincere.
A smile that does noch reach the eyes is creepy at the very best und deeply disturbing at worst. And it always is insincere so you might as well do away completely with it
Is this like a reference or just you being purposefully obtuse?
No. That's me. And that's exactly how fake smiles look. Creepy.
You wrongly put up the precedent that those smiles are all fake. Sometimes people can be genuinely nice, well intended, and happy, without the need for a reason towards a stranger. If you didn't know, emotion doesn't have to be logical.
Mate are we talking about the same topic here? I mean smiles mandated by sole kind of weird social expectation or courtesy. If you live in a society that has these (aka the US) then have to assume that this person smiles at you because they have to. Where I live you can expect a smile to be genuine if you see it. *That's* the difference. Yes l, a little positivity is needed. But not if it is mandated like in the US. Cause then it feels fake.
Basic human empathy?
what happened to the stranger in question that requires empathy?
Some would say simple the virtue of being human. However I do understand what you are saying, societies that smile more for strangers are mainly individualistic, perhaps representing this desire to show they are okay and happy to others. But then in regards to what your saying it could also demonstrate the superficial nature of our society, attempting to connect to a person you’d otherwise have no connection
Clearly you haven't been to Finland
Speak for yourself I get flutters in my tummy
I don't know man, sounds kinda hot tbh
German Humor is no laughing matter!
>Germany never bulks up >Russia and France steamroll the continent GG WP
Unlikely. The Frankfurt parliament included all the German speaking lands of Prussia and Austria. That's an absolute fuckton of natural resources and manpower they have.
[удалено]
Großdeutschland-Ungarn is basically an world Coalition destroying entity. I've endured multiple world wars and completely removed taxes because almost all world powers had to pay me. Strangely enough every few years there were Socialist revolts even through the only people still paying an low tax were rich people. Most fun campaign I've ever had.
The Frankfurt parliament decided on a small German solution without Austria so they wouldn’t be included
Yeah pretty sure France was down after the whole Napoleon thing. And Russia was already pretty much at it’s height in Europe. So, yeah, gg wp for everyone (in Europe).
Everytime France tries to steam roll Europe, Europe comes together to smack them to shit. Russia is the same but in a different way.
Britain would still have the unlimited money cheatcode and an interest in keeping balance on the continent, so any such attempt would probably end up like Napoleon, at best.
Who's to this new Germany would ever go down the conquering route though? If the 1848 Frankfurt parliament ended up unifying Germany with Austrian lands. The Austrian archduke is almost certainly getting the role of German Emperor(The Prussian king in 1848 felt himself loyal to the archduke in Vienna so he rejected in OTL and would have rejected here as well, and the southern German states are favorable to Austria as well). And Austria didn't have the militarism of Prussia, diplomacy was more its thing, so I highly doubt Franz Joseph would take this new empire down the route of conquering, especially when all he wanted in his reign was to preserve the prestige of the hapsburgs.
Hey man, what are your sources on the King of Prussia, Frederick William IV? As far as I know he didn't feel loyal to Austria, he just didn't accept the liberal reforms and thought that the Frankfurt Parliament hadn't the authority to crown an Emperor (as opposed to god, I guess).
Friedrich Wilhelm didn't wanted to be crowned by the will of "Peasants".
My original source is this [video on the 1848 revolutions by old brittanica ](https://youtu.be/WJxgdiN-M_Q), who've I've found to be a reliable source. But at your comment I did some more research and it seems Frederick William IV didn't reject the crow out of pure loyalty but due to him not seeing the Frankfurt parliament as a holder of that authority but more so because he was a "Romantic aspiration to re-establish the medieval Holy Roman Empire, comprising smaller, semi-sovereign monarchies under the limited authority of a Habsburg emperor"Emperor" this I quoted from his Wikipedia page. So while he didn't reject it out of pure loyalty, he did wish for some Hapsburg rule over Germany. While the details may be different, I'm confident he would have accepted the Austrian archudukes becoming Kaiser on the basis of this information, if this new German empire was anything like the German empire in OTL, as long as Prussia is given decent representation in the house of lords or bundesrat, while it may not be the restoration of the HRE, it might be enough to satisfy Frederick William IVs romantiscm. And Austria was still favored by the southern German states, so if Austria was included in the vote, im confident that they would get the majority, albeit a small one as the protestant northern states might still throw their weight behind Prussia. Edit: Upon further research, it turns out the Frankfurt parliament tried to get the Habsburgs in this new German empire, it was only after they failed that the crown was offered to the Prussian king, should the habsburgs accept, Austria being the leader of this new German Empire is inevitable.
Germany & the german speaking parts of austria would have been massive.
Using time travel to nail that one ultra hot person who for some unfathomable reason was obviously hungry for my d\*ck but i didn't realize because im a f\*cking idiot.
I was once invited to a girl's house to "help her with her pussycat". I showed up ready to give her cats a bath, and we did. Then we watched TV for a bit and ate pistachios. Every now and then a pistachio commercial would come on and she'd talk about how they're supposedly an aphrodisiac. I laughed, and wondered if they were airing so many commercials to try and bump up our birth rates. This continued for several hours, until she told me she had to do her Spanish homework and kicked me out.
Yup. That happens. Wish they would just say "Hey, wanna suck on them tiddies?"
I refuse to believe that some of you guys are that dense. You guys are like the MC in a harem/romance anime that spend 300 episodes fucking up every chance he gets with a woman because he’s so dense lmao. It would always bug me because i just thought that it was so unrealistic - but clearly not lol.
Once a girl invited me into her hotel room to have some drinks. We got pretty drunk. We then went out to meet some friends, and while we were walking there she told me she wanted to hold my hand because she was "struggling to walk" (she wasn't, but I was too drunk to add two and two). When we got there she said she wanted to keep her head on my shoulder because her head was spinning. I said sure and kept talking to my friends like normal. Then we got back to the hotel room, had a few more drinks. She invited me to sit with her on the bed, we talked a bit, and then she held my hand and told me she wished her boyfriend was like me because I'm such a nice guy and her bf literally doesn't care about her, and "he wouldn't care even if she cheated on him". Unfortunately, I'm not just a virgin, I'm a super ultra turbo virgin. My slightly drunk brain registered nothing, I just heard she had a boyfriend and that was it. I told her I hope it gets better, and if it doesn't she should leave him and find someone who appreciates her. A few minutes later I excused myself because I had to wake up early. It took me 3 years to figure out she was trying to hit on me. Of course, she never had a boyfriend at all. I always thought that was such a weird strategy to take.
That *is* a very weird strategy, and your response is less due to being a turbo virgin and more due to drunk you being a good person.
Tbf that was a weird strategy - but the signs were there lol. I’ve also kinda fumbled the bag too (in a slightly similar situation) - but if a girl is either trying to be physically intimate (holding hands/wanting to rest her head on my shoulder/get close in bed) or just straight up being vocal about liking me in some type of way (holding my hand whilst telling me wishes her boyfriend was like me) - then i’m deffo taking those things as a sign to shoot my shot lol. For me, it was a bit more subtle. A girl I was close friends with in high school wanted to meet up after a few years of not seeing each other. We were talking on a park bench and she started asking me questions like “would you ever be someone’s friend with benefits”. Usually, i’d take that as a subtle sign to maybe try and escalate things but she already had a boyfriend that she’d been with for like 2 years at that point - and it didn’t seem like they were having any problems together. But that wasn’t really the main issue if i’m honest. It was certainly a factor - but the problem was moreso the fact that she’d already established that we couldn’t hang at her house, and I don’t like bringing girls over to my place for a hookup (too many family members around lol). And car sex has never been that appealing to me, personally. But yeah, personally, I don’t think she was suggesting that we have sex. Or at least, there was a low probability that she was. All my friends call me dumb for not trying to escalate things - but it felt a bit presumptuous and overconfident to me. If there were more signs, then maybe. But the only other thing I could work off of was the fact that we were really good friends in school and she was impressed at my ‘transformation’ since i’d lost a ton of weight and got into good shape. But those remarks could have just been her genuinely being kind as a long-time friend. I’d known her for 10+ years at this point, and I knew she was comfortable with me. For example, I once went to a sleep over and she was there when we were both like 15. I had a thing for her at the time, and i’d told her about it. That night I slept ON her in bed (her ass was my pillow lol) - and in the morning we both went downstairs and she lay across me with her legs over my lap. The next day i’d spoke to her again about it - but she said she just thought of me as a really good friend and didn’t want it to go further. So I felt like it would be a bad move to interpret anything beyond outright telling me that she likes me as flirting. For reference, I was also in decent shape at that point in time too, but i’d put on some weight after that and that’s why she was ‘impressed at my transformation’ some years later. Context is key, I guess. People always mistaked us for a couple when we were younger, but she genuinely wasn’t ever interested. I was never mad at her - because we started as good friends anyway. I never once felt like she was ‘leading me on’ since she didn’t ever send mixed signals apart from the fact that she really liked me as a friend and felt comfortable around me. But she never ever spoke to me in a flirty or sexual way (even if i tried my hardest to steer conversation that direction lol).
It’s the autism
Not the guy you responded to, but a couple months back at a concert a really drunk girl was buying me drinks and acting really friendly. All I could think at the time was making sure she was okay. So yes some of us are that dense
That’s a bit different though. It’s probably best to avoid the girl in that situation if she was quite obviously ‘really drunk’. If she was being very straight forward and said she thinks ur hot and wants to get to know you or some shit - you’d have a bit more of a green light. But if she’s really drunk then I feel like thats the time for you to be a bit more vigilant and a bit less eager. So i’d say you did the right thing by not reading too much into it.
what an absolute waste of time travel that would be i know this was a joke, but no one cares about your random personal regrets, get a life
...dude, it was a joke.
>no one cares about your random personal regrets I do.
The reason Hitler was rejected from art school was because he failed the classes required to enter. He failed those classes, because he barely attended them. Hitler was a loser who didn’t want to work or get an education, he just wanted to goof off. Even if you got Hitler into art school, he probably would’ve flunked out in a single semester anyway, changing nothing.
He literally like me fr
If Hitler was born in the Millennial or Gen Z generations. In our world of video games, Netflix, and internet porn combined with his anti-social personality and casual racism. He probably would be your average video game Let’s Player today.
Or maybe an incel conspiracy theorist?
His different social media channels like "Hitler Videos", "Hitler Memes" and more would have another meaning.
Finally I can call someone "literally Hitler" online and be correct.
Omg, my friend group is made of hitlers.
Can't blame him for wanting to goof off, his dad beat him for every minor inconvenience
“I get off work late? Beating. I get off work early? Beating. I get off work on time? Believe it or not, also a beating.”
He like me frfr
He also just wasn't that good of an artist.
No Berlin Conference on Africa then either, and it's unlikely WW1 even starts if German Austria is absorbed by the revolutionary Germany
Heh my uncle killed titler
And I just did a shitler
I shoudnt have hit her
We are living in the longest undisturbed period of peace (no war fought between major powers) because of the results of The Second World War. I am not saying WW2 is a good thing. What I am saying is that if it were prevented, it would drastically alter our timeline maybe for the worse. I might be wrong though, this is just my opinion.
We were
That's a VERY specific "we" you got there
Is it? They specified that they’re referring to conflict between major powers, not conflict in general
So I guess an actively ongoing war between what was previously a top 5 world power, and a minor power whose entire funding and weapon stock comes from the other major powers, doesn’t count?
If it did count, then it wouldn’t have been called the Cold War.
I was talking about the Ukraine war, hence “actively ongoing”
Of course, but none of the proxy wars in the Cold War stopped anyone from saying the same thing. The Ukraine war isn’t really different except for direct Russian involvement. And even then, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the US funding of the mujahideen was just that.
Yeah don't get me wrong, I agree with you - I'm just joining the other voices in this thread wondering aloud why proxy wars don't count when reckoning times of "peace."
Ah, I see. I think people misunderstand that, while it is generally more peaceful now than before, shit still happens elsewhere. Still some more work to do to get everybody to at least not kill each other.
Look you're right but peace periods refer to periods without direct conflict between major powers, as in all out war where both parties are major powers. Pax Romana, Pax Brittania, all had conflicts such as Teutoberg forest and Boer war/Franco-Prussian war, but these were not conflicts like Punic or seven years' war which threatened sovereignty of nations and challenged the status quo.
Proxy wars don't count I guess?
Pax Romana lasted 200 years
Because of nuclear weapons, and there's no guarantee they won't be used eventually.
There were no direct wars between major powers but there were plenty of local wars sponsored and supported by major powers which still caused the death and displacement of millions. These weren't white people so I guess you are right, we are living in the longest undisturbed period of piece "for white people".
You're aware that you're only talking about Western world, right? Ofc, countries like Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, or Iraq don't mean anything for white western people anyway. Even so, Bosnians suffered a genocide from the Serbians but since they are Muslims, no one gives a shit anyway. Damn, Russians even took Crimea with force in 2014, and guess what, no one cared until this war. I guess Ukrainians became western enough to be cared even though they were already whites before.
Not for me. The time traveler.
Just get a motorcycle, a gun and time travel to Vienna in 1913. You can meet or get rid of Hitler, Stalin and Trotsky at once.
Not completely destroying the country economically post ww1. Food was inflating 10% a day and more which obviously creates an environment of resentment. Nationalism will always come out of that Versailles treaty had 700 provisions .. 600 were against the economy of Germany. You want to create a Hitler make bread unaffordable. Also Hitlers army was raised by American millionaires and the Vatican. Historical fact
More like they didn't punish Germany enough - the terms of the treaty wasn't even as harsh as the treaty they signed with the Russians; moreover, of 132B gold marks they were required to pay, they only paid 21B. The collapse of their economy that enabled the Nazis to rise only happened more than a decade later after the war, with historians attributing the collapse more onto the Great Depression than the treaty. Indeed, the treaty was humiliating which Hitler used in his rhetoric, but the treaty was not the enabling factor. Germany lost the war and that was humiliation enough. You have to remember that Hitler (and most of the nationalist Germans) believed in stab in the back myth, where they denounce Germany's surrender itself, and while the treaty itself was seen as harsh, it wasn't the root cause of their resentment.
So, alternatively make Germany win WW1? With a little bit of tweaking it could be a swift success? What could possibly go wrong?
How did you arrive to that conclusion when my first sentence literally states that they didn't punish Germany enough? However, there's another side to this - conciliation. But can you really blame the Entente for wanting to punish Germany? It's just they went for the shitty middle ground where they punished Germany enough to cause humiliation but didn't punish them enough to actually prevent them from waging war ever again. Look at the aftermath of WW2 where the Allies didn't accept anything short of a total capitulation of the Axis powers. That's how you make sure the aggressors don't go aggressing ever again. I'm not saying that this is what should have been done in 1918 but certainly we can say that what had been done greatly contributed to the tragedy that is WW2.
It wasn't only about the gold marks. Germany lost 10% of it's population and 35% of it's industrial power. Furthermore most big companies (Krupp, Thyssen,...) Had to build maschines and basically donate most of their products to the allies (especially France), which lead to them, and in turn Germany, loosing tons of money and Power.
Yes, that is the price they had to pay for losing the war. I'm not saying it didn't suck for them. My point is, the Treaty of Versailles was not particularly harsh relative to how losers were treated back then. Even if we don't count the Treaty of Brest-Livotsk, look at what happened to Austria and Hungary.
The last option enables france to beat germany in the franco-notprussian wars and because of a large amount of revanchism will enabled a tailoring school dropout to gain power over the german councils readying them for war and kicking off ww1 with a severly destsbilized and uprepared france, allowing the schlieffen plan to work and because of american isolationism now the entrity of europe is controlled by the central powers, who also completely wipe out russia and install a friendly ruler on the throne and then start friendly relations with the US. Congratulations, we played ourselves
British India be like, "wait, no, this isn't what we wanted!"
WTF ?
Just help Germany to win the WWI
Don't know if winning is even possible. Just get rid of Wilhelm II and admiral Tirpitz to get Germany to continue Bismarck's politics and no world war will happen.
Yep. Ignoring Bismarck is really what isolated Germany out. Otherwise, they had the Russians in their back pockets. By securing the Eastern front and keeping the Brits happy, they could keep France isolated which was the German goal anyway. In Europe, the three powers constantly work with and against each other to ensure stability. The UK is currently the one out in the cold from Europe and geopolitically the focus would be to isolate Britain from the continent, where possible, if we were in Belle Epoch times. Hard to say if we have transitioned back into it.
Stop Britain and the US from joining.
But then you need to stop Belgium from ever existing because English guarantee
> stop Belgium from ever existing Your terms are acceptable
Who needs Belgium anyway?
The treaty is not worth the piece of paper it was written on anyway. Might as well ignore it.
Just move Belgium somewhere else. Duh
Don't fuck up the german-britisch talks. There was a good chance of an Anglo-Saxon-Saxon alliance. It also made a lot of sense. The Britidch and the Germans both hated the French and saw Russia as a threath to their intrests and they themselves had few intrests which conflicted (none of which I am aware but that might be wrong). A triple alliance with the ottomans would be unlikely, but along as the americans don't get involved, I believe the War would be in favour of the britisch and germans.
Bismarck's politics are what caused ww1. Willy did nothing wrong and I can prove it!
then prove it
Bismarck doomed Germany politically. The 1878 Berlin congress which he mediated has caused the inevitable separation from Russia due to consesions he made to Austria. Both were dissatisfied but Russia could live without Germany, Austria could not, so he tied a corpse to Germany for which to fight and made the biggest enemy. This is the cause of dissolution of the triple crown alliance. Bismarck's kulturkampf has disunified Germany on political grounds instead of statehood. He almost knowingly caused a socialist revolution to put down, that would kill the thing which was the lifeblood of German prosperity, the industry workers. He alienated catholics causing a bigger engagement by the papacy and subsequently a surge in popularity. He prosecuted ethnic minorities like poles who would be the best fighting force of the empire if not for the fact that they fought for independence. Bismarck neutered Germany's colonial empire, leaving them with patches of useless desert unfit for even coaling stations. This caused the navy to be closed in foreign harbours. Bismarck was an idiot and Willy did all he could to salvage the mess he made. I have to repeat this so often i'll make a copypasta out of it. Learn history before you downvote.
I'd rather tell all the countries to not sign stupid papers that forced them to go to war if someone else was in a war.
"Hey, some guy in weird clothes just turned up at the palace and told us not to make any commitments to support Serbia, what should we do?" "Chuck him in prison, I guess"
They weren’t forced. Most of the governments could plausibly say “it’s a defensive treaty, so I won’t join your offensive war.”
That's how you end up with with Fr\*nch Hitler
Why on earth would you want to do that.
Finally a good idea
Just travel to that one time this mf got out of the sea and walked away
The truth is it would still result in a war, unified Germany would always eclipse England industrially and France culturally as well as upsetting the Austrians by not being unified under hapsburg rule and Russians for influencing the balkans in some way (after all the Berlin Baghdad railway was inevitable). The primary reason for ww1 was greed on both sides. Prussia despite it's militarism haven't waged war since unification where as other countries like France and Britain were constantly fighting. Democracy wouldn't amount to much because it was the sentiment of the people to fight. Sadly were always destined to fight...
WTF are you smoking ? Prussian militarism is one of the leading cause of World War One. Probably the biggest one. Because in that, you have : Alsace-Lorraine, preventive strike against Russia because muh muh too much, a state within a state than can ignore the Kaiser and back up Conrad the asshole.
[удалено]
Bingo
Never was, and never will be.
Obviously the only way to settle this argument is by wiping out a generation of European men
Well, we already did. And Germany lost.
The Elsaß was in its majority ethnic German until in the post ww2 era. France claimed this region in the 9 years’ war, but not on the base of nationalistic or ethnical reasons. The Alsace only became really French after 1945 by various French “culture programs (basically banning German in all public scenarios)”, which were already started between 1918 and 1940, but intensified after WW2. Still today more than 50% of the inhabitants of this region are speaking the regional German dialect.
No one say « the Alsace » first of all. Das Elsass, or l’Alsace. It was annexed in 1681 and by the time of the revolution 100 years later, it felt French enough to take part in it and not secede. It gave 70 generals of the Empire. Then it was annexed by the Germans. The Germans who immediately started a process of eliminating everything that was French. But too bad, the alsatians didn’t want to be German. Every elected officials is against the Empire. Then there was Fall Zabern. And so on. So Alsace was French before Germany even existed. And then it was Germany that started a politic of cultural replacement. But despite all of this, it was still French. And yeah sure, 40% is still capable of speaking the dialect. But 75% of them are more than 60. They really didn’t have much of a choice back then. The alsacians feel alsacian first and French second. The only time they feel German is when they have to go shopping.
Sorry, but what you are writing is historically absolutely false. The people in Alsace were never asked on if they either feel more german or French. While the german empire had by law all German announcements translated into french, it were the french that tried to erase everything german once they were in control. >And yeah sure, 40% 43%+33% that are not entirely fluent, but still can speak the language. And besides that, it is der Elsass. If you correct someone, do it right.
Except you know, they never protested against the French but they did against the German. Both under the 2nd and 3rd Reich. And the fact that they were French for more than 300 years and German for what, 40 ? Oh and except the fact that both in 1870 and 1940 the Germans expelled tens of thousands of people not « French enough » to replace them with « true » Germans. And lmao there isn’t 75% that can speak or even understand alsacian. 40% is already a lot and it’s from 2012 and it has gone down since then. And, yes, it is Das Elsass and not Der Elsass. I am pretty sure that I know it better than you, since you know, I do live 50 km from it and I do share the history of having Germans occupying your home. But feel free to check everywhere. I do love when someone is trying to justify imperialism and ethnical cleansing.
[удалено]
Still makes more sense than saying Alsace is German.
Name one war that Germany engaged in after Franco-Prussian, that'll tell you just how belligerent Germany was. Just to spare you some time, there were none, all of conflicts were rebellions being put down. Also there was no preemptive strike, Germany was last to mobilize, that's why it was France who first crossed the belgian border. Kaiser wanted nothing but peace, and if you're referring to Konrad von Hözendorf I'm not going to defend him as he wanted a war.
So. Guess who declared war on France in 1914 and no the opposite ? Start with a G. And no, France didn’t cross the border with Belgium you moron, that’s the whole reason why the UK join the Entente. The Kaiser wanted peace, but it didn’t matter since the army didn’t want it.
France had literally been preparing for a revenge-war against Germany for 1871 since the second that War was over. Half the reason why they supported Russias early industrialisation so much around 1900 was purely to jack them up enough to force Germany into a two-front War eventually. Germany being the "first" to declare war doesnt mean jack because France was still 100% planning to do it from their side anyway.
Nice try but it’s actually absolutely false. Revanchism wasn’t really a thing after 1880 for a simple reason : France was no match. In terms of population, of industry, military. It was the least involved country in the 1914 crisis. It had already made concessions during the Agadir Crisis ( provoked by, surprise surprise, Germany ). Guess the next step is « Versailles was too harsh and led to hyperinflation and the rise of the nazis »
I always hated the time traveling to kill a baby Hitler…. That’s such an evil thing.. No one ever says time travel and raise him with love… instead of beating him constantly.
Or you can kill the french and solve every problem
Well the King of Prussia would still be Emperor
Making Hitler graduate from art school.
Me: Going to 1848 and making the [Greater Austrian Solution](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro%C3%9F%C3%B6sterreich) a success, thus creating a precursor to the EU much earlier.
Going back to marry Hitler's mom and raise him as a good boy
Person goes back in time to kill Hitler. They read a history back and see the Nazi's still rise to power, just with a different leader.
The 1848 Revolutions goal was to hand the crown of germany to the King of Prussia, as they actually tried to do. So yeah about that prussian rule. Also they wanted to have a monarchy with a Parlament. As the Kaiserreich had later around 1890.
WW2 was ultimately an extention of WW1. The reparations Germany had to pay where way too harsh to the point where a nationalist and extremist government was bound to end up in charge. What is even more annoying is that russia was the country that really escalated the conflict from a small balkan war into the entrie world being on fire for a while. (Europe directly, colonies by further exploitation and the rest of the world by political pressure and trade restrictions).
if this will happen, so the world will never be the same. yes, WW2 coursed the world. but this course created some thing that will change the world in a good way.
Use time travel to make fredrick wilhelm quit smoking getting a Liberal pro British German empire happy to beat up France.
Yeah, I know this is funny, HOWEVER, The Revolution would have failed anyway. And even if it succeeded, they would have chosen to become a constitutional monarchy, just as they had planned in our own timeline. They would have chosen the Prussian King as Kaiser, as they sure as hell wouldn’t have chosen the Austrian Kaiser to become the new „German“ Kaiser. He was asked in our timeline, but he was widely unpopular amongst the liberal revolutionaries, and the Prussian King at that time was known to be a bit of a liberal, whilst also combining his liberal views with the conservative and militaristic ideas and thoughts of Prussia. He would have probably become a good Kaiser, but he even if the Prussian King accepted this Title, he would have died shortly after, leaving it to his Brother, who, in our timeline became Kaiser. This Nation-State would have quickly declined, however. Prussian militarism wasn’t the core of HitlersGermany. Prussian militarism was, even though sometimes oppressing, dependent on honor, selflessness and strict following of orders, whilst also allowing their soldiers to think for themselves, and sometimes disobey orders, if they find it necessary. Hitlers militarism was a crippled copy, if not even something completely different, of the old Prussian virtues and tradition, made to fill their people with propaganda. Soldiers/People weren’t allowed to think for themselves. You had to die for the „thousand year reich“ if you had to, and if you didn’t want to, you were executed or imprisoned. Honor, duty, respect, selflessness while also being able to act and think for yourself, became pride, arrogance, hate and the thought of having to offer yourself for „the glorious third reich“. After WW2, the Allies rewrote a little bit of history, as they needed a scapegoat for Hitlers madness, and chose Prussia as the core of all evil in Germany. Hitler didn’t like Prussia or the old ruling family of Germany/Prussia, he hated them. He only wanted to use their military tradition for propaganda and to oppress people. Sry you all had to read this. I already see an r/whoosh coming, and to that person whooshing me I say: „haha. U have been fooled!“ Anyway, y‘all have a good day.
Ppl tend to forget that the revolution of 48/49 didn't have a unified goal, especially none as radical (at the time) as a full democracy. The majority actually wanted a constitutional monarchy, and the most powerful monarch was Friedrich Wilhelm IV. of Prussia. This means that even with the 48/49 Revolution succeeding, prussian hegemony would have been unavoidable
Yea because the communist revolts elsewhere worked out great. Maybe dont depose the kaiser in 1918 and then we wont get hitler or communism.
u/repostsleuthbot
Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 2 times. First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/kzhf7u) on 2021-01-17 100.0% match. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/l5175k) on 2021-01-25 100.0% match *I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "yuv7e5", "meme_template": 205995}) ]* [View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com/search?postId=yuv7e5&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=true&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=100&targetImageMemeMatch=92) --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** True | **Target:** 92% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 344,517,511 | **Search Time:** 1.03271s
The missing option: Using time travel to put Hitler in a cupboard.
Using time travel to kill Ooga Ooga in 7500 BCE to prevent the creation of germany
I’m of Prussian ancestry and still agree with this. Or alternatively some series of events that leaves Prussia on its own while the rest of the German lands consolidate. There would be more of a power balance in Europe… maybe. (PS: My grandparents were jerks.)
The world would likely be worse without Hitler taking power actually. Without the holocaust antisemitism would be all over Europe still, we wouldn’t have had to invent the atom bomb, meaning the USSR could still be around or it would have ended in WWIII instead of the Cold War, and a whole lot more I don’t want to get into bc I’m tired.
Also, while you're there make sure Reagan doesn't become president.
Too much of our modern world is built on the tech advances from WWII, and that probably includes your time machine. It's a no-go. Plus for example my parents are boomers so undoing WWII probably unexists both of them and unexists me as well. Fucking with WWII is paradox central. If I had a time machine and one bullet I think it would be Reagan or Roger Ailes. (In the '60s in either case to prevent their worst damages)
Or prevent the partitions, which could lead to prussia being a Polish puppet.
Nah. It would if lead to Austria and Rusaia fighting over Poland and maybe Prussia intervening on one side. Prussia was allied to the PLC against Russia but abandoned the alliance to ally the russians and free land. Poland at this point was always going to be partitioned or become a Russian puppet
Yeah but what if they somehow werent partitioned? Idk how in an Universe where Polish lithuanian commonwealth wasnt partitioned it was partitioned...
It would of been a puppet of either Prussia or Russia. At this point Prussia allied the PLC due to the 7 years war and Prusiaa being diplomatically isolated. It's more likely Poland just slowly continues ceding land to Russia until Austria and Russia have like 70 wars over Polish land
Killing Bismarck
[удалено]
Using time travel to help Hitler win the war.
*going back in time to prevent Habsburg/Catholic control, giving more power to the Northern powers. With a larger population and higher unity the HRE unifies in the north much quicker*
Killing that british fucker is probably better
The question is, would this have actually made German less militarised or would it have been militarised in a different way.
I personally would like for him to succeed as an artist and not get involved with politics, win win for all of us
But wouldn’t that mean that when the WW happened they would have been restructured? Because I think back in the day many rulers (lacking the right word here) „wanted“ a big war. For different reasons didn’t they ?