Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

angrystaffofficer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 221 posts

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#11

Post by Kostic »

bahjoite wrote: post #7
threesixandnine wrote: post #2

What a fail. The very first paragraph is factually wrong. Didn't read the rest. Due to already receiving negative feedback on my comment let me explain. The assasination didn't happen in Serbia but Bosnia that was at the time occupied by Austro-Hungarian Empire. It's a huge fail by somebody who tries to explain to us what 'really happened'.

I don't know if the text has been changed, but it reads:- > After all, it was the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Serbia in 1914 and doesn't say anything about _where_ the assassination happened. edit: the words "in Serbia" have been pointed out to me; there is a bug in my reading comprehension; sorry for the errant comment.

I read it as: "assasination of the [person] of [country origin] in [place] in [year]". I can see why it's confusing.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#12

Post by yazan94 »

threesixandnine wrote: post #2

What a fail. The very first paragraph is factually wrong. Didn't read the rest. Due to already receiving negative feedback on my comment let me explain. The assasination didn't happen in Serbia but Bosnia that was at the time occupied by Austro-Hungarian Empire. It's a huge fail by somebody who tries to explain to us what 'really happened'.

True, you are correct. Though it could be attributed to the author as a smaller mistake, as Franz was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist. I am more confused to how the US's reconstruction had anything to do with setting the stage for World War 1.

> For just as 1866 guaranteed a militarily and culturally strong Germany which would wear down Britain, France, and Italy to a near breaking point in World War I, it also guaranteed a truly united United States, with a society that held the majority view that democracy and equality were worth fighting for – and which would intervene to defeat Germany just in the nick of time.

Nothing in the piece supports this statement, and I find this pretty hard to agree with. The first part of the article is a rehash of known facts and history. The last few paragraphs are, from what I can tell, irrelevant to the overall theme as well as thinly-veiled glorification of the United States Civil Rights Act.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#13

Post by danteembermage »

jimmyk wrote: post #6

And it meant that there was a precedence for taking up arms for equality and freedom...for a war that would, "make the world safe for democracy," as President Woodrow Wilson put it in 1917 when he requested a declaration of war on the German Empire. What was the German Empire doing to threaten equality, freedom, and democracy that France and England and the US weren't also doing? The argument that the US entered beca…

Wilson in his speech asking for American involvement in the war cited the injustice of submarine warfare more than anything, so I agree this point at least seems to fall flat.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#14

Post by yazan94 »

mikeash wrote: post #10
bahjoite wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if the text has been changed, but it reads:- > After all, it was the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Serbia in 1914 and doesn't say anything about _where_ the assassination happened. edit: the words "in Serbia" have been pointed out to me; there is a bug in my reading comprehension; sorry for the errant comment.

The bit where it says "in Serbia" seems to be talking about where the assassination happened. That could potentially refer to where he was Archduke instead, but that would be a really odd way to construct the sentence if so, and in any case would still be wrong.

According to Wikipedia:

> Franz Ferdinand Carl Ludwig Joseph Maria (18 December 1863 – 28 June 1914) was an Archduke of Austria-Este, Austro-Hungarian and Royal Prince of Hungary and of Bohemia [1]

Even if the author meant that Franz was an Archduke in Serbia, he would still be mistaken.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Au...

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#15

Post by neaden »

67726e wrote: post #3
threesixandnine wrote: post #2

What a fail. The very first paragraph is factually wrong. Didn't read the rest. Due to already receiving negative feedback on my comment let me explain. The assasination didn't happen in Serbia but Bosnia that was at the time occupied by Austro-Hungarian Empire. It's a huge fail by somebody who tries to explain to us what 'really happened'.

How about refute the core of the work instead of focusing on a small issue?

Well when it comes to WW2 he says "The U.S. military that desegregated in 1948 had recently assisted in putting down the second German attempt at empire in the 20th century – an attempt that itself grew out of bitterness and hate caused by the terms of surrender dictated by the French at the conclusion of World War I." Which is all essentially bullshit. The Treaty of Versailles was not unusually harsh, certainly when keeping in mind Germanys conduct in Belgium, unrestricted submarine warfare, and invention of chemical warfare and it was much more lenient then what Germany planned on leveraging against the allies. Germanies economic problems came much more from large amount of wartime borrowing and trying to weasel out of Treaty though intentional inflation, followed up by the global great depression.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#16

Post by yazan94 »

67726e wrote: post #3
threesixandnine wrote: post #2

What a fail. The very first paragraph is factually wrong. Didn't read the rest. Due to already receiving negative feedback on my comment let me explain. The assasination didn't happen in Serbia but Bosnia that was at the time occupied by Austro-Hungarian Empire. It's a huge fail by somebody who tries to explain to us what 'really happened'.

How about refute the core of the work instead of focusing on a small issue?

The core of the work is claiming that the reunification of Germany and the Franco-Prussian war along with the US civil rights movement post Civil War set the stage for World War 1. The first point is not novel nor unbelievable. I find that the second point is far fetched, and the author doesn't really support this argument in article.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#17

Post by badloginagain »

Tying in the US seems a bit forced here. WWI as a result of Franco-Prussian war I can understand, US civil rights not-so-much.

That Germany was 'destined' to lose is a non-starter anyways. From my understanding it was Britain's decision to enter WWI that really shaped the outcome, and that it was far from a foregone conclusion that Britain would enter a continental European war. If the British didn't get involved, Germany's chance of taking Paris is much better, denying the two front war Germany (rightly) saw as a worst case scenario.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#18

Post by valuearb »

threesixandnine wrote: post #2

What a fail. The very first paragraph is factually wrong. Didn't read the rest. Due to already receiving negative feedback on my comment let me explain. The assasination didn't happen in Serbia but Bosnia that was at the time occupied by Austro-Hungarian Empire. It's a huge fail by somebody who tries to explain to us what 'really happened'.

You are pedantically correct, but in all other ways wrong. Read it, it's an interesting piece even if you disagree with the conclusions.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#19

Post by cholantesh »

kristianc wrote: post #8

If this is up your street, may I recommend Dan Carlin's Blueprint for Armageddon, which has over ten hours of podcast material exploring the lead up to the first world war. Probably the best podcast I've ever downloaded, and insane that it's available for nearly free. http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-bluepri...

AFAIK, everything Prophets of Doom onward is completely free. Not sure how long that will last, and I would love for Dan to put out a monthly or yearly subscription via Patreon; his work is of such high quality.

Re: Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars

#20

Post by neaden »

jimmyk wrote: post #6

And it meant that there was a precedence for taking up arms for equality and freedom...for a war that would, "make the world safe for democracy," as President Woodrow Wilson put it in 1917 when he requested a declaration of war on the German Empire. What was the German Empire doing to threaten equality, freedom, and democracy that France and England and the US weren't also doing? The argument that the US entered beca…

Germany invaded the neutral country of Belgium and killed about 60,000 civilians in Belgium, looted and burned cultural artifacts, and conscripted laborers. That in combination with unrestricted submarine warfare really did mean German conduct in the war was far crueler then the Allies.
Post reply on HN