Why won't Pax Germanica


Another rise of Germany



Looking at the modern rise of the political and economic role of the German state and the unification of Europe around Berlin, you involuntarily begin to wonder what will happen tomorrow and how far this process will go. Indeed, today no one disputes and is not going to dispute the industrial and financial leadership of Germany in Europe.

But to be honest: I can’t believe in the “German model of Europe” in almost any way. I can’t believe it at all. The reasons here are rather subjective: the thinking of German politicians is somehow non-standard. You need to start with what? unlike Spain, France, Britain, Poland, Turkey, Russia, Germany joined very late.

Monstrously late - in fact at the end of the 19th century. Which, incidentally, immediately led to a terrible imbalance of forces in European (world!) Politics. The Austrian empire is something a little different. The rise of the USA and Japan could hardly lead to world wars, but the sudden appearance in the center of Europe of the strongest power, Germany, created an entirely new picture of the world and created a lot of problems. For many who lived at the turn of the XNUMXth — XNUMXth centuries, World War I with its massacres was a complete surprise.

Just try to calmly, carefully study history Wars before the reunification of Germany. There was no such nightmare and was not planned by anyone. In fact, after all these outrages, predictions about the “inevitability” of the First World War began to “force” actively ... Allegedly, already at the end of the 19th century, everything was clear to smart people with the upcoming political cataclysm.

If, gentlemen, we do not consider world history exclusively from the point of view of the providence of God, then we will be forced to accept the simple fact that history has many developmental options. That's right, and nothing else. "History It has subjunctive mood". Otherwise, studying it is simply pointless.

So wars took place both before and after the Second World War, let’s take at least the era of the Napoleonic Wars. But there were not just two wars, but two disasters in a row. Yes, and the First World War, and the Second - it is not so much a war as a global catastrophe. And one cannot fail to note one interesting fact: it was precisely Germany and the German leadership that stood at their origins. Such a "funny coincidence." It is clear that neither Austria-Hungary of the 1914 model, nor Italy of the 1938 model, by themselves, were absolutely capable of starting a world war.

They did not have the resources. Even “militaristic Japan” and “the incident at the Marco Polo Bridge” in the year one thousand thirty-seven could not become the cause and the beginning of a global massacre. Alas and ah. But just Germany has become easy. It was German initiatives and German “dynamism” in the field of foreign policy that caused the flourishing Europe to turn into a battlefield, a hotbed of extremist political movements and caused the mass death of those Europeans themselves. Moreover, those same world wars spilled far beyond the borders of Europe, turning the “semi-continent" itself into ruins ...

It is worth recalling the Kaiser Germany of the sample of 1914, which it is so customary to forget about. It was then, in 1914, that it all began ... So, then-then-Germany (unlike Hitler's Germany) was really a military-industrial superpower. The second strongest fleet, the most powerful army in the world, the most powerful and advanced industry in Europe, the scientific world of the beginning of the 20th century spoke German! Germany-1914 - it was very, very serious.

But German politicians disposed of this very “starting potential” in a very, very peculiar way ... 30 years after this, Germany and Europe lay in ruins for the second time in a row, and the German state suffered a complete and final defeat. Here are all sorts of amateurs from military history who claim that this was an absolutely inevitable outcome. Once again: history has many developmental options, we live in one of them, but this does not mean that it is the only possible one.

That is, the defeat of Germany in two world wars is not only not “inevitable”, but for the author personally is a rather unlikely outcome of the first half of the 20th century. The real world of 1945 is not just a deviation from the “main historical channel”, it is, excuse me, something generally unimaginable and very random. The fact that Russia will finally achieve the “superpower Germany”, which went through two disasters (Civil and 1941-1942) was, well, a very unlikely outcome of events, if you look from a prosperous 1914 ... Some kind of incredible “cyberpunk”.

A moment of history


Just remember how difficult it was to create great empires. The same great British Empire was balancing on the edge of the abyss for a very, very long time. Britain was much weaker than Spain of the 1815th century or France of the 1914th century. She could not enter into the “cabin” or “exchange of blows” with them. Everything was unsteady, vague and unreliable. If someone does not know, then the path to Pax Britanica (XNUMX) was by no means strewn with rose petals ... For some reason, people proceed from an unobvious premise: since this happened, this should have happened.

You know, the church history of the world is one thing, and even the history of the church is something completely different ... Do not confuse such things. So, just the British had to really, really try to get into the lead. And after all, everything could have turned out very differently. In principle, the first world power was built by continental Spaniards. Which way, by the way, was also thorny and winding. Thus, the Spaniards had many generations to conquer Spain from the Moors step by step, but immediately after the Reconquista they rushed to explore the New World.

Many people created world empires ... Even the same French, having gone through the crucible of numerous wars, some of which they won, some lost ... But there was a world French empire, and France was a great power (back in 1939!). Strange, huh? The French, British and Spaniards (three different countries with very different histories) succeeded, but the Germans did not. And if we talk about “potential”, then neither small Portugal nor small Holland possessed such potential for pure power building world empires.

But both little Holland and little Portugal built them quite well. But how? How? How did they do it? And there is nothing surprising here, of course, the power component played a role in the creation of world empires, but brute force alone was not enough. Politics, gentlemen. Geopolitics. Complex diplomatic games ... And any fool can wave his fists.

No, literally everyone who was lazy built empires - the same small and poor Swedes at a certain historical stage turned the Baltic Sea into a “Swedish lake” and controlled a significant part of Northern Germany, being quite a great European power. One cannot but recall the Austrians, who from different parts gathered quite a great power (while the “upper Germans” themselves made up less than a third of the population there!).

However, the Austrians were never a military superpower. The tragic paradox of the Habsburgs was that the French army was uniquely stronger, the Turks more numerous, the Prussians more organized and united, and there were surprisingly few great commanders among the Austrians. With all their wishes, the Austrians could not rely on a purely power component in the construction of the empire, but they built an empire ...

The Turks, who visited the suburbs of Vienna in 1683, are the creators of one of the greatest empires in history (and it all started quite miserably ...). Literally "on takeoff" Timur practically destroyed them ... in one short battle. In general, the Ottoman Empire was not built suddenly and not immediately, but at the time of Suleiman the Magnificent, it did not know peers ...

It is impossible not to mention the simple fact that Muscovy went to the world empire very slowly and uneasy (in the pre-Petrine era). The reason is simple: poverty with people, money and technology. All three opponents, Poland - Lithuania, Sweden and the Crimean Khanate (vassal of the Ottomans), were almost invincible in a head-on collision.

Krymchaks flew from the Crimea, robbed, burned, took prisoners and were completely inaccessible to Russian foot soldiers in their Crimea. “The Times of Ochakov and the Conquest of Crimea” - this is Catherine the Great! Only then ... just shortly before Napoleon ... The Crimean Khanate was defeated and annexed.

Poland ... the Russians fought with it endlessly. And just as useless. Despite the traditional Polish mess, this country was richer and more crowded Muscovy. And more modern, if that. It didn’t work out a “big and beautiful victory” over the Poles ... it didn’t work ... But the heavy and bloody collisions went on endlessly. Without much positive result. Poland stood Russian tsars literally across the throat - the presence of a strong Poland near Smolensk put an end to all imperial attempts and attempts, but it was not possible to smash the Poles “outright”.

Muscovy could not help but build an empire, but Poland could not win. The wars became protracted. The third opponent is Sweden. It's simple: the Swedes had modern disciplined army (one of the best in Europe, if not the best). Defeating their “head-to-head” on the battlefield was, rather, an unattainable dream than reality. The Swedish question will be decided by Peter the Great, having carried out a monstrous mobilization of all the resources of Russia.

That is, the tsar of Moscow was at its peak: from all three sides there were strong enemies, whose defeat was extremely difficult. Nevertheless, the empire took place. But the "German Germans" things went somehow very original. In general, unlike the distant and cold Muscovy, the economic, technical and cultural development of the German lands went quite quickly. Just if you look at the number of technical innovations and books there, written during the Late Middle Ages, on the territory of the lands inhabited by Germans and compare with the Moscow kingdom, there will be no limit to our surprise.

Germany as a whole was a rich, developed, densely populated territory even then and there were few who lagged behind in this regard. And even if you compare her with the future mistress of the seas, the comparison will not be in favor of the latter. When many of us are surprised at the technical miracles that the Germans demonstrated during the sunset of World War II, we somehow forget that the traditions of metalworking and precision mechanics have been there for hundreds of years. Those who believe that the T-34 was more primitively executed than the Pz-IV, also forget that they were engaged in their production very different people. The difference in qualifications of those who collected the “Yaks” and “Messers” during the war was simply fantastic.

The Krupp Empire in the 19th century did not arise from scratch either. Nevertheless, Germany declared itself as a great world power only at the end of that same 19th century. Somehow a little late, don’t you? If very roughly: France and Spain completed the process of unification just in the era of the Late Middle Ages. In France, it’s Louis XI, the end of the 15th century. Spain - Isabella and Ferdinand, also the end of the 15th century. The Kingdom of Great Britain was officially created in 1707, but some kind of frank “feudal fragmentation” after 1066 in the territory of Misty Albion was somehow not observed.

But the Germans in this regard somehow "lingered". Which cannot but cause certain questions. That is, one of the reasons for the monstrous World War I is precisely in this: firstly, the Germans united very late, secondly, united, they created the leading military-industrial force of Europe, and thirdly, they preferred to solve the emerging geopolitical issues by the method brute force: "And what is there to think, you need to shake!"

What did they forget and what did they learn?


That is, the option of long and complex geopolitical games for some reason was not considered by them in principle. They tried to turn the tide through the knee as soon as they got such an opportunity. Here, by the way, the complete lack of experience in large geopolitics affected. For example, the British last time so acted during the Hundred Years War. That is, making an attempt to turn the tide in their favor during a direct force confrontation. According to the results of the Hundred Years War, the British made certain conclusions: in the sense that ramming the gates of continental castles with their heads is far from the best strategy.

The Germans, however, began to gain similar experience already in the "trenches of Verdun." Already in the industrial era. All the arguments that during the two world wars they gained “priceless experience” of the fact that it is not necessary to act by force, but you can, so to speak, act “economically”, can cause nothing but a grin. Somehow they found this very “experience” and this “understanding” very dearly. And somehow it's too late by historical standards.

And the fact that they learned something there causes great doubts: the modern "EU" Europe is clearly divided into "grades and classes", and there are not even two of them. Someone there says that Russia does not want to build “equal relations” with its neighbors. But the Germans just built them, and you can’t argue! It’s just that someone automatically appeared in the role of “Europe of the second speed”.

Doesn’t resemble anything? The more Germans build the "City of the Sun", the more they get something completely different. Something like that ... I don’t know who is to blame, not my project. Regarding the "East Front" - here, as they say, without change. All criticism of “bad, barbarian Russia” fits very well into the German imperial historical tradition. Here, many in the Russian information space are literally shining with happiness after learning about the project of a large pan-European army.

I would advise them to buy together a large map of Europe and neighboring lands, carefully study it and choose options (directions!) For the use of this pan-European armada. Napoleon and Kaiser Wilhelm will not let lie. In general, with regard to geopolitics: once the Prussians were called "British soldiers on the continent." It seems that little has changed since then.
Author:
Photos used:
mfiles.alphacoders.com
Articles from this series:
Hitler: Total War
How the Germans almost won the war
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. maidan.izrailovich 3 January 2020 06: 10 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    If the Germans want to be masters of their own and their own history, then they need to get rid of Anglo-Saxon influence (dictate).
    1. kiril1246 3 January 2020 08: 24 New
      • 6
      • 6
      0
      Quote: maidan.izrailovich
      If the Germans want to be masters of their own and their own history, then they need to get rid of Anglo-Saxon influence (dictate).

      If Germany is left without an American dictate, this will inevitably return the situation to the level of 1914 with the corresponding result.
      1. bessmertniy 3 January 2020 09: 44 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        The rest of Europe will constantly besiege Germany, loading it with migrants, sucking out aid from it to backward European countries, etc. And today it is as if in a circle of “mongrels” who strive to bite off something from it. Moreover, the United States is making efforts to reduce German competition by restricting access to cheap resources - also Russian gas. hi
        1. kiril1246 3 January 2020 12: 09 New
          • 4
          • 6
          -2
          Quote: bessmertniy
          The rest of Europe will constantly besiege Germany, loading it with migrants, sucking out aid from it to backward European countries, etc.


          It must be clearly understood that from an economic point of view, Germany is a superpower. The only thing that holds her back is American control. Russia abandoned this control in the 1990s, agreeing to unite Germany and withdrawing its troops. Left without control at all, she will develop her own nuclear weapons without any problems; she has the financial and scientific potential for this. And then Russia will remember all the old grievances. However, the first to suffer are Poland and the Czech Republic, which received East German lands thanks to Stalin. They will have to be returned under the flag of justice. To this end, a review of the results of the Second World War has been started.
      2. Pravodel 3 January 2020 10: 22 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        Absolutely right. Immediately there will be a European army, the direction of movement of which is exclusively to the east: "Drang naсh Osten". The Germans will be helped in this, first of all, despite their "huge" love for the Germans, by the Poles. History, having made a turn, will return to its beginning: towards the end of the 30s. Just England comes out of the European Union - Russia's future ally in the fight against the Germans. The Germans will quickly subdue France, the rest of the country, except Poland, is already in their pocket. With Poland, the Germans will do exactly the same as they already did in the late 30s: they will share something, and then they will occupy it. Moreover, this does not even require provocations: the Germans simply enter Poland to protect it from Russian barbarians. After that, where will the European army be: 100 km from St. Petersburg, 500 km from Moscow, Ukraine will immediately open its borders for the entry of German troops. Taking into account previous experience, the Germans will not stand on ceremony with Belarus, they will give it to the banderlogs - Bandera and the brutalized Poles to be torn to pieces under their strict guidance. After the cleansing of Belarus, the Germans will deal with banderlogs and Poles with special care, moving them from Russia, Ukrainians, Karelians, Tatars, Chuvashs, etc. to the territories of Russia. from all living on its territory. Yes, do not forget about Finland, which certainly also wants to warm its hands in a new European fire. But what about the Americans? Everything is very simple: the 2nd Lend Lease and the next revival of America.

        In 1945, one of the goals pursued by the Anglo-Saxons, while remaining in Europe, was to prevent the revival of Germany to the level of the Reich. Despite all the costs, they nevertheless fulfill this function: the European, that is, the German army, in Europe does not and should not be.

        "People-State-Fatherland" - this is the slogan of every Russian patriot. A strong state, a united people, a prosperous Fatherland, which cannot be broken by internal and external enemies.
        1. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 24 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Moreover, this does not even require provocation: the Germans simply enter Poland to protect it from Russian barbarians.
          It must be assumed that at this point the Baltic states, Ukraine and Belarus have already become Russian ...? If the Russians again became such barbarians that Poland should be protected from them ........
      3. Mavrikiy 3 January 2020 21: 13 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: kiril1246
        If Germany is left without an American dictate, this will inevitably return the situation to the level of 1914 with the corresponding result.

        Is the US a stabilization factor? Absurd. what
        Learn the story. hi In 1914, England launched a war from German territory. Now it can be unleashed from Germany by the United States. Will it be more pleasant for you? stop
        1. kiril1246 3 January 2020 23: 09 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          In 1914, England unleashed a war from German territory.

          How's that?
          1. Mavrikiy 4 January 2020 13: 46 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: kiril1246
            Quote: Mavrikiy
            In 1914, England unleashed a war from German territory.

            How's that?

            And how do they unleash wars with the wrong hands? Like this.
            1. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 27 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              If kiril1246 (Cyril) still does not know this, then he is either a young ignoramus, or a type of pro-Western troll whose task is to fight the Russian interpretation of the history of the 20th century ....
  2. andrewkor 3 January 2020 06: 10 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Still, in the nuclear era it is necessary "to people softer, and look at the questions more broadly." Power Drang nach Ost is unlikely to succeed.
    It is necessary to ask the German VO regulars themselves what they think about this?
    In my opinion, they would have to deal with the local “blacks” from the beginning from the sofa. And under American sanctions
    you won’t get much!
  3. Amateur 3 January 2020 06: 51 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Poland ... the Russians fought with it endlessly. And just as useless. Despite the traditional Polish mess, this country was richer and more crowded Muscovy.

    What is this alternative story?
    1. 32363 3 January 2020 07: 11 New
      • 1
      • 5
      -4
      Quote: Amateur
      Poland ... the Russians fought with it endlessly. And just as useless. Despite the traditional Polish mess, this country was richer and more crowded Muscovy.

      What is this alternative story?

      Yes, such stories are a dime a dozen, to take at least the battle on Lake Peipsi, in Germany they have never heard of it. Putin here yesterday announced the German docks that they say they planned to use part of the Russians as a labor force, and partly to master Siberia, and at school we taught that we wanted to erase the Russians as a nation ... who should we believe?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Olezhek 3 January 2020 07: 28 New
        • 7
        • 3
        +4
        Yes, such stories are a dime a dozen, to take at least the battle on Lake Peipsi, in Germany they have never heard of it.

        Haha...





        How well do you know German?
        To make such statements?
        1. 32363 3 January 2020 15: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Olezhek
          Yes, such stories are a dime a dozen, to take at least the battle on Lake Peipsi, in Germany they have never heard of it.

          Haha...





          How well do you know German?
          To make such statements?

          perfect, but with such links the yab did not disgrace giving them away as a serious analysis, some lovers.
      3. Sergej1972 3 January 2020 13: 20 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Actually, in school, in Soviet times, we studied exactly what Putin said.
        1. UAZ 452 7 January 2020 00: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The Soviet school studied the partition of Czechoslovakia by Germany and Poland? About the Munich agreement was, but the role of Poland was retouched, for the sake of allied relations. Therefore, now the change in the position of our country somehow does not look too convincing - if previously they were silent for the sake of political expediency, now what are you making noise? Are you really disinterestedly craving for the restoration of historical justice, or is it just that the political situation has changed? And to cover such an argument is very difficult, even if they are essentially right.
          1. Sergej1972 7 January 2020 01: 10 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Nothing was retouched. And about Poland’s participation in the Czechoslovak section, information was given. The USSR did not equate Poland with Poland in the 30s. On the politics of Poland of the 30s. many dissertations were defended, and monographs published. And the level was very good.
      4. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        they say that they planned to use part of the Russians as a workforce, and partly to master Siberia, and at school we taught that we tried to erase the Russians as a nation
        One does not contradict the other, as you might have noticed. Rabsila in the extraction of natural resources of the former Russia (according to the plans of yours and the present West) should no longer represent a nation ... No ..?
    2. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I’m also interested in richer and more populous than Muscovy Poland ..... Why isn’t it anperia? Al power ....? And what a screaming dime in the middle of Europe, or the "hyena of Europe", as some said, and drowning in the United States, because the same Germany would have strangled her long ago ....
  4. Evil Booth 3 January 2020 06: 58 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    how much, more precisely, the whole calculation is generalization through direct statements about the underdevelopment of Russia. And it is directly affirmed more than once that each of the rivals fought a war of aggression and was not defeated on its own, but not combining at least three opponents with the sole purpose of robbery, who also fought among themselves one way or another.
    1. silver169 3 January 2020 07: 20 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      I didn’t understand anything in your message. Could you state your thoughts a little in Russian? lol
      1. Evil Booth 3 January 2020 07: 25 New
        • 0
        • 9
        -9
        maybe because you have a native Russian
  5. certero 3 January 2020 07: 08 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I personally am very glad that in Germany there is no normal army and militaristic aspirations now.
    1. Olezhek 3 January 2020 07: 50 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      I am personally very glad that Germany does not have a normal army

      Europe is worried about Poland’s plans to buy a large batch of tanks


      Berlin and Paris, which excluded Poland from their joint defense projects, forced Warsaw to focus on American weapons, Die Welt writes. Now Poland plans to purchase more modern tanks than Germany and France have combined, claims the German edition.
      am

      Pruvet Lukashenko!

      https://vz.ru/news/2020/1/2/1016621.html

      There is no perfection in life ... request
    2. UAZ 452 7 January 2020 00: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      At the beginning of the 30s they also did not have a normal army. The presence of a developed industry can be converted into military power quite quickly.
      1. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 43 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Who gave them money for a developed industry ...? Do not remember ...?
  6. kiril1246 3 January 2020 08: 22 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1
    One of the best articles recently appeared on VO. Very competent and clear analysis, without water.
    1. Mavrikiy 3 January 2020 21: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: kiril1246
      One of the best articles recently appeared on VO. Very competent and clear analysis, without water.

      Well, in grade 7, you need to do the analysis without errors.
      They did not have the resources. Even “militaristic Japan” and “the incident at the Marco Polo Bridge” in the year one thousand thirty-seven could not become the cause and the beginning of a global massacre. Alas and ah. But just Germany has become easy. It was German initiatives and German “dynamism” in the field of foreign policy that caused the flourishing Europe to turn into a battlefield, a hotbed of extremist political movements and caused the mass death of those Europeans themselves. Moreover, those same world wars spilled far beyond the borders of Europe, turning the “semi-continent" itself into ruins ...
      Did the Napoleonic Wars prevent Europe from blooming? And the fact that the war was on all the seas and continents is a secret for the author. request
      There is an idea and material is cut under it. Seven times measure cut once. No need to absolutize German villains, what English is worse. angry
  7. nikvic46 3 January 2020 08: 42 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    I don’t think that Germany would become the ruler of Europe. Previously, Germany was looked at as a country with developed science and technology. Hence the pro-German sentiment. This is exactly how Japan considered its ally along the Berlin-Tokyo axis. Now much has changed. If there are any countries underground sentiments are pro-American. Even in Europe, many countries are ahead of Germany in scientific technology.
    1. bessmertniy 3 January 2020 09: 51 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      The demography of Germany itself is changing dramatically in national composition. This is no longer a nation-monolithic state, and to some extent this is also losing.
      1. AllBiBek 3 January 2020 12: 12 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        You have a very shitty knowledge of history; Germany, in principle, was never ethnically monolithic, even under Hitler. Rhine blanket, yes. The North and South Germans, who could not bear each other's spirit, and with completely different mentally and culturally, Alsatian Germans who did not speak German either ... Baltic Germans, alien to everyone at all. Tyrolean Germans as subethnos. And even after WWII - ozi and carry, which for more than thirty years can not merge into at least something more or less homogeneous. In general, to summarize, you would also call China and India mono-ethnic states ...
        1. bessmertniy 3 January 2020 12: 21 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          The Germans are connected by language and history. All these are former Germanic tribes and former Germanic feudal plots. We can talk about the same division of Italians and French. Actually, the Russians are a long history of consolidation, which has still not ended. But today we are talking about something else - that in the modern German state huge groups of migrants have appeared who are generally alien to its culture and who, in principle, are not against burying it. hi
          1. AllBiBek 3 January 2020 12: 30 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            After the PMV, the French had a similar situation; at the time of its inception, France sat very densely on absinthe, and in the version of a hundred years ago, it leads to infertility in both sexes (in 3/4 cases for men and in half for women). Of course, the male part of the hollow shoots was worn out under all Verdun-Marne, but one hell, the birth rate was falling, and even all kinds of English-speaking divisions from all kinds of the USA-Australia didn’t help in terms of marrying the French. And then France took a step unprecedented at that time; opened borders for all its colonies. First of all - for Algeria and Morocco. As a result, demographics during Interbellum quite improved. And - oddly enough - the culture did not die. Moreover, it flourished, France is still in terms of philosophy and art - in world leaders, and in science is not stupid. To begin with, after the United States, they are the second to develop their own nuclear weapons from scratch. And - they are the third who crawled out into space. So it’s not so simple here ...
          2. unknown 3 January 2020 14: 14 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            What language can bind Germans?
            Modern German appeared in 1901.
          3. UAZ 452 7 January 2020 00: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The Prussians, Bavarians and other German-speaking Germans hardly perceived themselves until the 19th century. Tongue? But what about the Swiss Germans, the Austrians do not merge in ecstasy into a single German family of peoples? Story? This can you mean the 30-year war, when the Germans enthusiastically slaughtered each other?
            The formation of ethnic groups and states is a complex and ambiguous process: somewhere a multinational state is being formed, somewhere a single nation speaking the same language forms two states.
        2. Sergej1972 3 January 2020 13: 25 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          In China, unlike India, there is an overwhelming 90 percent Han majority. Although among the Han people there are certain differences.
          1. pru-pavel 3 January 2020 23: 04 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            There are colossal differences. These are essentially different nations. They can understand each other only at the expense of hieroglyphs. The general basic vocabulary of German and Russian is 25% (English and Russian 24%, Spanish and Russian 23%), and between the so-called Chinese dialects some common basic vocabulary may even be less than 10%. That is, the differences between Chinese dialects can be 3 times stronger than, for example, between Russian and literary German. Well, the only thing that saves them is that all the Chinese understand the hieroglyphs. And in writing they can communicate with them. Moreover, without any chance to understand spoken language between distant dialects, since these are essentially different languages ​​and very distant from each other.
            1. Sergej1972 3 January 2020 23: 54 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              In schools and universities, everyone studies the Beijing dialect. Therefore, almost all literate Chinese (including non-Han Chinese) understand the official version of the Chinese language.
              1. pru-pavel 3 January 2020 23: 56 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                We also learn all English. And supposedly they understand something. In China, the situation is no better.
                1. Sergej1972 4 January 2020 05: 11 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  In the Beijing dialect, all subjects are underway. It also has television and radio programs. Without knowing him, you will not get a civil service, military service, you will not become a member of the CCP. Chinese students from different provinces who come, and study in Russia, have no problems communicating with each other.
  8. parusnik 3 January 2020 09: 04 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    But the Germans just built them, and you can’t argue!
    ... So for this the EU was conceived ... together with France .. Then the Germans, the French were pushed back, with a slight movement of the shoulder ...
    1. AllBiBek 3 January 2020 12: 18 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      He started as the next Reich, that is, the next Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. And, this time, without the ability to conduct an aggressive foreign policy, even theoretically. For a hundred years, the Germans nevertheless understood at the level of genetic memory, only by copying the British way of expansion - through intrigues and merging of their elites with the native ones - they completely ignore the fact that the Anglo-Saxon model is extremely cruel to ordinary citizens of the metropolis. She applied to them is actually cannibalistic. But the Germans are cheating with migrants, how much in vain.
      1. UAZ 452 7 January 2020 00: 54 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Our model of empire in relation to the citizens of the core nation is generally life-giving - they are considered mainly as resource donors to turn national outskirts into regular windows that hide the impoverishment of the central provinces of the metropolis.
        1. AllBiBek 7 January 2020 02: 26 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I can not agree that at the end of the USSR it was; I was lucky, and before its collapse in active age, I visited the Baltic states, Georgia and Kiev ... But - about the fact that a) ice cream in cartoons, on a stick and in chocolate, happens in real life too ) he is on every corner and c) when he’s not climbing anymore - you can throw the undernourished into the trash, I learned from my own experience in Moscow in 1990. I don’t hint at anything, and don’t call for anything, I just share my memories. But in general, to consider humanity as a bundle of historically developed civilizations with a set of individual paradigms - this is such a science, called "behavioral geography", this is to it. We are a very young civilization that has just groped for a way of reconciliation with its own history; by comparison, the French by the beginning of WWII equally respected the legacy of both the Bourbons and Bonopartes, while in the States by the beginning of WWII they respected Lee and Grant in the same way. Moreover, if we take the pivotal civilizations of our time - there are 6-7 of them - we are generally the youngest, and at the most advantageous positions. What will happen next - we will see.
          1. e-sam 7 January 2020 02: 48 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            Quote: AllBiBek
            Moreover, if we take the pivotal civilizations of our time - there are 6-7 of them - we are generally the youngest, and at the most advantageous positions.

            The USSR was not civilization, but ANTI-civilization. Sect. Medieval obscurantism.
            1. AllBiBek 7 January 2020 02: 56 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Latynina, log in. Or is it Benedict?
  9. Ros 56 3 January 2020 10: 22 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    For after the holiday reading there are too many beeches. And what kind of leadership a striped colony can have.
    1. AllBiBek 3 January 2020 12: 21 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Stripes were also once a bunch of colonies, and - by the standards of history - very well-worn. Even St. Petersburg is older than the entire history of the Independent United States. But here you go, lucky the descendants of the rabble of European slums and sectarians of all stripes.
      1. unknown 3 January 2020 14: 17 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        According to recent studies, seventy percent of the white population of the United States consider themselves descendants of German immigrants. Add Russians, Irish, Italians, other Poles and Swedes ... And how many descendants of English immigrants in the USA?
        1. pru-pavel 3 January 2020 22: 59 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Subethnic White American Groups
          German Americans (47 911 129 people; 16,50% of the total population)
          Irish Americans (35 people; 186% of the total population)
          Americans of English descent (26 people; 349% of the total population)
          Americans (20 people; 875% of the total population)
          Italo-Americans (17 people; 488% of the total population)
          Americans of Polish descent [en] (9 people; 660% of the total population)
          French Americans [en] (8 891 224 people; 2,87% of the total population)
          Americans of Scottish descent [en] (5 people; 562% of the total population)
          Jews of Jewish descent (5,5 - 8 million people; 1,7% - 2,6% of the total population)
          Americans of Dutch descent [en] (4 people; 687% of the total population)
          Americans of Norwegian descent [en] (4 people; 491% of the total population)
          Americans of Russian descent (3,13 million people.)
          Americans of Armenian descent (2 people; 000% of the total population)
          Americans of Azerbaijani descent (14,205 [5], Iranian Azerbaijanis 40,400 [5] (2000 census))
        2. e-sam 7 January 2020 02: 51 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Quote: ignoto
          According to recent studies, seventy percent of the white population of the United States consider themselves descendants of German immigrants.

          Not 70, but 700.
          Will lie. The descendants of the Anglo-Saxons, they are mainly. From this and such successes in everything. Show me a poor country inhabited by Anglo-Saxons.
  10. knn54 3 January 2020 16: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Germany merged in 1991.
    Germany could remain within the Weimar Republic. But the West needed a "fist" against the USSR, when it became clear that the country of the Soviets could not be ruined from the inside. So Nazi Germany had no alternative.
    1. e-sam 7 January 2020 02: 53 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Quote: knn54
      about the West needed a "fist" against the USSR, when it became clear that the country of the Soviets could not be ruined from the inside.

      That’s what the West didn’t give a damn about about the rotting USSR in the 30s.
      And Germany was needed by amers. To rock the situation in Europe and finally push the Britons off their pedestal, taking the whole world into their own hands. And this plan was brilliantly implemented.
  11. Nikolai 3 January 2020 18: 37 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    We need to be friends with the Germans, to have allied relations despite the terrible story. Both the 1st and 2nd World Wars were inspired by the Anglo-Saxons. In these wars both states were weakened, both peoples were exterminated. We have been going to an alliance with the Germans since the time of the visionary Peter and his descendants - Peter, Paul, Alexander, Nikolai and others. A strong alliance with the Germans will give a strong peace.
    1. Olezhek 3 January 2020 19: 32 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      We need to be friends with the Germans, have allied relations despite the terrible story



      https://topwar.ru/89719-u-nemcev-tri-problemy-s-rossiey.html
  12. Mavrikiy 3 January 2020 21: 02 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    request Dear author hi Did you go to school?
    Just try to calmly, carefully study the history of wars before the reunification of Germany. There was no such nightmare and was not planned by anyone.
    1. All the wars in Europe planned "foggy Albion."
    2.
    Europe’s strongest power, Germany, created a completely new picture of the world and created a lot of problems.
    England did not create a new picture of the world, but an instrument to crush France on the continent. And then there were problems with the "tool", and new headaches.
    The rise of the United States and Japan could hardly lead to world wars, but the sudden appearance in the center of Europe of the strongest power, Germany,
    What is that pearl? Germany is not a rabbit in the cylinder of a magician, here it is not, again, and it is! Bismarck would not have created her with “iron and blood” if the British had not helped him.
    WIKI: Moreover, it was difficult for a sea power to fight without allies on the continent, namely in a strong Prussia, the ruling elite at first saw a counterweight to the French Empire. The British were very worried about both the French project of the Suez Canal (fears for India) and Napoleon III’s desire to annex Belgium. Moreover, a united Germany was not seen as a rival to England in colonial affairs, but could be a profitable trading partner for the sale of English products and colonial goods.
    Yes, and the First World War, and the Second - it is not so much a war as a global catastrophe. And one cannot fail to note one interesting fact: it was precisely Germany and the German leadership that stood at their origins.
    The origins of WWI and WWII were England and her money, which she pumped from her colonies.
    I did not read further, the student’s thoughts on world problems are ridiculous and boring. request
    1. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 55 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Finally, at least someone here correctly laid out everything ..... And then Cyril have no idea whatsoever about it and only laudatory cries of the author make ....
  13. Mavrikiy 3 January 2020 21: 19 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: kiril1246
    The only thing that holds her back is American control. Russia abandoned this control in the 1990s, agreeing to unite Germany
    What nonsense. The USSR did not control Germany. Germany and without the GDR was the leader of Europe (superpower? - no. Germany does not have sovereignty)
    1. kiril1246 3 January 2020 23: 20 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      USSR did not control Germany

      GDR is not Germany?
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Germany and without the GDR was the leader of Europe

      And with the GDR, did she cease to be the leader of Europe?
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      superpower? - no.

      Politically not, and the economic potential of Germany is quite comparable with the world's superpowers.
      1. Mavrikiy 4 January 2020 14: 03 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        We still "control" East Prussia, and this restrains Germany. Absurd.
        Superpower - oh hto this? negative Definition in the studio! repeat Or is it a figment of the imagination?
        WIKI: A superpower is an independent state with tremendous political, economic and military (necessarily including strategic nuclear weapons in the modern world) superiority over most other states (including other great powers and nuclear powers), which allows it to exercise hegemony not only in its region, but also in the most remote places on the planet
        1. e-sam 7 January 2020 02: 55 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          We still "control" East Prussia, and this restrains Germany.

          East Prussia is mainly in Poland now.
  14. iouris 4 January 2020 16: 41 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Germany formed "monstrously late." And about his country: where is Russia? Following the author’s faith, one would think that it apparently formed “monstrously early”, and only the United States formed in time.
  15. faterdom 5 January 2020 20: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It seems that everything is logical until WWII and its end.
    And hereinafter - the occupation zones were not any “Germanys” there, the Anglo-Saxons at first generally wanted to leave only the agricultural sector there.
    But then the "concept has changed" - Fulton, the Cold War, the creation of the Federal Republic of Germany, the answer is the GDR and the cherry on the cake is West Berlin. All this has become the arena and the likely fuse of TMV. Then - the betrayal of the GDR by the Gorbachev and the discharge of this real ally into the clutches of Germany as a "trophy".
    But all these movers - Germany in the form of its parts, and even a single one - are not an actor in world politics.
    The first such step was an attempt to scribble Ukraine, putting there his “genius” Klitschko as a gauleiter. She also did not succeed - Poroshenko was put on a “Gau,” and Nuland and Payet explained exhaustively where the Germans and others to go there in a telephone conversation.
    The current situation in Germany - it HAD a chance for acting in world politics, and the apotheosis was under Schroeder. Not hegemony, but acting, which allows not the Greeks to bend there financially, but have a clear opinion that does not coincide with the Anglo-Saxon one. The recipe is a sharp and decisive rapprochement with Russia and China (they are not identical, but there are options for interests). The expulsion of the occupying forces and the return of the gold reserve to Vaterland.
    Let's go the wrong way. We have a monstrous problem of migrants, Muslims, more and more strong kicks in economic interests from the “patron”.
    As for "Drang nakh Osten": firstly: there are no such forces, and secondly: if you equip them with the Muslim banner, they will kill those who are closer and not go to Russia for death.
    And thirdly: we didn’t hide and do not hide: the threat to Russia - we will destroy everyone who gets horrible, Germany together with America, without America, America without Germany, this is all the same to us. Is it the same for the Germans - let them ponder, like many philosophers gave to the world, maybe they will liken it.
  16. Amf49 7 January 2020 21: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There is also Austria with a promising young Kurtz.
  17. iouris 8 January 2020 21: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    A horde from Vladivostok to Lisbon is also impossible.
    However, as Schweik said, this has never happened before, so that somehow, it never happened.
  18. Engineer 9 January 2020 11: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The author teaches you to cook soup the most successful European nation. It's funny
  19. Dzungar 16 January 2020 20: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And one cannot fail to note one interesting fact: it was precisely Germany and the German leadership that stood at their origins. Such a "funny coincidence."
    Not Germany and the German leadership stood at their origins, but the Anglo-Saxons. Germany and its leadership were their instrument and were used by them for their own purposes ... Here, of course, we must admit that the interest of the German leadership was superimposed on this ....