Springtime of Nations II: A European Republic Quest

Planning to approval vote for this (by 01paradox01) and a version with the Federation as outlined by Fission Battery. I think it's more than fair, personally.

[] Plan: Sister nations and Smaller Land Bribes
-[] We will build a community of nations.
-[] We accept the Montenegrin request for Kotor.
-[] We accept the Serbian request for Vojvodina.
-[] We decline the Romanian request.
 
I still don't quite understand why countries that have surrendered to us expect anything.
They have claims on parts of the former Austrian empire, they know that the Entente wants to counterbalance both us and Russia in the region, and so they want to use Entente backing to gain their Austrian claims. They expect us to comply with the Entente because it was the Entente that pressured us into the peace between us and the Imperial League.
 
There's also the fact that "no balkan federation != no racial tensions" :V
While true, having clearly delineated border that everyone has agreed upon does make things a lot easier. Assuming we manage to get everyone to actually agree upon those borders, of course. That, in turn, will be the easiest if we draw those borders in accordance with what the local populations desire.

The balkan super-state was called "Yugoslavia" in real life, and that didn't turn out so well. Possibly, things might work better in a genuinely democratic state, but it's still a potential failure point. I'm definitely not in favor.

Also, my gut says not one square centimeter of additional territory for Romania! If they wanted to expand, they should have picked the other side during the war. Though my head says that it may be worth it, if we can get sufficient concessions in turn... still, it would leave a foul aftertaste.
 
Last edited:
While true, having clearly delineated border that everyone has agreed upon does make things a lot easier. Assuming we manage to get everyone to actually agree upon those borders, of course. That, in turn, will be the easiest if we draw those borders in accordance with what the local populations desire.

The balkan super-state was called "Yugoslavia" in real life, and that didn't turn out so well. Possibly, things might work better in a genuinely democratic state, but it's still a potential failure point. I'm definitely not in favor.

Also, my gut says not one square centimeter of additional territory for Romania! If they wanted to expand, they should have picked the other side during the war. Though my head says that it may be worth it, if we can get sufficient concessions in turn... still, it would leave a foul aftertaste.
Saying "you can go genocide, but only up to this line" isn't exactly better than the federal solution.
 
I want Croatia-Slavonia to stay together, so I'm open to Vojvodina going to Serbia but not Bosnia - much less Dalmatia. I also don't want to give Romania, who fought a war against us, anything. I'm fine with Montenegro gaining Kotor.

So:
[] Plan: Sister Federations and Smaller Land Bribes
-[] We will build a federation of equals.
-[] We accept the Montenegrin request for Kotor.
-[] We accept the Serbian request for Vojvodina.
-[] We decline the Romanian request.
I'm going for this plan.
 
To the people who think the serbs are going to get away with any genocide in here, Tell me with a straight face that the our citizens that practically all have been trained to be soldiers and believe in a quite vibrant but all very left philosophies would not vote in there soldier councils to go mobilize to stop them no matter what the German government stance on it is.
 
Last edited:
Can someone be really cool and make maps for the other plans?

Sure, I've made two.

For my plan which is:

[] Plan: The National Principle
-[] We will build a community of nations.
-[] We accept the Montenegrin request for Kotor.
-[] We accept the Serbian request for Vojvodina and Bosnia.
-[] We accept the Romanian request in full.



For the plan we've mostly agreed upon with a Federation:

[] Plan: Sister Federations and Smaller Land Bribes
-[] We will build a federation of equals.
-[] We accept the Montenegrin request for Kotor.
-[] We accept the Serbian request for Vojvodina.
-[] We decline the Romanian request.

 
Saying "you can go genocide, but only up to this line" isn't exactly better than the federal solution.
Obviously that would be a failure state. The problem is, it's a failure state that could easily happen with the superstate solution as well, only without the lines on the map.

The important part is that any borders - or any internal division of influence among the various groups inside a larger state - must be mutually agreed upon, rather than just dictated by foreign powers. I think that will be easier to achieve with multiple states.
 
Lmao I forgot Montenegro was a token league ally during the war.

They didn't do anything of note, while Romania & Bulgaria still sent troops (who got flattened by the Allies), but I'm still mulling on reinforcing the point that declaring war - even if you only provided supplies - will have consequences by denying Montenegrin demand.
 
Last edited:
While true, having clearly delineated border that everyone has agreed upon does make things a lot easier. Assuming we manage to get everyone to actually agree upon those borders, of course. That, in turn, will be the easiest if we draw those borders in accordance with what the local populations desire.

The balkan super-state was called "Yugoslavia" in real life, and that didn't turn out so well. Possibly, things might work better in a genuinely democratic state, but it's still a potential failure point. I'm definitely not in favor.

Also, my gut says not one square centimeter of additional territory for Romania! If they wanted to expand, they should have picked the other side during the war. Though my head says that it may be worth it, if we can get sufficient concessions in turn... still, it would leave a foul aftertaste.

No, having clear borders does in fact make everything a lot harder because those are only clear after a few rounds of ethnic cleansing. You can't ethically draw clear borders with one group on one side and the other on the other.

We have a workable framework for non territorial plurinationalism at home, we could try it. Or we could make smaller countries with non ethnic borders but expecting border drawing to address ethnic tensions is not realistic.
 
It's fairly uncommon for the representatives of a sovereign state to show up to a conference to resolve the territory of a state they are not a part of after a war they are not a part of to then agree to the fundamental restructuring of their entire regime.


If you establish influence over a nation, you will be able to make demands after the conference, including democratization and plebiscites, among other things. This ability only goes so far when dealing with monarchist states.
i dont understand the purpose of this then
 
Lmao I forgot Montenegro was a token league ally during the war.

They didn't do anything of note, while Romania & Bulgaria still sent troops (who got flattened by the Allies), but I'm still mulling on reinforcing the point that declaring war - even if you only provided supplies - will have consequences by denying Montenegrin demand.
Montenegro was a literal puppet via personal union with one of the League members, weren't they? In any case, withholding fucking Montenegro a single port isn't worth two influence.
 
The important part is that any borders - or any internal division of influence among the various groups inside a larger state - must be mutually agreed upon, rather than just dictated by foreign powers.
It's unfortunate plans with mandates all territorial changes to be ratified by plebiscite didn't win, which would solve this one. Reminder that etran has confirmed it's viable if we, for example, design options that require republican outcome for, say, Transylvania to deny Habsburg Romanian rule over it.

Oh well..

Montenegro was a literal puppet via personal union with one of the League members, weren't they? In any case, withholding fucking Montenegro a single port isn't worth two influence.
I somewhat agree on the "not worth it" part, but just for confirmation (since I didn't recall any info of such a union)... @Etranger , is Montenegro in personal union with any League members right now?
 
No, having clear borders does in fact make everything a lot harder because those are only clear after a few rounds of ethnic cleansing.
You're contradicting yourself here. By your own statement, the problem isn't having the borders, it's getting to the point of where you have them, and doing so without the ethnic cleansing.

And, you know, that's fair. That is indeed the tricky part.

The problem is making the multiethnic state work is tricky too, and if you fail then you have the same problem... except much worse, because now there is no clear line on the map everybody has already agreed on. Which means they'll fight over where the line is going to be drawn. At that point, the ethnic cleansing is guaranteed.

I mean, it can be done, obviously, but if it fails the consequences will be absolutely catastrophic.
Or we could make smaller countries with non ethnic borders but expecting border drawing to address ethnic tensions is not realistic.
There will obviously be overlap. However, if every group has their own state, and they and their neighbors have previously all agreed on where the borders are and on mutual legal protections for the minorities left on the other side of those borders, then the whole situation is ultimately much less likely to blow up, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Speech: Some Deranged Jacobin Stuff About Romania
Speech given by Jacobin delegate Johan Sackler to the German Parliament on the commencement of negotiations at Vienna

"Citizens! What glorious day! What great occasion! This war, this sublime, terrible war which the citizen-soldiers of our free republic have waged upon the crowns of Europe have swept clean the oldest altars of reaction that remained in Germany. Look now upon your achievements! That dynasty which even Bonaparte could not fully destroy has been laid low, the east has yielded, and all her peoples now take hold of their destiny with no direction but their own.

Through the force of our arms and the unstoppable power of our mission we have bent centuries to happen within years: the fall of empires, the depositions of kings, the collapse of realms and the end of eras, these we now wield as a force of nature, as, like Alaric, we dispense judgement upon the Imperial dignities of Rome.

Yet it is with some disquiet that I notice a general sentiment has prevailed as this august body, the most free assembly in the history of mankind, discusses the answers to the question of the nationalities in the east: Romania, it is said, cannot be our friend, for they seat still a crowned dignitary from that broken edifice we now divide. And indeed it is true that we, who fight so audaciously and well to free humanity from the tyranny of crowned heads, could not tolerate the surrender the concession of territory to Romania in her present state represents, I propose - in the interest of reasoned moderation, in our mission for the soul of mankind - a compromise.

Romania! You who yearn to breathe free! You whose peoples are veiled behind the cruelties of medieval realms and divisions, you who so remind Germany of herself: produce this crowned head! Win for them and yourselves the joy of liberation from without and within. Grant him to us, grant him to the supreme judgement of the people and the guillotine, and cleanse yourselves of the shackles of your Habsburg slavers!"

Parliament subsequently descends into a rancour of shouting. Sackler is seated and order is called.
 
However, if every group has their own state, and they and their neighbors have previously all agreed on where the borders are and on mutual legal protections for the minorities left on the other side of those borders, then the whole situation is ultimately much less likely to blow up, IMHO.
Those agreements are made through international treaties meaning that any of the signing states can renegue on it at any moment. It would literally take one ultra-nationalist government to destabilize the whole situation. This solution is not immune to ethnic tensions, none is.​
 
There will obviously be overlap. However, if every group has their own state, and they and their neighbors have previously all agreed on where the borders are and on mutual legal protections for the minorities left on the other side of those borders, then the whole situation is ultimately much less likely to blow up, IMHO.

But you won't have "each group their state" without ethnic cleansing? Us guaranteeing minority rights in states where they are, well, minorities, is much harder than them having a whole community of their own group to fall back on within the same larger state. Why have minorities we need to extract guarantees for and constantly keep watch on the respect of when we could just... Not have that issue by not drawing them on the wrong side of a border?
 
Speech given by Jacobin delegate Johan Sackler to the German Parliament on the commencement of negotiations at Vienna

"Citizens! What glorious day! What great occasion! This war, this sublime, terrible war which the citizen-soldiers of our free republic have waged upon the crowns of Europe have swept clean the oldest altars of reaction that remained in Germany. Look now upon your achievements! That dynasty which even Bonaparte could not fully destroy has been laid low, the east has yielded, and all her peoples now take hold of their destiny with no direction but their own.

Through the force of our arms and the unstoppable power of our mission we have bent centuries to happen within years: the fall of empires, the depositions of kings, the collapse of realms and the end of eras, these we now wield as a force of nature, as, like Alaric, we dispense judgement upon the Imperial dignities of Rome.

Yet it is with some disquiet that I notice a general sentiment has prevailed as this august body, the most free assembly in the history of mankind, discusses the answers to the question of the nationalities in the east: Romania, it is said, cannot be our friend, for they seat still a crowned dignitary from that broken edifice we now divide. And indeed it is true that we, who fight so audaciously and well to free humanity from the tyranny of crowned heads, could not tolerate the surrender the concession of territory to Romania in her present state represents, I propose - in the interest of reasoned moderation, in our mission for the soul of mankind - a compromise.

Romania! You who yearn to breathe free! You whose peoples are veiled behind the cruelties of medieval realms and divisions, you who so remind Germany of herself: produce this crowned head! Win for them and yourselves the joy of liberation from without and within. Grant him to us, grant him to the supreme judgement of the people and the guillotine, and cleanse yourselves of the shackles of your Habsburg slavers!"

Parliament subsequently descends into a rancour of shouting. Sackler is seated and order is called.
I didn't understand what that speech was about to many fancy Lefty Nancy words, I just wish someone stop the king from spending all our money on partys for his Friends and other useless things! - a German newspaper interviewing a Romanian farmer.
 
Last edited:
*Federationist screaming and clawing at the walls while screeching about how National Personal Autonomy's time has come*

THIS IS OUR TIME. A FEDERATION OF PEOPLES UNDER THE NPA TO PREVENT NATIONALISTIC STRIFE.

The revolutionary movements in this region were exposed to it. It's time. We can accept a munch of monarchs and a bunch of tiny squabbling nations ready to genocide each other for clay like OTL or we can finally start our long journey towards one world, many peoples living in harmony. This is our time!
 
But you won't have "each group their state" without ethnic cleansing? Us guaranteeing minority rights in states where they are, well, minorities, is much harder than them having a whole community of their own group to fall back on within the same larger state. Why have minorities we need to extract guarantees for and constantly keep watch on the respect of when we could just... Not have that issue by not drawing them on the wrong side of a border?

Do you really think we'd just let them genocide eachover Willy nilly? Besides that, I think you're definitely exaggerating the Balkans's lust for extermination. I also envision many people simply moving over to their national-state once the changes have been made, and it shouldn't be a problem for Germany to assure a swift transition. You calling extermination the only "solution" is a bit absurd when you take that into account. I did not go into this venture to destroy the Habsburg empire just to see it reformed under a new name and ideology, with Hungarians undoubtedly dominating it's politics.
 
Last edited:
I somewhat agree on the "not worth it" part, but just for confirmation (since I didn't recall any info of such a union)... @Etranger , is Montenegro in personal union with any League members right now?

Montenegro is de jure an independent principality. However, until just recently, its foreign policy was de facto run out of St. Petersburg. That's why they were part of the Imperial League and thus the war.
 
Back
Top