My opinion was that it as not a lasting peace. As Ferdinand Foch said "This is not a peace treaty, this is an armistice for 20 years". Germany would inevitably recover at some point, and when they did, they would want to reclaim their lost territory. And the half heart attempt to incorporate self determination into the treaty left too many disputes that would arise 20 years later. I agree with you that there was precedent for things like reparations, and losing territory with the franco purssian war and the treaty of brest litosk, but look at what happened after that. The French would stop at nothing to regain alsace, and the russians just invaded poland, ukraine and the baltic states and eveuntally finland to regain their lost territory. So I dont know what the allies expected the Germans, hungarians and bulgarians to do when it came to their lost territory. Thats just my opinion, your video was very well done!
I do wonder what would have occurred had Austria been permitted to join with Germany at war's end, which was expressly forbidden, apparently. (Don't know if it was by the Treaty, however).
The treaty was a convenient scapegoat for Communists & Nazis, and even some prominent intellectuals in the West, such as John Maynard Keynes. They took small, legitimate complaints and exaggerated them greatly, as politicans are known to do. Self-culpability is not something the general people like to hear.
Agree. There was a writer called "Etienne" who calculated Germany could have paid its debt, but choose not to. Communists due to anti-capitalism, nationalists due to xenophobia.
Communist? What? During the majority of the weimar republica era was Germany was ruled by liberals. When the socdems got to lead a very fragile coalition in 1928, they tried to make a deal with the allies to lower the debt and resume payments, which resulted in massive bscklash from conservative pro-monarchy and the new nazi party, and some said lead to their rise. Furthermore, the Nazis weren't anti capitalist. They were anti globalization, capitalism was very much alive during their rule, being one if the first govts in history to carry out a plan of privatization
@@AgusSimoncelli communists actively engaged in armed resistance, having german nationalists as contextual allies. The nazis were not searching for private property, they had a guild system (corporatism).
@OskarTrollington while it is true that ns were for private property, the market was controlled by the state = dirigism. Strasser wanted to collectivise land and allocate it to Germans only.
There was nothing punitive in Germany being forced to give back territory to Poland. Prussia, Russia, and Austria had dismembered and absorbed Poland during the Three Partitions in the late eighteenth century resulting in the ending of Poland as an independent country. Germany needed to give back territory in order to help put Poland back on the map of Europe after WWI. It has always interested me that all three of the powers that had dismembered Poland in the Three Partitions lost WWI, enabling Poland to be reconstituted, despite the fact that they were not all fighting on the same side in the war.
Agree! Strongly biased as a Frenchman but if you think Versailles was harsh, have a look at the conditions imposed at the previous Versailles and even more at Brest-Litovsk. Not even mentioning that northern France is basically destroyed in 1918. As for the Sarrland it was always decided that people would have the choice to reintegrate or not Germany. In 1871 the Empire directly annexed Alsace-Lorraine as a core state. Sevres was in many regards way worse, as it failed very much to impose a coherent European order. And how a crew of old gloomy officers will orchestrate this treaty alongside with the stab in the back myth after Versailles is maybe also the core of the problem. Great video, thank you!
The German Propaganda machine did work, now we all think that the Treaty of Versailles was harsh but it really wasn't, it was pretty standard for that time (like he said)
My opinion was that it as not a lasting peace. As Ferdinand Foch said "This is not a peace treaty, this is an armistice for 20 years". Germany would inevitably recover at some point, and when they did, they would want to reclaim their lost territory. And the half heart attempt to incorporate self determination into the treaty left too many disputes that would arise 20 years later. I agree with you that there was precedent for things like reparations, and losing territory with the franco purssian war and the treaty of brest litosk, but look at what happened after that. The French would stop at nothing to regain alsace, and the russians just invaded poland, ukraine and the baltic states and eveuntally finland to regain their lost territory. So I dont know what the allies expected the Germans, hungarians and bulgarians to do when it came to their lost territory. Thats just my opinion, your video was very well done!
The Treaty of Trianon was so bad it makes the treaty of Versallies look like a time out in the naughty corner.
If Ataturk didn’t reverse some of the terms in the Treaty of Sèvres, Turkey as a nation would basically be a rump state.
Audio quality seems to have gone up 🤔
I do wonder what would have occurred had Austria been permitted to join with Germany at war's end, which was expressly forbidden, apparently. (Don't know if it was by the Treaty, however).
So interesting ! Thank you
Love 💕 your soundtracks!
The treaty was a convenient scapegoat for Communists & Nazis, and even some prominent intellectuals in the West, such as John Maynard Keynes.
They took small, legitimate complaints and exaggerated them greatly, as politicans are known to do. Self-culpability is not something the general people like to hear.
Great video man
Thank you I really appreciate it
In comparison to the congress of Vienna the Versailles treaty was harsh
Having background music 🎶 with vocals is somewhat distracting - perhaps just use instrumental background music in future videos?
Most music in educational videos is usually extremely distracting. But, great presentation and thank you.
Agree. There was a writer called "Etienne" who calculated Germany could have paid its debt, but choose not to.
Communists due to anti-capitalism, nationalists due to xenophobia.
Communist? What?
During the majority of the weimar republica era was Germany was ruled by liberals. When the socdems got to lead a very fragile coalition in 1928, they tried to make a deal with the allies to lower the debt and resume payments, which resulted in massive bscklash from conservative pro-monarchy and the new nazi party, and some said lead to their rise.
Furthermore, the Nazis weren't anti capitalist. They were anti globalization, capitalism was very much alive during their rule, being one if the first govts in history to carry out a plan of privatization
@@AgusSimoncelli communists actively engaged in armed resistance, having german nationalists as contextual allies.
The nazis were not searching for private property, they had a guild system (corporatism).
@OskarTrollington while it is true that ns were for private property, the market was controlled by the state = dirigism.
Strasser wanted to collectivise land and allocate it to Germans only.
There was nothing punitive in Germany being forced to give back territory to Poland. Prussia, Russia, and Austria had dismembered and absorbed Poland during the Three Partitions in the late eighteenth century resulting in the ending of Poland as an independent country. Germany needed to give back territory in order to help put Poland back on the map of Europe after WWI. It has always interested me that all three of the powers that had dismembered Poland in the Three Partitions lost WWI, enabling Poland to be reconstituted, despite the fact that they were not all fighting on the same side in the war.
Btw i never understood why they didnt made a stronger deutschmark to outrank their debt.
Hitler being Hitler, would disagree with you on the Treaty.
Agree! Strongly biased as a Frenchman but if you think Versailles was harsh, have a look at the conditions imposed at the previous Versailles and even more at Brest-Litovsk. Not even mentioning that northern France is basically destroyed in 1918. As for the Sarrland it was always decided that people would have the choice to reintegrate or not Germany. In 1871 the Empire directly annexed Alsace-Lorraine as a core state.
Sevres was in many regards way worse, as it failed very much to impose a coherent European order.
And how a crew of old gloomy officers will orchestrate this treaty alongside with the stab in the back myth after Versailles is maybe also the core of the problem.
Great video, thank you!
Typical British rhet! 😂
The German Propaganda machine did work, now we all think that the Treaty of Versailles was harsh but it really wasn't, it was pretty standard for that time (like he said)