Why did it all have to go so wrong frens?
Habsburg bois
Other urls found in this thread:
nnsfront.files.wordpress.com
m.youtube.com
twitter.com
Read this and you’ll know
nnsfront.files.wordpress.com
That's what ya get for allying with the Jews.
t. The Elector Palatine
inbreeding
Tfw not being a part of the Hambsburg Empire anymore
daily reminder
>be german king
>try to reign over slavs of different kind that hate each other and you.
It was always doomed
Vlachs and Serbs. You should have gassed them.
Austria-Hungary is my favorite historical empire.
Never forget that it was the British, French and the Americans that caused the destruction of our empire.
The Czechs were the most loyal of all the different nationalities within the Empire. The Hungarians and southern Slavs were the real problem when it came to nationalism. Nationalism is an enlightenment ideal that must be rejected on reactionary grounds if we are to keep such an Empire together again one day. Never forget that revolutions are the greatest evil of all, and the American and French revolutions are very much responsible for letting the enlightenment and romanticism into the mainstream.
Monarchy is the best form of government.
You god damn rite white boy
duno
that's what you get when you let incest analgauers taking over your country for thousand years
Delete this!
Well you could always read Mein Kampf. Hitler had a great explaination for this. Multi-cultural Austrian-Hungarian Parliament in a Nation with centries of Hungarian, Slavic and German ancestry. A Jewish-controlled press that promoted Marxism while Conservative parties ignored the interests of the Labor Unions (even when they had legitimate points). The inability of Representative Democracy to foster accountable leaders capable of making hard decisions while pandering to small percentages of ethnic minorities to sway elections. That about sum it up?
the habsburgs were originally from switzerland lol
The eternal kraut is what went wrong.
Because you had to start the WW1 over some inbred Habsburg dying in Sarajevo, balkanizing Europe in the process.
>Hitler began to distance himself from the book after becoming chancellor of Germany in 1933. He dismissed it as "fantasies behind bars" that were little more than a series of articles for the Völkischer Beobachter, and later told Hans Frank that "If I had had any idea in 1924 that I would have become Reich chancellor, I never would have written the book."
Seems like Hitler didn't really support the shit he said in that book later on. Why should we consider it valid when it's own author has dismissed it as nothing but "fantasies behind bars"?
And yet the Empire survived for almost 400 years, through many many different wars, which weren't all victories, far from it. Can't say the same for Hitler's non-multicultural state.
Sure ... the 30 other ethnicities in the Austro-Hungarian Empire had nothing to do with it. Let's blame it on the 20% German population that never wanted to be part of this Empire ro begin with.
its* damn autocorrect
Liberalization of the regime was the real issue. An absolute despot will always be better at governing a massive multicultural state than if he delegates his power to political organizations like assemblies and parliaments or political parties. There's a reason why the Empire started declining around the second half of the 19th century and onwards.
Come to the table with something other than Jewpedia and we'll talk. The citation for that quote was a book written by Thomas Rybak in 2010 and I hardly believe it can be seen accurately or in context Jewpedia gave it.
Nonetheless, even if Hitler did distance himself from Mein Kampf (unlikely), it still doesn't dismiss his analysis, first-hand, living in Vienna and seeing the multi-cultural Representative Democracy flounder into oblivion under the weight of it's own bureaucracy and Jewish-propelled Marxism.
central europe best europe
>The Czechs were the most loyal of all the different nationalities within the Empire.
You were literally entirely to blame for the 30 Years War. The Hungarian Revolution and the Compromise were nowhere near as deleterious to the Habsburg position and likely wouldn’t have happened without the wound inflicted on them in the 30 Years War; which again, was entirely the fault of Czechs.
Absolutely ... I do, however think that in the context of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, there were too many ethnic interests for even a despot-King to manage successfully. When your Empire speaks 30 different languages and your "official" language is Latin, you can't keep enough people happy to maintain control over the Empire.
People often criticise Franz Josef for being old and out of touch with the politics of the time, but it is mind boggling to think about his Generation and Position.
When Franz Josef entered military service, as was common among nobility,
Muzzle Loading Muskets were still state of the art, Line Infantry was still the general battle formation, and his instructors had fought against Napoleon.
Within this mans lifetime and reign, technology advanced to severely it is difficult to imagine these days,
The Railroad went from being an experimental mode of transport to being the engine that drives industry and logistics
Machine Guns, artillery that could fire tens of kilometres, Cavalry became obsolete, society completely transformed from an agrarian one to an industrial one in most regions, and where once Soldiers were honoured and celebrated men in colourful Uniforms, they had become anonymous masses of brown and grey marching to an unceremonious slaughter.
To a man like Franz Josef, it must have appeared that the world has gone mad, and 1916 must have looked like the end of days.
>The Czechs were the most loyal
that's why they had the highest rate of desertion and literally formed whole Brigades of Deserters fighting on the side of the Enemy?
Take us back Meister.
Generations of inbreeding had weakened the bloodline of the Hapsburgs to the extent that they regularly produced deformed or imbecile offspring.
If they had of outbreed with their nobility more then they would of still been in power.
you didn't kill off any whining hungarian nobles, that's your problem, we could had this, if you had just gotten rid of them
t. Hungarian peasant
Worst Time Line Ever!
lol, as if that's an insult, guess who started the revolution in 1848, yup, not us
Calling things you don't like Jewish doesn't dismiss them, and I do not see any basis for dismissing the quote based on what you stated.
And yes, I reject democracy utterly and have pointed out the great mistake that was made in liberalizing the regime of the Austrian Empire. However I have to point out that the multicultural aspect is completely overexaggerated as a problem by those whose narrative it fits, particularly Hitler in this case but also many other nationalists. A state that lasted being this way for almost 400 years is one that can clearly survive long-term, and the only thing that managed to completely destroy it was one of the bloodiest conflicts in history, a triumph of revolutionary powers and people literally starving on the streets. The common Austrian identity was shared by many of the different ethnicities and the Empire had to be artificially broken up through the treaty of Versailles, despite support for its existence still being quite high in its former territories.
guess who protested all the reforms, yup, it was magyar nobles, if you think i have beef with normal magyars, you're mistaken, i only hate their rich nobles who only cared about themselves and because of their stubbornness, the empire shattered, literally
Croatia (And Slovenes too) has sided with Austria-Hungary for centuries. We got uppity when Hungary tried to force their rulers on us and erase our language and culture. Other than that we were loyal and faught by the empire's side in all major conflicts, down to WW II.
same here
I guess I should've specified. I meant towards the end of the Great War.
The Czechoslovak legion, if that's who you're referring to were POW's that were indeed traitors, but they were a minority. The majority of Czechs at the time stayed loyal to the Empire until the final months of the war or so and we caused little unrest in the Habsburg lands as a whole, which can't be said for the Hungarians, Germans and the southern Slavs which were almost always initiating some form of petty nationalistic conflict in the Empire, which is something that the Czechs hardly ever did. Anyway, I'm not here to attack my fellow countrymen, but I will also defend those which I share my ancestry with.
Some guy from 2010 knows everything about a book author he was never alive to see is infallible?
Yeah nah.
Judging by your grammar it seems like you might be projecting a little.
Calling things you don't like anti-Jewish doesn't dismess them, and I do not see any basis for believe the quote based on what you stated.
Maybe, now that each of us has is own nationalism can just work together? We don't need reign over anyone, but we all want to stop Europe from turning into a shithole.
Franz Joseph led a sad life as a Kaiser, I do feel sorry for him to be born on that era. Not to mention that Sissi was a cunt to high heaven.
I never called anything anti-Jewish, did I now? And I'm sure there's a list of sources in the book itself, particularly the one that I posted.
She was a total thot with the loyality of a modern millenial woman.
New World mentality at its finest
Croatia had autonomy. It’s not our fault if your most notable people, like the Zrinyis, CHOSE to be Hungarian. As for the Slowvaks, if they wanted to be Slavs they should’ve fucked off to the Russian Empire.
Sisi did nothing wrong. Best girl.
You have to understand that our royal lineage died with Petar Svačić in the 11th century, and that was the doing of Hungarians. A Hungarian leader had then been imposed on us. This shit has been going on for a long time. To say that we had autonomy is silly, yeah we had autonomy but our leaders were Hungarian. Wanna guess where their interests and allegiance lied?
> As for the Slowvaks, if they wanted to be Slavs they should’ve fucked off to the Russian Empire.
They wanted to retain their culture and language, because they love their country. The bullying that occured throughout the ages was totally unnecessary and tryranical. We served the empire, we paid our dues and respects, forcing us to abandon our language and erasing our customs and language was unjustified and uncalled for.
>Habsburg bois
The more I read about the monarchy, the more museums I visit, the more I compare current monarchies - the glader I am I live in a democratic republic.
The finer details of it are insane. Straight up insane. Examples:
Franz I/II like every arch duke had to learn a trade. He became a gardener. His tools are on exhibition at the Hofmobilienkammer. His two-man saw has grips made from wood. 1 made out of walnut tree for his teacher and 1 made out of mahagony for Franz. What. The. Actual. Fuck. These fuckers were so up their asses that they had to have a custom saw grip, because the crown prince shouldn't touch "commoner wood"? Jesus Christ.
When Karl I was crowned king of Hungary in 1916 his son Otto, the new crown prince, was a few days past his 4th birthday. There are paintings, on display at the Wagenburg, of Otto exiting the imperial carriage and all the distinguished officers around him bowing deeply. Before a 4-year-old. In a golden dress. Who probably doesn't even know what's going on. It's fucking *absurd*.
And that shit would be commonplace if Habsburgs were still around. Picture related. It's a grown-ass woman who leads a country with nuclear weapons groveling before a boy who hasn't done anything noteworthy in his life. Fuck monarchies.
Nothing against the family Habsburg though. I went to university with a Habsburg girl and she was a nice person and very smart. I'm sure they're good people. I just don't need them at the head of my country.
Just imagine how the world would look today if only we would have won ww1.
Nothing would compare to the two german empires. We might even have a Großdeutsches Reich.
geez i wonder why.
I'm unironically ok with them doing this. It helps to set them apart from common people and signifies their importance as Heads of State. Also
>Reddit spacing
Every Austrian is a little Kaiser, so it is okay. The world doesn't deserve our greatness.
They're still pissed because they weren't invited to the Reichsgründung
Agreed. Hierarchy needs to exist and if must be very clear about the lines that it draws. With democracy there is no hierarchy, you only get fucked in the ass by the oligarchic Soros-type elites or you are one of them. With monarchy you have God, the monarch, the nobility, the merchant guilds, the clergy and the common people. Everyone knows their place and isn't constantly trying to selfishly advance themselves at the expense of everyone else. And the common people don't get involved in affairs of state, which is probably one of the best things.
Plus they were technically the Holuse of Lorraine after Maria-Theresa died.
you mean so right
LARPing aside, even your post is incoherent. Two empires or one German empire? Can't have both. And simply winning WW1 would probably not have killed the tide of nationalism that was rising quickly all over Europe. How many Ausgleiche would we have needed until all Volksgruppen of the Empire would have been happy to remain under Habsburg rule? Maybe we could have gone the Commonwealth route - release independent nations but remain nominal head of state. But keeping Austria-Hungary together seems quite impossible to me, even riding a fictional victory in the Great War.
>Reddit spacing
What does that even mean? If that's the latest meme from that cesspool, would you mind keeping it there?
I have nothing against other people setting up monarchies. Why can't we have both? I just happen to be very satisfied with a republic.
It’s just a bit of a preposterous argument in the sense that the Nationalities Law didn’t apply to Croatia. As for your dynasty, the same thing happened to Hungary albeit several centuries later. Your complaints would just make more sense if you were talking about Slovaks. The Serb, Vlachs and Ruthenians all had ethnostates right next door.
Woodrow Wilson hated, HATED the Habsburg Empire, and was the one pushing for its end.
"Austria was far more wicked than Germany. It existed in contradiction of the Mazzinian principle of the national state, it had inherited many traditions as well as symbols from the Holy Roman Empire (double-headed eagle, black-gold colors, etc.); its dynasty had once ruled over Spain (another bete noire); it had led the Counter-Reformation, headed the Holy Alliance, fought against the Risorgimento, suppressed the Magyar rebellion under Kossuth (who had a monument in New York City), and morally supported the monarchical experiment in Mexico. Habsburg - the very name evoked memories of Roman Catholicism, of the Armada, the Inquisition, Metternich, Lafayette jailed at Olmuetz and Silvio Pellico in Bruenn's Spielberg fortress. Such a state had to be shattered, such a dynasty had to disappear."
-Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Notice how Austria-Hungary was the only losing power that was dismembered. Wilson believed that all monarchy must go and replaced with happy democracies everywhere, any other Allie power saw the Empire as necessary because it kept south east europe from plunging into chaos and a balance to Germany and Russia, which would otherwise would make a grab for Europe. Hm I wonder what happened afterwards in the 20th century?
So I blame pic related.
Wilson was one of the worst American presidents and I hope he burns in Hell.
He also introduced income tax
that was the main line that went extinct with Charles II, the one that ruled victorian era Austria was Habsburg-lorraine.
Looking at his track record, his domestic as well as foreign policies were pretty disastrous for the 100 years that followed. But also he was a child of his time and maybe other presidents would have made similar decisions. Nobody could have fucked Europe up as much as he did tho.
The funny thing is their Capetian rivals in France were more inbred because they would marry their cousins consistently, but Charles V had bad genetics which doomed the Habsburgs with the Founder Effect.
DELET
fuck the habsburgers
Hated Habsburgs because he
>morally supported the monarchical experiment in Mexico
God this pissed me off
t.spic
>tfw born too late to bully the italians with the frogs
It hurts Luigi, it really does
>tfw born too late to bully the austro-hungarians
i know
m.youtube.com
Democracy is one of the worst forms of government, if not the worst. This video simply scratches the surface. I recommend that you read Plato's works if you genuinely believe that democracy is in any way something good.
Wilson was a petty socialistic piece of revolutionary shit. He deserves to burn in hell.
>tfw Mejico never had the protection of Napoleonic France and Austria from Anglo-American aggression.
Might watch it later, but I agree for sure. Democracy is incredibly flawed and a horrible form of government. But we simply don't have anything better available to us. As Winston Churchill put it, "Democracy is the worst form of government - except all the others that have been tried."
This is not exactly a theoretical affair. We have a vast historical record and history has not been kind to absolute monarchies. I don't think any are left apart from the Arab countries and the Vatican. And both are not exactly shining examples for anything.
I think democracy is the right idea, but people are generally not capable of handling it properly. Switzerland is an incredible case study, where people will often vote *against* populist agendas (like decreasing taxes, restricting minority rights, etc). But it's a small country with hundreds of years of experience, democratic culture and intense civic education. You can't take people out of an authoritarian government with authoritarian structures and mindsets and expect them to do well in a democracy (hence why most of the Arab Spring has been walked back since).
It's idealistic for sure, but again: If you know something with a better historical record - please tell, I'm all ears.
So far I'm leaning towards our democracy simply being very young (exactly 100 years old in total, 63 years old in terms of the Second Republic). Give it a few centuries and let's see where it goes. Monarchies have had thousands of years to refine and still came crashing down after all.
But we just elected a new Kaiser user. We can pause democracy for a decade or so, until we are not completely fucked anymore.
You sound immature
Democracy is a sinking ship, and the crew has been thrown overboard by the passengers
>we just elected a new Kaiser
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha, this made me fucking laugh
multiculturalism
>But we just elected a new Kaiser user.
How so?
>We might even
Should't that imply that there could ahve been a union later on, but wasn't a given.
At least that si teh way I meant it.
It was the fucking Hungarians dishonoring the spirit of the compromise. Has there been a more self inflicated damage addicted group that Hungary?
You have to be eternally grateful to based Basti for making this possible.
>Plebeians electing other Plebeians and pretending to do governance.
Kurz is a cuck, Kickl is our only hope
Got anything smarter to say, Burger?
And he didn't have to let him come to power. But he did.
Shouldn't have trusted the protestant krauts, we'd be having a Habsburg-led EU by now if you didn't listen to them.
Yeah I find it extremely funny that you put your hopes on mere politicians that have short term mentality and an inferior soul to any Sovereign that have come before them. Thats why I personally think common folk don't have the right to rule themselves, if they cannot rule over their own lives, Just look at 99% of Jow Forums do you think they should rule? most of them live on the razor's edge of life and suicide.
I see. Holy shit, a personal union between Deutsches Reich and Österreich-Ungarn would indeed have been crazy.
How exactly is the idea that people should earn respect and status and don't deserve them by birthright immature?
>Democracy is a sinking ship, and the crew has been thrown overboard by the passengers
Possible. We live in interesting times for sure. I still see a conceptual advantage though. In a liberal democracy you can openly advocate for authoritarian rule and ~50% of people can even switch rulers. Under authoritarian rule you cannot openly advocate for democracy and short of a violent overthrow there's no way to get another ruler. This to me is the biggest strength and appeal of liberal democracies. Regardless of whether I happen to be pro democracy or pro authritarianism, I'd rather live in a society where my freedom to speak up and vote for change doesn't depend on who's in power. Extreme left dictatorships are exactly has horrible as extreme right dictatorships. Let's not roll the dice on who ends up on top for the Fourth Reich.
>gets cancer from depleted uranium
Monarchy has been acknowledged as the very best form of government by many of the greatest thinkers of western civilization, ranging from Plato, to Aristotle, to Thomas Aquinas to Joseph de Maistre and many many others. Historically speaking, monarchies lasted for more than four thousand years as the established form of government in most countries. Democracies have not faced the same hardships and such fierce revolutionary opposition as the monarchies of the American and French revolutions and onwards. Democracies in the West and East are already failing due to the greed of their own politicians (among countless other reasons) who do not have a long-term interest in preserving their country and its prosperity, as their positions are not acquired for life and nor are they hereditary. In the long run, the politician has absolutely zero reason to work for the good of his country instead of his own material wealth. Democracy has not been subject to nearly as harsh conditions as most monarchies have been and as it is right now under not-so harsh conditions, and even then it manages to be such a mess. It is also very difficult for a democracy to have long-term goals when every single plan is thrown out the window whenever a new party comes to be in charge, see pic related. Political parties and elections in general also divide the population into ideological camps which put half the country at risk of war with its other half.
1/2
Democracy also struggles with multiculturalism, as it is not unified in purpose but instead gets bogged down in petty ethnic conflicts which can be observed in the West right now through the Muslim voting patterns or in America the negro voting patterns, which are heavily ethnocentric, though of course I have to note that Muslims are not all one ethnicity, but they very much behave like it when it comes to pursuing their group interests. If you get rid of voting, establish a proper hierarchy, create hereditary positions such as a baron instead of a mayor and get the unintelligent masses to cease giving a shit about affairs of state, your country's ideological and ethnic polarization will be heavily reduced and the merit of those that we consider statesmen will also increase (as they will have a reason to give a damn about their position and preserve it for the future generations), corruption will go down and things will drastically improve. This failed experiment of democracy has to be wiped off the face of the Earth if mankind is to ever achieve a greater purpose than what is currently being promised by your average political party's campaign.
2/2
Man, get that Anglo/Franco enlightenment thinking out of your head, its honestly quite fucking disgusting.
>monarchy is best
Sure it is, faggit
Are you such a simpleton that you cannot differentiate between institution and individual?