What if Belgium Never Existed?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- Belgium is easily one of the weirdest countries in Europe to exist. It's a country that's ethnically, culturally, and linguistically polarized between French, Dutch and Germans, has no real historical identity beyond the past 200 years, got obliterated in both World War I AND World War II, and yet SOMEHOW still exists. So, why does it exist? And, what if, in an alternate timeline, Belgium never existed? Enjoy!
DISCORD: / discord
TWITTER: / joshsulhistory
INSTAGRAM: / josh.sullivan.history
MUSIC:
La Brabanconne: • Belgian National Anthe...
Wien Neerlandsch Bloed: • Netherlands / Países B...
Amsterdam Mars: • Amsterdam Mars
Marche de la Gendarmerie Belge: • Marche de la Gendarmer...
Unsere Marine: Unsere Marine: • Unsere Marine ⚓ [Germa...
Video Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
0:40 Background
4:55 Scenario
The people of dr congo rejoice
Well not exactly, they still would have to live under colonialism for like 70 years. Probably a better outcome than Belgium though…
@@josephinee.becker6406 exactly
@@josephinee.becker6406They probably would have been a German or British colony so slightly better outcome.
@@josephinee.becker6406anything but Belgium
they slaughtered the Congolese and then didn't even invest into the land after
In our timeline Sweden also wanted the Congo and considering that they are also a neutral country, many European powers would find it preferable rather than letting one of their rivals get it. So in a world without Belgium, we might have had Swedish Congo 😂
Belgium? You mean northern France, southern Netherlands, and small western portions of Germany. Other then those countries, it’s also the city state if The Hague.
Norther France, Soutern Netherlands and Western Rhineland-Westphalia lol.
True. I don’t know why anyone still believes in this so called nation of ‘Belgium’. It’s just France, Germany, Netherlands, and city state of The Hague.
The Hague is in the Netherlands you silly goose.
nah that aint belguim thats north western luxembourg
We can all agree at least Belgium doesn’t exist and it really just three countries there instead of the four.
Flemish is not a language, it is a dialect group of dutch.
a variant (West-Flemish) almost qualified to be, and is according to the French both West-Flemish and French-Flemish are languages
@@wcthunder6940 Yes it is indeed very distinct.
What if the Teutonic Order won the Battle Grunwald?
What if the Russian Monarchy was restored after the fall of the USSR?
Is there still a royal family though?
Yes but who is the rightful heir to the Romanovs is still in dispute. @@Wendeta-hq2cp
@@Wendeta-hq2cpyes. In fact the heir is actually heir to 2 separate thrones of Europe: Germany and Russia.
Edit: slight error. Maria is not heir to the German throne. Her husband is one Whilhelms great grandchildren from his sixth and youngest son.
The true German Heir is Georg Friedrich Prinz von Preussen (prince of Prussia)
@@Carpediem357
Ah cool!
@@Wendeta-hq2cp despite the efforts of the bolsheviks the Romanov family is still large enough to have a disputed headship
Suggestion Josh: What if Napoleón II survived?
So basically better Congo?
Another European nation would have colonized it instead. Congo has always been open for the grabs.
@@saladspinner3200 would have been better than Belgium
What if the Spanish Armada was successful?
What if the Anglo/French union actually happened?
What if Britain was inhabited by giants?
Angolo😂
what does the third one even mean lol
*VIDEO SUGGESTION:*
What if Joshua Norton actually became The American Emperor?
What if the smaller German states United without Prussia or Austria
@@BubbaJ18
Best Option is Bavaria and Saxony perhaps making an alliance backed by France in exchange for the Rhine, with many smaller German states convinced to by the prospect of taking land from Prussia?
Realistically a union would only work in terms of economy and diplimacy though, since Austria, Prussia and Britain have stakes in preventing the smaller states from growing in power.
10:50 that peace is so unrealistic. Why would such a minor war see so much land change hands
"What if Belgium never existed"
*life could be a dream, life could be a dream do do do do sh-boom!*
This video is an attack on my country, my identity and my people. Vers l'avenir, mes amis
A few notes: (1) France had a defensive doctrine before 1912. Plan 16 as opposed to the Offensive A Tout Prix plan 17. (2) if the Belgians were able to hold off the Germans and destroy their rails and 20% of their tunnels I assume the Dutch would be able to do even better and have a long history of strategic flooding. Maybe Germany wins but maybe it goes worse for them.
I doub that the dutch would do better,wil they fo good stopping Germany? Yeah butt their history is in floodings and bridge destruction belgium only really had railway so i belief they would be better at it
And if i remember correctly the Belgian rmstate railway company was more valuable than the dutch at the time due to greater industrialization in the south and therefor greater loaders on its railways
What if James Stuart the Old Pretender became King?
suggestion: what if the khedivate of egypt avoided british colonization?
This scenario AKA.
What if the Ducth were never Partitioned.
Netherlands Belgium and Luxembourg.
DUTCHLAND.
Then we finally would have better roads..
HOWDY JOSH! love your content ❤❤❤❤❤
What if the 1960’s Congo Crisis caused the DRC to collapse?
What if the HRE never existed and a unified German Kingdom was formed in its place instead?
@@Carpediem357
Well that technically happened (Kingdom of Germany) so in order to prevent the HRE I would say that either East Rome has a second wind or Italy unifies by itself (Lombards).
This leaves Italy to become the seat of Rome by itself and Remain independent, thereby resulting in Germany remaining Germany. The main issue is the Agnatic succesion which would crumble Germany and without, say, a title such as Holy Roman Emperor, the state would not be so important and therefore would end up overtaken by France.
If it does survive the Agntic succession would be dropped and thr basis of a centralized state would emerge probably, with some dynasty managing to strengthen central authority like the French ones did.
@@Wendeta-hq2cp Maybe the Lombards or Romans help unfiy them? And they place an heir of theirs on the throne and thus the agnatic succession wouldn't crumble or would be delayed further
@@Carpediem357
Well yeah, but the agnatic succession is kinda designed to crumble. Donno if you know, so I will mention it here:
The agnatic succession basically passed the land first to the head of the senior branch (brother of the king, perhaps even an uncle if the uncle lived long enough) and then, only after the old branch was done with, the land would end up distributed to the rest of the sons. Unlike primogeniture, which settles disputes, Agnatic succession does not, which is why these sons used to fight each other, or simply partition the land and go their separate ways, maintain some sort of alliance sometimes.
It was for this exact reason that the HRE became an electable seat, with the Prince-Electors having the privilege of primogeniture and therefore keeping their lands from crumbling.
The Agnatic succession would affect Germany btw, not Italy, since in this alternate timeline Italy may become the new HRE (and the seat would be electable), or East Rome takes over and they had primogeniture I'm pretty sure.
@@Wendeta-hq2cp so we'd have to find a way to make the Kingdom a Prince-elector system to start and then the german lands would have to be given titles and land like HRE did. Let's say they also are given a elevated status similar to Emperor of Rome like Charlemagne and Otto were given. What sort of title would work?? Emperor or King of the Germans? Or say if Rome gave them a elevated status after they became Christianized with a title like Little Romans?
@@Carpediem357
Well if Germany Christianized we'd Probably look at a Regnum Germania (or Regnum Teutonicorum if I wrote that correctly).
If the Agnatic succession stays, then the King of Germany would have to be elected through a prince elector system. If not, then perhaps Rome being the one needed to recognize the crown would enforce a proto-primogeniture structure, which would develop into proper primogeniture.
The Crusades might go better and also I imagine that the "Teuntonic State" covering the baltics and cutting off poland from the the Baltic sea would become part of Germany in this timeline.
I have no clue what would happen to Bohemia though, but I imagine it might end up Germanized.
The Congo would have faired better in this timeline.
Nah…. Don’t think so….. belgium also did great innovations to the congo, no néed to always bring up the négative things, think of the conquestadores, anyway, I’m belgian…..
@@maximilienleroux1704true
@@maximilienleroux1704"great innovations"? Fair. The wat they were able to cull the population could be described as "innovative"
That fact that Belgium is still here is mind boggling.
I'm still standing... Yeah yeah yeah!
Before getting Belgian Congo, King Leopold II wanted the Philippines but Queen Isabel ll of Spain at the time rejected his proposal haha.
He also tried to buy Crete from Greece. It would have been cool to have a Mediterranean colony to go to for the holidays!
Tldr. Britain thinks france cant have nice things.
No Talleyrand Plan? Sad.
Now, what if Belgium had been created in 1814 as a Secondgeniture of Austria (just like Tuscany) with Archiduke Charles as its king?
Josh Man. Idea: what if Napoleon's son aka Napoleon II live longer and become Emperor of France.
I think it would be possible thst France would be awarded Wallonia as compensation for the congo, being seen as a preservation of the balance of power. Also maybe some of French Africa (maybe Djibouti, or islands off the coast of East Africa, if not Madagascar itself) would be awareded to the Netherlands for the same reason.
Nice vid
i still hope the dutch would have a special military operation to liberate the dutch majority here in belgium
5:46 The French annexation of Wallonia is this alternate historians’ dream!😢
You didnt Stopped watching after realizzing we weren't going to gear anything pre 1500s or 1800
As a historian as well, i believe that the Russian bolshevik revolution would still happen because what year it is doesn't matter or contribute to the revolution. Only being at war for so long and then also losing it meant the revolution happened. This means that even in your timeline, the revolution happens because Russia still lost the war and still fought for a few years. It would still happen just earlier than in our timeline.
I don't think Germany would invade the Netherlands in that time line, because the then Queen Wilhelmina had an uncle-niece like relationship with Kaiser Wilhelm II. I don't think he would want to damage that
best video ever ngl, it made me subcrkib
Any Belgians here?
Me!
I’m Congolese Canadian, In Belgium right now wondering the same damn thing 😂
What a combination (no offense)
1830 was a mistake, flanders and the netherlands should reunite!
Dutch Waffles
What if Napoleon successfully manages to escape to America after losing the Battle of Waterloo?
As a Japanese Nertherlander once said “ Belgian aren’t a race!”
*Saxon Netherlander. She is a native Drentian of course.
Needless to say, the Southerners were -Pissed-
Very upset.
As a German I would invite our dear neighbours France and the Dutch to partition Belgium, as nobody needs it otherwise anyway.
bruh.
@smal750 Are you a Belgium citizen? 🤣 Wanna be ein DEUTSCHER STAATSBÜRGER? It’s GREAT.
You are missing some nuance here with the real history. Belgium also definitly had a historical identity beyond that past 200 years. There's the fact that Belgium was "sort of" united before this under the Spanish, Austrians Netherlands, which also kept them split from the north for about 500 years. You don't really put a lot of emphasis on how they were longer split than ever united. There was the Brabantian revolution too in 1789-90, which did establish a proto-"United-States-Of-Belgium". Then the Burgundians in the 15th century who first united most of the southern lowlands, though they also brought parts of the Netherlands into the fold too.
You forgot that there are also Luxembourgish down south near the border XD
As a belgian I will never understand my country and wonder why we exist but we eat the best fries in the world every friday so can’t complain
Best timeline
why not have Netherlands Join Central Powers in This Timeline?
Congo may be the China of Africa
Based on
They do have a common history of beeing a colony of Spain.
The Congo would be partitioned between France, Germany, Portugal and UK or given to the Netherlands as a neutral state.
In Spain, the same thing happens with the Catalans.
Germany would have a hard time invading France
What if it was all, just a dream?
they held resisted the germans for almost 4 years in ww1 they get not get obliterated, also have more cultural and historical identity than the US and many other countries which were founded in the timeperiod that Belgium was. 💀💀
YESSSSSSS! YESSSSSSSS!
So basically Kaiserreich ending but no commies
The Good Ending:
So you're saying THIS guy "roasted" possible history?? Nah man out of everything on the internet i never expected a beef between whos imaginary world of these man children is more "realistic"
Based video
I dare say a lot less blood might have been shed on the fields of Continental Europe.
Video idea:
What if the french revolution happens in britain instead of france
britain wouldnt have done shit
Your hate is immense@@smal750
Do what if goryeo still exsist today
No more Belgium!
Protestantism wasn't forced on the southerners (freedom of religion) and the Language Decision did not apply to Wallonia. The idea that the north wanted to turn the south into Dutch speaking protestants is a lie.
what if Lowlands were mountanious
Sorry but you are mixing up some stuff at 1:05. The hapsburg monarchy evolved over time, in the 1500 hundreds we were under SPANISH hapsburg. The revolt was against them, and then with the War of the Spanish succession we became Austrian in 1713, then owned by the French RIGHT BEFORE Napoleon.
Nice video but one thing is completely wrong russia would lose at most poland and lithuania. Germany offered such peace deals to russia in our timeline and with France defeated russia would want peace (Ok maybe germany pushes for a bit more like the rest of the baltics as they dont have to end the war with russia like in our timeline)
Why not give the Congo to the Dutch? The Dutch had some colonies in Africa before giving them to the British. So what if the British gave the Congo to the neutral United Kingdom of the Netherlands?
4:53 I'm sure that nothing like that would happe- oh wait The Germans did exactly that in both world wars
Part 2
i always knew the world would turn to chaos if belguim didnt exist now the world cant enjoy our free congo filled with french fries and waffles
Somehow
Good vid but you forgot a lot
I wonder and wish that every day
W Video
A perfect world doesn't exis-
Howdy Josh!
Honestly the best part of No Belgium would the fact that the E U probably wouldn't be as horrible as it is. Belgium, due to being so small, has the Washington D.C. syndrome. (aka has concentrated too much power)
That's, of course, assuming everything else stays the same.
What if Bulgaria never existed
10:45 - If war on the western front ended quickly within a year I doubt Germany would be interested in prolonging the conflict against Russia with the goal of taking so much land. In OTL they managed to occupy the rest of Baltic region and Ukraine only after Brest-Litovsk treaty with one of the main reasons to compenstate scarce resources for the still ongoing war effort by stripping them from occupied territories. With France allready surrendered, what the point for Germany and Russia to continue fighting? The both are major trade partners to each others, didn't had any significant feud before WW1 and had similar geopolitical goals in challenging Great Britain supremacy. So realistically I think they will just sign white truce with no border changes or create buffer state only out of Congress Kingdom of Poland. And after that maybe attempt to revive Treaty of Björkö that both Wilhelm II and Nicolas II showed interest in before as alliance with France became obsolete
My dream
WW1 and WW2 would’ve never happened
Good ending
Hi I’m Josh
Hi Josh, I’m Josh
What if Congo was a successful state
Do what if USSR won Polish-Soviet War
Challenge for Jush Sullivan History:
Don't make Germany win WW1 in every alternate history.
I mean it's kinda impossible. Reality is that *our timeline* is the exception. The Allies were woefully unprepared and got lucky thanks to dragging out the conflict and then having the US step in. Germany was simply too strong and Austria, the Ottomans and Bulgaria were good enough to sponge some of the forces of the Allies.
@@Wendeta-hq2cp The US intervention was very late in the war (1917) and was only relevant to the war in 1918 when the Germans were already losing to the Franco-British troops.
As a french, I don't hate to see what if Germany won WW1 scenarios (its alternate history after all), what bothers me is the fact that many think that Germany had the upperhand while clearly it was stalemate that favored the entente long term (with or without the US).
The poilus (french soldiers) fought like lions during the war, thats why Verdun was the bloodiest battle (french memo for the battle: 300 days, 300 nights, 300 thousands deaths for both sides).
And seeing so many peoples saying that France would be easy to conquer without its allies or worst, thinking they would surrender easily (I hate that joke) is to me either misunderstanding the french situation in the war or just a bad excuse for a surrender joke which (outside of WW2) isn't fair.
@@spatialex
The surrender joke is more because of WW2. Also mon ami, France suffered the most casualties and Germany, as Josh mentioned, did get pretty close to Paris in WW1.
The Entente was not favored by the prolonged conflict by much either. We are looking at 51 v 49 advantage for the Entente. US was the one to turn the tide since they had fresh forces to provide while Germany, getting resources from the east, was exhausted and wasn't able to move fast enough to intercept.
No US means a protracted conflict where the Central powers, now gaining resources again, can pull through and potentially gain a victory, even if a pyric one.
Based on what
Best world ever
no more Hercule Poirot
So good timeline?
What if Venice colonized?
Cool video, I liked most to all of it. Only 1 complaint, the people of Belgium tried to make a united Belgium for a long time before that. Every now end then there were some aims to get it. Also the name dates from ancient time. Lastily, really cool to think that if Belgium didn't exist, there may not have been a ww2.
As a Belgian I wish We stayed part of the Netherlands A united Netherlands would be an economic powerhouse
As a Belgian / Dutchman.. We would be unstoppable...
No
@@belgium_solo_vers Can we ask you why not?
@@ArienvanRijswijck He's scared of being a citizen of one of the most powerful countries in the world
@@Sphagetti__ haha , who knows.. But I get why alot of people get shocked by it .. We have a long complicated history with them , but eventually alot of people seem to use history as shield to dodge that idea.. And that's a shame , cause it has potential when you think about it. Eventually , people like to fight the idea with what they call "facts" , but in reality it's all about perspective. You can't change a fact , you can change your perspective.. besides that history has always 2 sides , based on perspective that's a fact that people seem to forget alot..
So thank belgium?
What if Brexit never happened?
U really french right now.
Suggestion: What if West Virginia never existed?
And no cringe EU Brussels
The Moment He Called Napoleon A *Weirdo* I Unsubscribed (I'm Not Addicted.)