Why is Germany always so Strong?

[Augarundus]

They've had the luck to produce fine leaders and the luck to be on a good geopolitical location. The latter is something that Serbia sadly didn't have.

Actually, their location is more a curse than a blessing. They're the piggy in the middle. They're stuck between France on one side and Eastern Europe, which in living memory was basically just Russia, on the other, and Italy lurking just a little while south. And like all of Europe, in this 'globalized' world, there's a lot of one-way migration. The Germans have been at the receiving end of many unfortunate mass migratory movements that generally ended in violence and upheaval, from prehistory to last month when it turned out Germany is having to accept more Middle Easterners and Africans than ever.

1) Minor note, but encouraging immigration is probably one of the most important strategic goals Germany should adopt today. Germany's population is set to decline very significantly in the next century - this is a major weakness of Germany's, and I expect its industrial sector to suffer. In the long-term, Germany's high-tech economy (like those of other westernized countries experiencing population decline, such as Japan) will probably make a transition to more mechanized, robot-intensive manufacturing (as they already have begun to) in order to displace the dwindling workforce. Either that or outsource manufacturing to other economies with more dynamic workforces (Nigeria, for example). Nanotechnology development could be a gamechanger, though, so I won't make any predictions. Nonetheless, in the short/midterm (the next half-century or so), Germany really should encourage as much immigration as possible.

2) There are obvious benefits to being isolated from threats (the US and Britain have natural geographic advantages that isolate them from serious threats, which has allowed them to pursue globe-spanning, ambitious policy goals without fear for their own backyards), but being threatened also has its own benefits. Germany has been forced to engage in serious competition with its nearby rivals - competition far more intense than Britain or the US. And this has prompted Germany in earlier times to become a military superpower - not because Germans are just evil (though this is not me being an apologist for Nazism, make no mistake), but because Germany must militarize for its own security. Germany's very precarious security situation begs it to be hawkish, which is why Germany must dominate its neighbors to survive (so that no one of its neighbors presents such a threat that it could dominate Germany - see: Napoleon). **


**The best analogy I can give is that of an industrial monopoly. Say that company A has a monopoly on the automobile industry. It has obvious advantages - because there are no competitors, it can afford to get lazy (its security situation affords it a great amount of freedom). But if company A exists in a highly competitive automotive industry, it must be innovative and aggressive to survive. Germany is in the latter situation (much like Russia and Iran - geographically insecure and surrounded by threats), whereas Britain and the US are in the former situation.

[Geanna]

Culture and location.

Including being very industrialized and organized.

[Geanna]

They've had the luck to produce fine leaders and the luck to be on a good geopolitical location. The latter is something that Serbia sadly didn't have.

Actually, their location is more a curse than a blessing. They're the piggy in the middle. They're stuck between France on one side and Eastern Europe, which in living memory was basically just Russia, on the other, and Italy lurking just a little while south. And like all of Europe, in this 'globalized' world, there's a lot of one-way migration. The Germans have been at the receiving end of many unfortunate mass migratory movements that generally ended in violence and upheaval, from prehistory to last month when it turned out Germany is having to accept more Middle Easterners and Africans than ever.

No one worries about Italy, partially because Italy can barely do anything outside of making a proper bowl of noodles and sauce. [Sorry Italy] Though yes, they've a somewhat shit location, it's also what has driven their cultural and political shifts throughout the centuries. There was a military threat both east and west, and being as industrialized and organized as they are, they could easily keep a buildup to deal with both. Germans have this special ingenuity about them it seems, they can build massive armies and run the entire country like a well oiled machine with ease, I can respect Germans for that, now if only my country could do that [kicks the Kremlin] Building an empire however, they're not so good at as they seem more often than not to take one more than they can chew and end up fighting on two fronts - but oh well.

[Augarundus]

A lot of people are pointing out things like "culture" (Protestant work ethic, basically) and "industrialism". That's fine, but it doesn't explain:

A) Why other countries that possess these same characteristics aren't equally powerful (Scandinavia is industrialized and Protestant - not home to great powers. Britain is industrialized and Protestant, but it's not as dynamic as Germany, nor did its army match Germany's at each nation's respective height).

B) Why these factors developed in Germany but not elsewhere. Why is Germany so industrially powerful and why is it so culturally obsessed with order and labor, but not France? Why not Italy or Russia?


These explanations ignore the structural, underlying factors for Germany's power - its geographic location. These are the factors that produce the above conditions that contribute to Germany's power. You're identifying the proximate causes of Germany's greatness (industrialism, culture, military might, etc.), but not the underlying causes (geography). It's akin to say that World War I was caused by Franz Ferdinand's assassination - while true, it's a very superficial explanation that ignores the factors that set up the war (nationalism, great power competition, etc.). It's not a useful explanation, because it doesn't tell us any broader, applicable information about the world (how do we avoid wars in the future? By not assassinating Archdukes of Austria-Hungary? That's not really a worthwhile explanation, anymore than "Germany's powerful because they're powerful", which is basically what this thread is saying).

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Deutschland, Deutschland über alles!
Über alles in der welt!
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält.
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt,
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles!
Über alles in der welt!

Will Horst-Wessel-Lied become the anthem again?

[Rio Cana]

Commenting on an above post, militarily Germany is surrounded by small nations. Austria, Czech Republic, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the Danes. None of those nations are a threat just like the Swedish and Norwegians.

France and Poland are really the only large nations that border them. And I do not think that the French or Polish want anything to do with invading Germany. But a really armed to the teeth Germany might worry them. Especially, if a German democratic nationalist party or leader takes power.

[Augarundus]

Commenting on an above post, militarily Germany is surrounded by small nations. Austria, Czech Republic, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the Danes. None of those nations are a threat just like the Swedish and Norwegians.

France and Poland are really the only large nations that border them. And I do not think that the French or Polish want anything to do with invading Germany. But a really armed to the teeth Germany might worry them. Especially, if a German democratic nationalist party or leader takes power.

At various times in their history, France and Poland have taken turns beating up Germany (at those times, I guess that would be "All the Little Germanies"). Austria was once a great power that had its fun fighting the Prussians, Italy was a threat at various points in time. The Dutch were once a concern, and the British could always blockade the coast and deny the Germans imports (as they did during the First World War, starving a considerable amount of German civilizations). Not far away, the Russians presented a massive military threat to Germany, and the Swedes killed a third of all Germans (civilians and all) during the 30 Years War.

Germany has been surrounded for all of its history by great powers vying for control, and each one of them has taken its turn invading Central Europe. In fact, one of the major explanations for Germany's aversion to republicanism and classical liberalism was its humiliation during the French wars of revolution and the Napoleonic wars. Only very recently has Germany become more secure (the United States, having occupied Europe and created the European Union, has effectively neutered Germany's neighbors, so Europe lives in a pretty benign climate). If writers like George Friedman are correct and Poland becomes a significant European power in the 21st century - aligned against a Russo-German alliance -, Germany will once again face a massive security threat, and, once again, this will require a militarily powerful, economically dynamic, and internationally aggressive Germany if it is to survive.

[Geilinor]

A lot of people are pointing out things like "culture" (Protestant work ethic, basically) and "industrialism". That's fine, but it doesn't explain:

A) Why other countries that possess these same characteristics aren't equally powerful (Scandinavia is industrialized and Protestant - not home to great powers. Britain is industrialized and Protestant, but it's not as dynamic as Germany, nor did its army match Germany's at each nation's respective height).

Scandinavia doesn't have the population to be as powerful as Germany and wasn't as affected by the world wars.

[Augarundus]

A lot of people are pointing out things like "culture" (Protestant work ethic, basically) and "industrialism". That's fine, but it doesn't explain:

A) Why other countries that possess these same characteristics aren't equally powerful (Scandinavia is industrialized and Protestant - not home to great powers. Britain is industrialized and Protestant, but it's not as dynamic as Germany, nor did its army match Germany's at each nation's respective height).

Scandinavia doesn't have the population to be as powerful as Germany.

1) Why is that? Why does Scandinavia have a smaller population? The answer is geography - Scandinavia doesn't have as much fertile land, which means that it's population is constrained to be unable to expand past a certain point (at least historically). Again, we're identifying the proximate causes here - "Why is Germany more powerful than Nigeria? Well, because Germany's richer!". While that's true, it doesn't answer the fundamental question of why Germany is richer, why Germany is more populous, why Germany is more technologically advanced or socially progressive. The answer is in Germany's geography.

2) Note that I gave the example of Britain specifically for this reason.

3) At one time, Sweden was arguably the most powerful nation in Europe, and killed a third of Germany's population.

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

A) Why other countries that possess these same characteristics aren't equally powerful (Scandinavia is industrialized and Protestant - not home to great powers. Britain is industrialized and Protestant, but it's not as dynamic as Germany, nor did its army match Germany's at each nation's respective height).

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Britain don't have anywhere near the population of Germany. Do you expect Sweden a country with under ten million people to match Germany a country with over 80 million in terms of industrial or military might?

B) Why these factors developed in Germany but not elsewhere. Why is Germany so industrially powerful and why is it so culturally obsessed with order and labor, but not France? Why not Italy or Russia?

Because the idea that Germans are so culturally obsessed with order and efficiency is a myth caused largely by WW2 and the Nazis. Germans aren't particularly efficient or hard working peoples, if you want hard working peoples look at South Koreans "where the average employee works 2,357 hours per year–that’s six-and-a-half hours for every single day of their life."¹ or about 45 hours a week, for the EU (except Britain and Malta) work weeks are capped at 48 hours² meaning the German who works the most barely works more than the average Korean. IIRC Americans also have crazy long work weeks compared to Europeans. French do actually have pretty short work weeks but compared to the rest of Europe they aren't that insane.

Asking why Germany is more powerful than Sweden is like asking why the US is more powerful than Canada, or why a 7 foot boxer is more powerful than a 5th grader. It isn't hard to be stronger than someone when you are many times their size.

¹http://www.forbes.com/2008/05/21/labor-market-workforce-lead-citizen-cx_po_0521countries.html
²http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#European_Union

[Rio Cana]

Read somewhere that while Poland does business with Germany and all seems friendly that deep down they do not trust the Germans. Having said that, they also do not trust the Russians. Generally, they have excellent ties and trust the Romanians.

Found this article from this year in which it seems Poland-Romania-Turkey are cooperating on security issues. This could prove to be the making of a powerful future Eastern European alliance inside of NATO.
Article - http://www.agerpres.ro/english/2014/05/ ... g-08-32-07

This on Polish-Romanian Strategic partnership.
http://www.pism.pl/events/conferences/P ... -Community

[Geilinor]

A) Why other countries that possess these same characteristics aren't equally powerful (Scandinavia is industrialized and Protestant - not home to great powers. Britain is industrialized and Protestant, but it's not as dynamic as Germany, nor did its army match Germany's at each nation's respective height).

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Britain don't have anywhere near the population of Germany. Do you expect Sweden a country with under ten million people to match Germany a country with over 80 million in terms of industrial or military might?

B) Why these factors developed in Germany but not elsewhere. Why is Germany so industrially powerful and why is it so culturally obsessed with order and labor, but not France? Why not Italy or Russia?

Because the idea that Germans are so culturally obsessed with order and efficiency is a myth caused largely by WW2 and the Nazis.

The idea of German order and efficiency comes from Prussia's military.

[Geilinor]

Read somewhere that while Poland does business with Germany and all seems friendly that deep down they do not trust the Germans. Having said that, they also do not trust the Russians. Generally, they have excellent ties and trust the Romanians.

Found this article from this year in which it seems Poland-Romania-Turkey are cooperating on security issues. This could prove to be the making of a powerful future Eastern European alliance inside of NATO.
Article - http://www.agerpres.ro/english/2014/05/ ... g-08-32-07

This on Polish-Romanian Strategic partnership.
http://www.pism.pl/events/conferences/P ... -Community

They trust the Romanians because Romania can't do anything to Poland but Germany and Russia partitioned it.

[Augarundus]

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Britain don't have anywhere near the population of Germany. Do you expect Sweden a country with under ten million people to match Germany a country with over 80 million in terms of industrial or military might?

Britain has a population that is quite similar in size to Germany's, which I why I gave that example. I already responded to this in my post directly above yours.

Because the idea that Germans are so culturally obsessed with order and efficiency is a myth caused largely by WW2 and the Nazis. Germans aren't particularly efficient or hard working peoples, if you want hard working peoples look at South Koreans "where the average employee works 2,357 hours per year–that’s six-and-a-half hours for every single day of their life."1 or about 45 hours a week, for the EU (except Britain and Malta) work weeks are capped at 48 hours2 meaning the German who works the most barely works more than the average Korean. IIRC Americans also have crazy long work weeks compared to Europeans. French do actually have pretty short work weeks but compared to the rest of Europe they aren't that insane.

The German "obsession with order" is not a myth. The goosestepping caricature is, but be belief in the importance of rule of law is deeply ingrained in German culture. It is ingrained in most other European cultures as well, and forms the foundation of post-Enlightenment government.

And my point here wasn't to defend these as actual reasons why Germany is so much better than other countries. These are reasons that other people in the thread are giving - my question is that, assuming these are true, why would they have developed in Germany and not elsewhere? And, assuming that they have developed elsewhere, why still is Germany more powerful?

Clearly, Ordnung and Arbeit are not why Germany is so powerful.

Asking why Germany is more powerful than Sweden is like asking why the US is more powerful than Canada, or why a 7 foot boxer is more powerful than a 5th grader. It isn't hard to be stronger than someone when you are many times their size.

Which is why I answered that in the post above yours. I'm not an idiot - I obviously realize that Germany is bigger than Sweden and China is larger than Mongolia.

Read somewhere that while Poland does business with Germany and all seems friendly that deep down they do not trust the Germans. Having said that, they also do not trust the Russians. Generally, they have excellent ties and trust the Romanians.

Which is why Poland is a close ally of the United States - they are surrounded by two nations that they do not trust and that have taken turns beating the shit out of them for the last three hundred years (Germany and Russia). If Poland wants to avoid another set of partitions, it needs an ally who is willing to guarantee its independence against the hungry beasts to its left and right.

At the same time, Germany is increasingly dependent upon Russia for supplies of natural gas, and Russia is increasingly dependent upon Germany for its technology and manufacturing capacity - the natural basis of an alliance framework is taking shape. Poland does not want to see its two historical adversaries form a political alliance (let's not forget the last time they did so).

[Constaniana]

Lacking a functional sense of humor, the only thing left for your average German is to devote themselves totally to doing a good job.

[Constaniana]

Because David Hasselhoff is strong, and all Germans try to emulate the patron saint of Germany.

The face of power and efficiency.

[Libertarian California]

This brings up the a similar question. Demographically, Austria and Germany are the same. The only difference is Catholicism vs. Protestantism. But yet, Austria never amounted to shit. Does religion really make that much of a difference?

[Freiheit Reich]

Culture and location.

Agree. They have an excellent education system, their value of technical high schools places them above the USA. They realize that college is not for everybody and that technical skills are also important for a nation's economy.

They won't stay strong though if they keep importing uneducated people that hate western values from uncivilized nations. They need to tighten up their immigration rules and only allow educated immigrants into their nation, preferably those from nations that don't hate evil westerners.

I suggest reading 'The Bell Curve' to understand the importance of IQ on society. Immigration rules can either improve or weaken a nation's IQ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_and_intelligence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve

[Ifreann]

So one historian may overzealous in associating historical Germans with the Nazis. You've not exactly highlighted a problem here.

You obviously are not reading what I am saying. I mentioned only one as an most famous example, I also said there are a guard of such historians in Germany besides him.

Yes, well, you saying something and me believing it are two different things.

[Rio Cana]

Read somewhere that while Poland does business with Germany and all seems friendly that deep down they do not trust the Germans. Having said that, they also do not trust the Russians. Generally, they have excellent ties and trust the Romanians.

Found this article from this year in which it seems Poland-Romania-Turkey are cooperating on security issues. This could prove to be the making of a powerful future Eastern European alliance inside of NATO.
Article - http://www.agerpres.ro/english/2014/05/ ... g-08-32-07

This on Polish-Romanian Strategic partnership.
http://www.pism.pl/events/conferences/P ... -Community

They trust the Romanians because Romania can't do anything to Poland but Germany and Russia partitioned it.

Romania also let Polish troops escape via Romania. Supposedly, read somewhere
that they offered to get directly involved in Poland against Germany but they were turned down. I have no
idea if that fact is true since cannot find secondary sources on it.

[Northern Arcadian Empire]

This is why German is so strong (many have been said before)

1. Location- good land for farming, highly defendable territory (hills, mountains to the south), Rivers for industry, also right in the middle of Europe, a cross road for many ancient trade routes so it was easy to spread ideas quickly
2. Resources- (like I said before good soil for farming), large coal deposits, large iron deposits, wood for houses, etc
3. History- Germany has always had a history of warfare, and through out this historical period of warfare they have adapted to become great warriors and accept warfare into there culture.
4. Scientific achievement- because of the war like history Germany has always been one step ahead of others in weaponry examples- German immigrants created the Kentucky Rifle, the first bolt action rifle, automatic weapons, great tanks.
5. Industry- when WWI and WWII came rolling around, Germany was already head in industry and scientific advancement. They also believe in quality wins all,

[Nazis in Space]

The face crotch of power and efficiency.

Fix'd.

[Baltenstein]

[
3) At one time, Sweden was arguably the most powerful nation in Europe, and killed a third of Germany's population.

That's a gross misrepresentation.

[Republika Srpska Party]

Germany might lost World War II, but they were far the best. Just look at their Ground Force during WWII, and the greatest tank in that era, THE MAUS.

[Quintium]

Minor note, but encouraging immigration is probably one of the most important strategic goals Germany should adopt today. Germany's population is set to decline very significantly in the next century - this is a major weakness of Germany's, and I expect its industrial sector to suffer. In the long-term, Germany's high-tech economy (like those of other westernized countries experiencing population decline, such as Japan) will probably make a transition to more mechanized, robot-intensive manufacturing (as they already have begun to) in order to displace the dwindling workforce. Either that or outsource manufacturing to other economies with more dynamic workforces (Nigeria, for example). Nanotechnology development could be a gamechanger, though, so I won't make any predictions. Nonetheless, in the short/midterm (the next half-century or so), Germany really should encourage as much immigration as possible.

A nation is a group of people and a state is the political and diplomatic fiction that rules that nation. You should make a strong distinction between the two and acknowledge that the nation is what has caused Germany to be so productive. Germany is not prosperous and powerful because it has a good state - it has a good state and is prosperous and powerful because it has the right nation. The Germans are a naturally productive nation. If you were to switch the population of Germany with that of Somalia, you would find that Somalia would become prosperous and powerful and Germany would collapse in a matter of weeks. I think you should step away from the purely economic argument and look at it from a more cultural perspective. Some cultures build, other cultures destroy. Some cultures encourage productivity and security of property, other cultures encourage lethargy and theft. Mass immigration, especially from outside Europe, will only hurt Europe tremendously in the long run.