@@ebanydwayne1357 its really not. Like he said The Uk canibalised both the Canadian and Indian Economies and The Japanese canibalised the South Korean one. All 4 were already in the top 10 or Top 5 so its easy to see, how Brazil would do well.
Here's a suggestion that hits closer to home - What if the Netherlands kept the Moluccas and West Papua away from Indonesia (they can be independent or a part of the "Koninkrijk"), just that they aren't part of Indonesia
More like how africans cant get their shit together and blame it on colonialism. South Korea and Taiwwan were completely destroyed by japan, their female population used as sex slaves and so much of their natural rsources extracted and used for the war economy. Yet in just 50 years they grew by more than 10000% in GDP and 50% in population. It takes stability, good education and a clear vision and plan to grow in wealth, the Africans, Indian subcontinent, malasia and indonesia just dont seem to be capable of.
@@drksideofthewal we know how it happened tho, who are you quoting? Industrialisation and the great divergence is incredibly well documented. It’s not colonialism, it’s industrialisation.
@@maxdavis7722 Yes, we do know how it happened. Two points of disingenuity on your part already. 1. Pretending not to understand how scare quotes work. 2. Presenting "the great divergence" as something that has nothing to do with colonialism... when colonialism is specifically referenced by sociologists as one of the main factors. I understand people of European decent being ashamed of how they got their wealth, and wanting to think it was just g̶e̶n̶e̶t̶i̶c̶ s̶u̶p̶e̶r̶i̶o̶r̶i̶t̶y ingenuity, but let's not rewrite history. You may now feign confusion.
The fact that most countries double or triple their populations but barely change their GDP, essentially becoming poor countries on a per capita basis, just shows how unprofitable Colonialism was towards the end of the 19th century. It was highly profitable at first, as Spain looted Aztec and Inca gold, and later, when tobacco, spices, and cotton were being exported. But, by the 19th century, prices for these commodities crashed, making colonies net-consumers of resources after you count the military and naval expenditures and various rebellions, famines, and epidemics. The most profitable colony ever- India, stopped being profitable by the 19th century for Britain. It was still extracting a lot of resource out of it, but it was also spending fortunes building the infrastructure, maintaining its army there and putting down rebellions and even more money maintaining its navy and fighting other European powers like France and Russia to keep them away from Indian borders and away from controlling naval passages to it. The myth of how Colonialism made Europe wealthy doesn't stand up to facts (again, after that enormously profitable early stage of looting, of course).
You forgot the European colonies/concessions within Cina. They look insignifficant on the map, but many of them are now major population and industrial centers of China.
America also had Liberia. So we aren't just adding Philapines to USA we are adding Liberia, Micronesia, Nauru and some more. But most of the economy miliaty and landmass is just USA and Philapines.
Very interesting idea, could you also make this again except the map is from 1938, before Germany took any land from other countries? I'm sure it would be very very interesting.
huh. kinda a long drawn out video. but what of the internal/external geopolitical implications??? (what my brain was thinking throughout the entire vid)
So what you are saying is that we should implement this idea? I'd even give up Alsace-Lorraine for it (because I'll admit it, France looks weird without it😛).
didnt you forget the border correction in south america? Namely ecuador and Peru. Its not reaaaaaly noteworthy but on a geograohy and statisitics video, i think it should be be noted
If there’s any conclusion I could make from this, it’d be that decolonization actually benefited the European taxpayer in the short term, as holding onto the colonies would’ve been expensive, as their possessive governments would’ve had to increase the standards of living or face insurrection. The whole rush to decolonize was kind of unethical in how Africa, India, and other regions were left in ruin, but ig the alternative would be the colonizing nations still maintaining possession of their colonies for much longer, which is also pretty unethical.
It’d probably be chaos, now that all these undeveloped regions have a majority vote in highly developed economies there’s likely going to be a lot of wealth distribution if these states hold together at all. Also for the minorities under the less nice governments of China and Russia bad times await
@@NBrixH scandinavians being seperate makes more sense as we're quite distinct from the germanics in central europe. It would also make sense to group slavic speaking people into South Slavs, Central Slavs and Eastern Slavs
For future videos like this, it would be awesome if you started of with an uncolored map and filled it in as you went. With so many global empires having to share colors with minor nations they have no direct affiliation to, it becomes really hard to spot the parts of the map you're actually talking about.
@Hotmen _pro_ Rivalries wouldn't carry over from 1914, so the EU and even NATO would still exist, they might be a little bit smaller due to Russsian influence being more prominent as they are much bigger but apart from that the world is the same
(Syria was calculated for the Ottomans, I just accidentally wrote it down for France) Thank you all for watching! To support the content consider leaving a like and a comment, it really does help the channel grow! For weekly (alternate) history content, consider subscribing to the channel!
@POSSIBLE HISTORY. What if America went full manifest destiny. Purchase of western Canada. after the American civil war. Purchase and state hood of English Caribbean and English Belize and English Guyana after ww1. Purchase of Greenland and Falkland islands. after ww2. Annexation of northern Mexico. in WW1. Full annexation and Commonwealth status of Spanish Caribbean after Spanish American war. as kind of a part 3 to your what if Britain formed the Imperial Federation and European union in the 50's. maybe a part 4 combining all 3 to what the differences would be Today.
@POSSIBLE HISTORY. What if America went full manifest destiny. Purchase of western Canada. after the American civil war. Purchase and state hood of English Caribbean and English Belize and English Guyana after ww1. Purchase of Greenland and Falkland islands. after ww2. Annexation of northern Mexico. in WW1. Full annexation and Commonwealth status of Spanish Caribbean after Spanish American war. as kind of a part 3 to your what if Britain formed the Imperial Federation and European union in the 50's. maybe a part 4 combining all 3 to what the differences would be Today.
Idea: Overlay all of the borders of every known empire that we have maps of, then where two or more areas overlap create a new country. Think of how those new regions would work geographically and politically. I would watch that video.
Please make more of these videos. Could you please make a what if 1444 borders came into the modern day. Gotta get those paradox gamers somehow I know that would be a whole lot more work, so just go with your best guesses
My country doesn't exist (well, technically it exist but at the time it was more like the Holy Roman Empire, a mess of different duchies with a king trying to keep everything together) and what was present was at war against England at the lowest time you can start an Europa Universalis IV game.
We probably will never see united Germany as Austria preferred to had more minor states that are easily controlled to have a huge United German country, but it would be interesting to see video what if Germany united under Austria
@@secretname4190 an oversimplified outlook. If Austria unified all Germans it would be beaten in a pan-european effort against them within a year (kinda like revolutionary France but weaker). And that's not even including the reality check that the Hungarians would never allow to incorporate any Germans without compensation. The empire would fall into a civil war if it just annexed Bavaria, and one that the Germans probably wouldn't win.
@@secretname4190 excuse me? What do you mean they would "crush" the Hungarians? Are they just going to purge all of the hungarian landowning nobles preemptively, or wait for the nobles to proclaim their own king? And I would like to remind that Austrians have already needed to call on Russia for help to defeat a Hungarian revolt not even 20 year prior, as they weren't capable of doing that themselves.
@@secretname4190 However, i do agree it would need to be a slow process *if* all the stars aligned and it did actually happen. But that's out of character, Austria hasn't been interested in german domination since they lost their HRE.
@@secretname4190 valid point! But it still doesn't mean the unification is imminent, likely quite the opposite. I see a world with Prussia being brought back to the status of a regional power, losing Silesia, and perhaps having some changes in the government. Obviously it wouldn't unite Germany. But as for Austria... I just don't see them eating their cake and having it too. The biggest issue to me is that I don't see what political force in the country would want to include both Germany and Hungary in the empire. The Habsburgs would be in the most comfortable position they could dream of, having influence over every country from Denmark to Sicily, so why would they feel the need to get even more? Contrary to what you've said, Europe can not only coordinate a coalition, but is more willing to do so than ever before. Look at the Napoleonic wars, the Crimean war, and the Congress System allowing for coordinated foreign policies. Finally, in our timeline Austria was the great protector of the independence of smaller states and status quo. Taking a 180° change in this policy is equally as likely as them establishing a communist regime.
Neither did bolivia kinda It was disputed territory, both had claims over it, hell even Argentina had some claims But yeah generally it’s depicted as part of bolivia so makes sense
What if France was carved up after the Napoleonic Wars and everyone got a piece of France that would be interesting with Russia Prussia and Austria in their future coming Wars
The Second Napoleonic War electric bogaloo... But it depends at what time does France get carved up? If its after Napoleon abdicates then mostly likely Napoleon return like otl but more intense as the people of France would be in full support of Napoleon.
We would probably need to get the great powers not to fear eachother cause Russia wanted a strong france to balance the uk and austria Austria wanted a strong france to balance the uk russia and prussia The uk just didn't want to deal with the continent anymore and france was really what allowed it cause france wanted to have some form of dominance in europe while the uk just wanted to focus on a thing called empire
Israel deserve to exist and for everyone's knowledge that no one wants to hear it's Israel's land not palestine's it wasn't even called Palestine the Romans give it the name after the Roman Jewish Wars
Here's a fun idea to calculate, what if modern day UK had every piece of territory they had ever owned. I.E. British Empire + North Sea Empire + Angevin Empire etc.. to just see how OP a country could possibly get
@@Emanon... Technically the first kingdom it held was England, then Denmark then Norway. Thus it was an empire run by the king of England and therefore English territory
@@sh4dowveil749 "technically" doing all the heavy lifting here, don't you think? While Cnut officially created the empire, it was already defacto created by his father Sweyn Forkbeard. He was king of Denmark before becoming king of Norway and England.
@@Emanon... "Technically" is an amazing word, don't you think? Technically a hot dog is a sausage sandwich. It's bread, topped with various condiments (usually including ketchup) and sausage. Bread topped with a tomato based sauce and sausage also describes a pepperoni pizza. Therefore, technically speaking, pepperoni pizza is a type of sausage sandwich. Furthermore, by defining "sausage sandwich" as a subcategory of the hot dog instead of the other way around we can technically define pepperoni pizza as a type of hot dog. The North Sea Empire, ruled by a Danish born Danish king with a capital in Denmark, is technically an extension of England since Knut technically gained the title of "King of England" before he could inherit the title "King of Denmark" from his brother. I love these types of logical fallacies, they make life more fun.
Very nice. While really minor, I wouldve liked to see Denmark restored by having Iceland and the Danish West Indies restored to it. It wouldn't change much but still it would be nice to see.
I dont know if this was a mistake but when you mention the Portuguese empire your missed, Guiné-Bissau, cape verde, são Tomé e princepe, east Timor and Macau. These might not be extreamly relevant in terms of gdp, with the expection of macau, but its still more then 5 million people half of the current Portuguese population
Keep in mind that the fact ottoman GDP and population grow about the same is entirely because of Israel, which only contributed 9 million people but has 1/3 of the gdp of the new ottoman empire. Without it, the ottoman would follow pretty much the same trends as in Europe
Japan's colonialism was even worse than european one, yet their colonies (Korea and Taiwan) grew in wealth by almost 1000% in just 50 years. It is not colonialism fault if those nations are not wealthy it is their own. Even if colonialism didnt occur they would likely still not be as wealthy as western nations. They dont have the stability, drive and the vision to make a good plan and follow it to grow in welath.
@@mattia8327 It 100% is colonialism's fault lmao, not all colonies were the same, Korea and Taiwan were treated differently, than that of the African colonies held by Europe in Africa Under Japan, while the colonial rule was still brutal, Koreans and Taiwanese were still treated much better than a Congoloese person under Leopold's rule lmao. Koreans were literally recruited as officers into the IJA and there was an entire group of Taiwanese indigenous peoples known as the "Takasago Volunteers" who served under the IJA.
@@bobjosefuerte7516Botswana is wealthier than most African countries because they chose to not be stuck in the past and antagonize the whites. Many colonized peoples would have preferred to life under colonial powers like the British over their corrupt and inept leaders that they have today.
@@mattia8327 "They dont have the stability, drive and the vision to make a good plan and follow it to grow in welath" >despite the fact that they are increasingly growing in stability and wealth in the modern day after decades of dealing with the effects of civil war, political crisis, and many other issues >despite the fact that European colonialism exploited and destroyed the continent by making arbitrary border lines and conflicts due to their presence and manipulation >despite the fact that Africans were left uneducated and exploited due to European colonial governments rarely giving them any form of higher education and or skills, leading them to build their own unique systems and getting educated abroad Colonialism is not the only thing at fault either. The Cold War did not help much in stabilizing Africa or as a matter of fact literally any post-colonial holding, and there are several other complicated reasons as to why things are the way they are. But you are denying one of the most basic facts, that Colonialism is one of the biggest reasons as to why Africa and a lot of other nations are the way they are lol.
Also, Turkey itself isn't that developed, it depends on the comparison material. And I guess some rich regions from oil countries (Koweit, cities from Saudi Arabia) are also a boost.
British Empire returns, Rees-Mogg rejoices. French Empire returns, much revolting ensues. Russian Empire returns, much revolting ensues Philippines becomes a territory of the US again Turkey gets back the Ottoman Empire, much revolting ensues.
Can you do a video on Richard the lionheart on what if he survived and live longer because that would have changed a lot of history if he survived and surprisingly there's not a single video alternate history scenario on Richard the lionheart at all even though with his life would have changed a lot of things
Great Vid! I learned some things that i didn't knew I never realized that Rwanda and Burundi were part of german empire and not belgium before this war Never looked closely into map
i dont think it would have saved the central powers, but for the 1917 comparison it probably would have been more fair to include the territories the central powers would have seized from russia. i dont think it would have made things that much better for the central powers though
Gorbatjsov himself mentioned it in the 90th if i remember it correctly ...there was a...but ...germany out of nato i think it was or no placing nukes on german soil but correct me if i am wrong
@@redacted_lol yes, as far as i know they offered it in return for German neutrality (out of NATO or no Nukes) and for dropping all the USSRs or Russias debt in German banks. Germany already was struggling with the integration of the DDR so they chose not to do it. It still would be a interesting what if scenario.
There is one thing that I have to nitpick: you forgot to transfer part of Italy to Austria, which might be just enough to make Italy not gain, but lose overall GDP after the change. Northern Italy has a higher industrial value compared to southern Italy, though I don't know in my head if taking the lands formerly controlled by the Austro-Hungarian Empire would impact the GDP that much. I think though that this is an oversight and should've been included in the video.
oh we would most definitely be excited for you to divide the world up into language groups and compare them... definietely do it leyered tho, so first would be small sub-families i.e. South Slavic, West Slavic, West Germanic, etc... then Slavic, Germanic, Latin, etc
As a Filipino, considering how we will be retroceded to the US, I fully welcome the restoration of 1914 borders, if that means ending the curse of being Filipino
By 1914 the Congo wasn’t the nightmare fuel it was under the direct ownership of Leopold. Pretty shitty but not “holy fucking shit this place is literal hell on earth” level
@@sto1238 I'm not talking about leopold the second, I'm talking about the fact the congo is a country where the government has no control, it's all controlled by warlords and foreign governments armies.
Idk why but i see Germany letting its colonies be independent or they make the colonies part of Germany itself and give the people in colonies equal or as equal rights as they could give. Also Philippines becoming a state in the USA? This is assuming that the 1914 borders just appeared and nations didn't just collapse to civil war
I think for America they have the power to hold together since they’re really powerful and didn’t gain a ton of land. The Europeans are definitely in for a bad time.
Now I wonder how global rankings would look like if West and East Germany would be different countries? How far would West Germany drop in standing for population and economy? Where would East Germany appear on the lists?
@Yora Western Germany would remain at the same place. Eastern Germany has about 1/4 of population of modern Germany and the gdp per capital is lower. But India would have a bigger economy in a very few years.
@@prathamshrivastava1314 Pretty. While i can't See Britain being able to actually keep their New Lands, but if they did it would be a much bigger threat then China
I feel like you massively, massively underestimate the Ottomans here, as you can't just equally divide the GDP of a country like Saudi-Arabia per % of area annexed. That eastern coast holds the vast majority of the country's petroleum industry, which is responbile for about 2/3s of Saudi-Arabias exports.
grouping nations together is interesting but what about splitting them apart? how far could we realistically break apart nations into smaller states and what could it mean for the political climate of each region and the world?
@@Fusion_4000 then you didn't understand my comment. Consider for a moment we turn back time to whenever the previous video was posted and someone wrote in the comments they would like to see a video about "what if we had 1914 borders today" and then you came in to reply to that comment saying "just look up a map of 1914, there you go champ wasn't so hard" do you see how unhelpful you are being in that scenario? So even if I just wanted to see any country fractured, sure I could look up the HRE or Sengoku Jidai Japan, but I wanted everything cut to bits. To see a map like that I could totally find that by just looking up each country's subdivisions. but that isn't going to tell me what sort of ramifications that would have for the modern geopolitical climate. So you know, thank you but no thank you.
1.48 British empire is not a nation. It would be wise to stay away from WW1 and gradually dispense with the most populous domains. The Subcontinent and Subsaharan Africa. Thus, the empire is replaced by a commonwealth of GB, CAN, AUS, NZ, and strategic sparsely populated, thus easily manageable, lands like the Gulf states, Malta, Cyprus, Singapore, HongKong, 20% of SA around the Cape. At this point they aren’t colonies and you treat the whole commonwealth like the white dominions, with impetus for prosperity and economic growth.
I would like to see an alternative version of this video where puppets and domions and such count as there oen things instead of being dominated by there mother nation like irl. Cause, ya know its 1914 borders not 1914 diplomacy.
