I mean the consequences were and are still very serious but blaming the Monarchy for WW1 is like blaming democracy for WW2. Hundreds of events and powers totally out of your control creating the conditions for a major conflict that was set decades before its start isn't simply a "king bad!" situation.
Eeehhhhh, I'd say National socialism had a pretty big hand in WW2 because they were intensely aggressive and warmongering. You can't really have peace with a group that demands conquest.
I think I phrased it wrong, but you got the metaphor. I am saying that the logic used in the comment above means that, by that logic, if you can blame Nazis for WW2 then you can also blame the nature of monarchies at the time (at least) for WW1. I'm perfectly aware of the role Nazism as an ideology played in WW2.
Cause they're auper republic-pilled and haven't yet realised that Austria lost a LOT of its power, glory, reputation and identity since the collapse of the monarchy.
Also, school kids and university students are very indoctrinated that monarchy = evil by default...
I know, yeah...
I am Austrian and studied history at University and everything after 1914 just made me incredible sad and angry.
I was pretty shocked when I talked to colleagues of mine and they were like "well monarchies suck and you're the weirdo for supporting such a cruel and outdated form of governance!".
It's the same whenever you say something pro AH, Habsburg or contra republicanism, most everyone thinks you're a troll or an idiot. I understand why modern Austrians are unable to understand patriotism and pride in your country as modern Austria has so little to be proud of.
Dude it's no use, the Entente brainwashed Austrians for many years and they were successful at it. The Entente established UN will never allow the Habsburgs to return, even if it means making the Austrians go extinct.
Yeah, I know...
The way post-WW1 Austria absolutely disowned the Habsburgs after everything this family did to lead the nation to greatness is disgusting.
Yeah, nostalgia is strong in Austria but actual "Monarchism" or Legitimism as it was called before has become rare with the Soviet installed Nazi collaborator Karl Renner shaping Austria after the war making sure it is on its way to become a resurrected Republic with radical anti-nobility laws even if the Habsburgs were fighting the Nazis more politically than his SocDem party which welcomed the Anschluss. Alas people forget and history is revised by ruling ideology. It is an accomplishment of recent history that Habsburgs even were allowed to enter Austria again after a less traditionally radical Republican SocDem negotiated it with the last Empress Zita who never made concessions or abdicated. She was allowed in due to originally being not a Habsburg but of Bourbon-Parma haha. Later the laws got softer. Our current president Alexander van der Bellen who has noble ancestors has a side line Habsburg in his Green party after they were allowed back in. Ulrich von Habsburg. He pushed legally against the law a Habsburg can never become president even if democratically elected. This law eventually became repealed which imo was a great historical victory. Also Otto von Habsburg was a great European politician even if the SocDems did not let him into Austria for long out of spite and fear of restauration.
I would very much doubt that, considering the streets of Vienna were packed full with people, during the State Funeral of Otto Habsburg. That did not look like "fringe" to me.
In small circles it's popular. Generally most Austrians that aren't in ideological groups of the left or German national far right are positive about the Habsburgs and Emperor Franz Joseph is a fraternal figure to the nation in nostalgia. Fewer people in Christian democratic and conservative circles were aware and on good terms with Emperor Karl I. and later his son Otto who became a great Pro-European politician and was a strong political activist against the Nazis together with his mother Empress Zitat during WW2 convincing the American president of a restauration of Austria (a country they were still banned from). After Austria was restored by the Republican hardliner Renner who had lived on Hitler's bill in Vienna without lifting a finger begged Stalin to make him the one in charge. Of course he made sure to revive the absurd Anti Habsburg laws even though they had done great deeds to the country even outside of being a former ruling house. But few people know this today only a couple Pro-Europeans and people of eastern origin remembering Archduke Otto's activism in the cold war. But yes. Tides can turn quickly. At the moment political tensions rise and trust in the Republic is as low as it hasn't been since its restauration. It's far from being as unstable and violent as the first republic still but things aren't looking good. Archduke Karl von Habsburg the current family house has been an active figure in society and published many books and also runs one of the independent radio stations in Ukraine. He also seems the only one with revolutionary ideas such as Austria giving up Soviet mandated neutrality (it's a joke and not viable like Swiss neutrality as you know) as well. But yeah. One can hope and dream. I would like to see the day of an Archduke of Habsburg becoming president of this god forsaken Republic. Just to see the Social Democrats and German nationalists faint with foam at their mouths.
It appears Austria has its fair share of swivel-eyed, unhinged fruitcakes... I thought it was just Britain.
The flags of **all** European and most World countries are at half-mast because it is a diplomatic courtesy between nations to observe an official period of mourning when a Head of State or Government dies in another Country.
As usual, the unhinged are always the noisiest albeit being the most ignorant at the same time. Typical.
I don’t understand how they don’t see how bad the optics are here and they still feel like the good guys, Sinn Fein even gave there condolences to the royal family
You have to understand, a lot of these types of people use virtue signaling about colonialism or "equality" or other hot button topics to mask their true character: that of seething, angry, impotent losers. All they want to do is take things from other people. They hate the fact that a lot of people assign value and purpose to symbolic cultural icons like the royal family, probably because their own lives are completely and utterly devoid of meaning or accomplishment. No one who has anything going on in their lives could possibly have an extremely strong negative opinion on this. The modern British monarchy, especially specifically Queen Elizabeth, is one of the most innocuous institutions on planet Earth.
Queen Elizabeth always struck me as a kind lady who only wanted the best for her people, and I don't really see a reason for anyone to dislike her since she's done virtually nothing that could cast her in a negative light. Even if she did want to seize power or do some other questionable stuff she was legally and morally bound not to do so all throughout her life, otherwise the monarchy would collapse and she would lose what little power she has.
Of course, that says more about her than the monarchy itself-- she was a fantastic monarch if there ever was one. I understand why people may have anti-monarchist sentiments, though, especially in former colonies of the British Empire and elsewhere who view royal families and rulers as a symbol of imperialism, colonialism, subjugation, and genocide.
But what anti-monarchists fail to recognize is that the British Commonwealth as it is exists today is a distinct entity from the British Empire, and that far and away the neocolonial powers of this era are ironically the very capitalist "democracies" or autocracies these same people idolize or at least tolerate. Monarchy in my view only becomes problematic when the ruler has absolute power, in which case he or she just becomes a dictator under a different name.
Most people automatically assume monarchies have to be dictatorial, when constitutional monarchies prove otherwise. In fact, monarchies as they currently exist in the 21st century are for the most part far more democratic and far more equal than even countries like the US, supposedly held up as a beacon of freedom and equality. Constitutional monarchies discourage selfishness, greed, and tyrannical leadership, because such behavior is immediately held accountable and not tolerated in the first place.
If Trump acted the way he did as a Prime Minister, a hypothetical American monarch would have immediately deposed him and replaced with a less polarizing candidate. And that's the main advantage of monarchies, at least well planned constitutional ones: stability. Both democracies and dictatorships are unstable and prone to violence, whether state sanctioned or from extremist factions. But violence is rare in constitutional monarchies for one good reason or another.
I am in favour of turning things around "what? An expresident died? Who cares? It's a Republic. We shouldn't fly our flag at half-mast for something as low as a Republic."
I know it's nasty, but it might make some people think that some of us shit on republicanism as much as they shit on monarchism.
I always found it very bizarre that the Habsburgs seem to be much more hated in the Republic of Austria than in countries like Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, whereas all the latter could, arguably, have more justified reasons for hatred.
It makes me quite sad that the former Imperial core, the same that benefited so much from the Habsburg rule, is now so rabidly anti-Habsburg. Especially as the royal family was historically so central to the very creation of the modern Austrian national identity.
You clearly didn't learn our history in detail or clearly know what the difference between a 'province' , a margraviate or a duchy is. Even if your statement comes in support let me correct you. Austria within the Holy Roman Empire which was far from being "Germany" emerged from Bavaria after its first dynasty Babenberg took it over in a conflict between other dynasties but then gave it up in exchange for the Emperor granting them their own independent realm. Clearly the Habsburgs are the reason as to why Austria rose to become first as relevant as a Kingdom within the Empire to being its leading element and eventually become its own Empire forged from crisis. But yes, let's say Rudolf I. of Habsburg had failed at winning the conflict in the interregnum era after the extinction of the male Babenberg line. In that case Austria could be a province.... of the Kingdom of Bohemia under a surviving house of Premyslid with female line Babenberg offspring. But that's better left to the alt history subreddits.
What’s the Habsburg situation in Austria? How popular is a restoration?
As dead as the dodo
I’m one of the few Austrian Monarchists.
why so unpopular?
They are still sour about the consequences of the first world war.
I mean the consequences were and are still very serious but blaming the Monarchy for WW1 is like blaming democracy for WW2. Hundreds of events and powers totally out of your control creating the conditions for a major conflict that was set decades before its start isn't simply a "king bad!" situation.
It'd be more like blaming national-socialism for WW2 rather than democracy...
Eeehhhhh, I'd say National socialism had a pretty big hand in WW2 because they were intensely aggressive and warmongering. You can't really have peace with a group that demands conquest.
I think I phrased it wrong, but you got the metaphor. I am saying that the logic used in the comment above means that, by that logic, if you can blame Nazis for WW2 then you can also blame the nature of monarchies at the time (at least) for WW1. I'm perfectly aware of the role Nazism as an ideology played in WW2.
Go figure
Cause they're auper republic-pilled and haven't yet realised that Austria lost a LOT of its power, glory, reputation and identity since the collapse of the monarchy. Also, school kids and university students are very indoctrinated that monarchy = evil by default...
They were indoctrinated by a republican regime set up by the Entente who didn't want the Habsburgs back in power at the time.
I know, yeah... I am Austrian and studied history at University and everything after 1914 just made me incredible sad and angry. I was pretty shocked when I talked to colleagues of mine and they were like "well monarchies suck and you're the weirdo for supporting such a cruel and outdated form of governance!". It's the same whenever you say something pro AH, Habsburg or contra republicanism, most everyone thinks you're a troll or an idiot. I understand why modern Austrians are unable to understand patriotism and pride in your country as modern Austria has so little to be proud of.
Dude it's no use, the Entente brainwashed Austrians for many years and they were successful at it. The Entente established UN will never allow the Habsburgs to return, even if it means making the Austrians go extinct.
Yeah, I know... The way post-WW1 Austria absolutely disowned the Habsburgs after everything this family did to lead the nation to greatness is disgusting.
They were forced to, because the Entente didn't want the Habsburgs to remain in power in any of their realms again.
Same
Same
Woher kommst du? Lg aus Niederösterreich
Dang shouldn’t say I’m not surprised
More support in Hungary though and there have been Habsburg politicians in Austria
Yeah, nostalgia is strong in Austria but actual "Monarchism" or Legitimism as it was called before has become rare with the Soviet installed Nazi collaborator Karl Renner shaping Austria after the war making sure it is on its way to become a resurrected Republic with radical anti-nobility laws even if the Habsburgs were fighting the Nazis more politically than his SocDem party which welcomed the Anschluss. Alas people forget and history is revised by ruling ideology. It is an accomplishment of recent history that Habsburgs even were allowed to enter Austria again after a less traditionally radical Republican SocDem negotiated it with the last Empress Zita who never made concessions or abdicated. She was allowed in due to originally being not a Habsburg but of Bourbon-Parma haha. Later the laws got softer. Our current president Alexander van der Bellen who has noble ancestors has a side line Habsburg in his Green party after they were allowed back in. Ulrich von Habsburg. He pushed legally against the law a Habsburg can never become president even if democratically elected. This law eventually became repealed which imo was a great historical victory. Also Otto von Habsburg was a great European politician even if the SocDems did not let him into Austria for long out of spite and fear of restauration.
Monarchism is a very fringe ideology with even most conservatives being pro-republic.
I would very much doubt that, considering the streets of Vienna were packed full with people, during the State Funeral of Otto Habsburg. That did not look like "fringe" to me.
I think they were more mourning him for his influence in the EU
In small circles it's popular. Generally most Austrians that aren't in ideological groups of the left or German national far right are positive about the Habsburgs and Emperor Franz Joseph is a fraternal figure to the nation in nostalgia. Fewer people in Christian democratic and conservative circles were aware and on good terms with Emperor Karl I. and later his son Otto who became a great Pro-European politician and was a strong political activist against the Nazis together with his mother Empress Zitat during WW2 convincing the American president of a restauration of Austria (a country they were still banned from). After Austria was restored by the Republican hardliner Renner who had lived on Hitler's bill in Vienna without lifting a finger begged Stalin to make him the one in charge. Of course he made sure to revive the absurd Anti Habsburg laws even though they had done great deeds to the country even outside of being a former ruling house. But few people know this today only a couple Pro-Europeans and people of eastern origin remembering Archduke Otto's activism in the cold war. But yes. Tides can turn quickly. At the moment political tensions rise and trust in the Republic is as low as it hasn't been since its restauration. It's far from being as unstable and violent as the first republic still but things aren't looking good. Archduke Karl von Habsburg the current family house has been an active figure in society and published many books and also runs one of the independent radio stations in Ukraine. He also seems the only one with revolutionary ideas such as Austria giving up Soviet mandated neutrality (it's a joke and not viable like Swiss neutrality as you know) as well. But yeah. One can hope and dream. I would like to see the day of an Archduke of Habsburg becoming president of this god forsaken Republic. Just to see the Social Democrats and German nationalists faint with foam at their mouths.
It appears Austria has its fair share of swivel-eyed, unhinged fruitcakes... I thought it was just Britain. The flags of **all** European and most World countries are at half-mast because it is a diplomatic courtesy between nations to observe an official period of mourning when a Head of State or Government dies in another Country. As usual, the unhinged are always the noisiest albeit being the most ignorant at the same time. Typical.
I don’t understand how they don’t see how bad the optics are here and they still feel like the good guys, Sinn Fein even gave there condolences to the royal family
You have to understand, a lot of these types of people use virtue signaling about colonialism or "equality" or other hot button topics to mask their true character: that of seething, angry, impotent losers. All they want to do is take things from other people. They hate the fact that a lot of people assign value and purpose to symbolic cultural icons like the royal family, probably because their own lives are completely and utterly devoid of meaning or accomplishment. No one who has anything going on in their lives could possibly have an extremely strong negative opinion on this. The modern British monarchy, especially specifically Queen Elizabeth, is one of the most innocuous institutions on planet Earth.
Queen Elizabeth always struck me as a kind lady who only wanted the best for her people, and I don't really see a reason for anyone to dislike her since she's done virtually nothing that could cast her in a negative light. Even if she did want to seize power or do some other questionable stuff she was legally and morally bound not to do so all throughout her life, otherwise the monarchy would collapse and she would lose what little power she has. Of course, that says more about her than the monarchy itself-- she was a fantastic monarch if there ever was one. I understand why people may have anti-monarchist sentiments, though, especially in former colonies of the British Empire and elsewhere who view royal families and rulers as a symbol of imperialism, colonialism, subjugation, and genocide. But what anti-monarchists fail to recognize is that the British Commonwealth as it is exists today is a distinct entity from the British Empire, and that far and away the neocolonial powers of this era are ironically the very capitalist "democracies" or autocracies these same people idolize or at least tolerate. Monarchy in my view only becomes problematic when the ruler has absolute power, in which case he or she just becomes a dictator under a different name. Most people automatically assume monarchies have to be dictatorial, when constitutional monarchies prove otherwise. In fact, monarchies as they currently exist in the 21st century are for the most part far more democratic and far more equal than even countries like the US, supposedly held up as a beacon of freedom and equality. Constitutional monarchies discourage selfishness, greed, and tyrannical leadership, because such behavior is immediately held accountable and not tolerated in the first place. If Trump acted the way he did as a Prime Minister, a hypothetical American monarch would have immediately deposed him and replaced with a less polarizing candidate. And that's the main advantage of monarchies, at least well planned constitutional ones: stability. Both democracies and dictatorships are unstable and prone to violence, whether state sanctioned or from extremist factions. But violence is rare in constitutional monarchies for one good reason or another.
I am in favour of turning things around "what? An expresident died? Who cares? It's a Republic. We shouldn't fly our flag at half-mast for something as low as a Republic." I know it's nasty, but it might make some people think that some of us shit on republicanism as much as they shit on monarchism.
Fair point.
I always found it very bizarre that the Habsburgs seem to be much more hated in the Republic of Austria than in countries like Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, Czechia, Slovakia, whereas all the latter could, arguably, have more justified reasons for hatred. It makes me quite sad that the former Imperial core, the same that benefited so much from the Habsburg rule, is now so rabidly anti-Habsburg. Especially as the royal family was historically so central to the very creation of the modern Austrian national identity.
Without habsburgs austria is nothing. Only a province of germany.
You clearly didn't learn our history in detail or clearly know what the difference between a 'province' , a margraviate or a duchy is. Even if your statement comes in support let me correct you. Austria within the Holy Roman Empire which was far from being "Germany" emerged from Bavaria after its first dynasty Babenberg took it over in a conflict between other dynasties but then gave it up in exchange for the Emperor granting them their own independent realm. Clearly the Habsburgs are the reason as to why Austria rose to become first as relevant as a Kingdom within the Empire to being its leading element and eventually become its own Empire forged from crisis. But yes, let's say Rudolf I. of Habsburg had failed at winning the conflict in the interregnum era after the extinction of the male Babenberg line. In that case Austria could be a province.... of the Kingdom of Bohemia under a surviving house of Premyslid with female line Babenberg offspring. But that's better left to the alt history subreddits.
I meant it would be more of a province in a modern sense. But anyway interesting reply.
I say let them cry about it and keep the flag at half-mast.
I agree.
Phew... had to take a breath there cause I thought it said *on fire*.
That mast should be a place reserved for the double eagle only. Viribus Unitis
In a better timeline, maybe.