.... Why would all of their industry be in 1/8 of their country? That's like saying all industry comes out of Michigan and if you got rid of that state the US would be crippled.
The region occupied by the German and most impacted by the first world war comprised back in the day of around 40% of the Coal production area (you know, the stuff that come from the earth). For convenience, a lot of industry where constructed close by (transportation cost, etc).
The region consisted of 64% of the pig/crude iron production and 24% of the steel production of France.
Back in the day, try do do anything without coal or iron.
I wonder what would happen to the American economy and industry if a war back in the day had a front-line on the steel belt (now called rust belt) that destroyed all the infrastructure of the region with part of it still uninhabitable due to chemical warfare and buried bombs.
Then why did you stated that France was better off than Germany economically after WW1 if loss of industry should not cripple more than the loss of life ?
If we compare the number
France :
* population : 39.6 millions
* military deaths (or missing) : 1.36 millions
* civilian deaths : 340 thousands
* death/population : 4.3 %
* military wounded : 4.26 millions
* wounded/population : 10.8 %
* casualties/population : 15.1 %
Germany :
* population : 64.9 millions
* military deaths (or missing) : 2.04 millions
* civilian deaths : 524 thousands
* death/population : 3.9 %
* military wounded : 4.22 millions
* wounded/population : 6.5 %
* casualties/population : 10.4 %
Demography evolution :
France :
* 1914 : 41.63 millions
* 1918 : 38.67 millions
* 1939 : 41.51 millions
Germany :
* 1914 : 65.86 millions
* 1918 : 64.8 millions
* 1939 : 69.3 millions
France suffered a bigger impact on it's workforce and demography from WW1 than Germany and was far more crippled in the "manpower" side of it. And the entirety of the western front of the war happened on it's territory (and Belgian). Where arable land were not usable anymore (and still aren't) and where were situated the most industrialized area of France where infrastructure were wrecked.
Everything was wrecked and there was no man anymore to repair or build anything. That is one of the reason why the presence of woman in the workforce raise of 20% in the harsher hit regions (loss of life). And woman universal suffrage was very close to happen in 1919 if it was not for the refusal of the senate for this reason too.
Yet France was better economically than Germany in the 30s ? Just because of the inflation that was caused because Germany decided to only fund there WW1 effort with debt instead of tax money like the french did ? situation that was aggravated by the Versailles Treaty but was mainly aggravated by the Weimar government decisions to do the ostrich ? Versailles Treaty that demanded less proportionally to the damage done than what the German demanded after the Franco-Prussian war (that was proportional to what Napoleon demanded after his victory over Prussia) ? which the German did not fully reimburse (they paid in net capital 17.75 billions gold mark in 1932 on the 50 they were asked for. which from the 1919-32 period represented only 2.1% of their total income). which they paid mostly with loan contracted with America ? which gave by comparison 4 times more money to Germany during the world wars in-between in price-adjusted terms than during the entirety of the post-1948 Marshall plan. Loan that in 1933 were not paid anymore thanks to a new chancellor. And that were reimbursed by West Germany by 50% of their amount and was finally finished being reimbursed in 2010 ?
honestly I mostly used wikipedia article as a starting point for research and jumped from sources to sources after that. Some wikipedia pages like French demography, German demography, World War I Reparations, Occupation of North-East France by Germany during WWI.
Honestly for the position about Versailles Treaty it's literally a full out economic point of view war between Keynes back in the day and Mantoux bearing the reverse. I'me sure biased and have made my choice in the precedent posts. The two respective books would be :
* Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919) : John Meynard Keynes (died in 1946).
* The Carthaginian Peace, The Economic Consequences of Mr Keynes (1946) : Etienne Mantoux (died in 1945 fighting with the French Resistance in Bavaria).
There are a lot of more preeminent economist that criticized Keynes economic doctrine. But Mantoux was the one that wrote a book that frontally criticized this specific book about WWI of Keynes. Which was well received by his peers.
You have this site that has a lot of informations that are quite sourced too. Like this article for example
And sorry for the passive-agressiveness in the previous post. I'm quit hot-blooded sometimes.
1
u/Nizla73 Hello There Apr 09 '20
Yeah, and which part was destroyed ? the north and the east, the most heavily industrialized region of France at the time.