How similar are Germany and Austria? How different are they?

[Cranberry]

On topic though, it is relevant to remember that the entire Austrian identity was formed by the idea that we are anything but German, that we are somehow different from them. Nations and peoples usually have some sort of defining principle, be it language (Italians, French) or some sort of (long) common history (Belgium, Switzerland...). Austria, in relation to Germany, lacks that, there was nothing really dividing us, so when they started to plant the idea of an Austrian nation and Austrian nationalism into people's head after WWII, they had to start with the only thing that came to their minds - creating an artificial notion that we are not Germans, we are not like them; and which sadly (then conveniently) also heavily included the notion "we are not Nazis", giving Austrians in their mind a cart blanche on denying their part in the crimes of Nazism.

That isn't to say that there are no or were no differences of culture or mindset between Germany and Austria. Largely however, they were artificially created after WWII to forever bury the possibility of a second Anschluss.

Yes, this does sound quite accurate to me. Whether in 1918 or in 1945, it's clear that Austrians would have willingly opted for Anschluss by a wide margin. Nations are funny things...

Oh, and also, I was imagining a post-1945 restoration rather than a post-1918 rump.

correct me if I'm wrong but I recalls the Allies forcing as part of the post-war settlement that Germany and Austria will not be united.

is there a constitutional barrier to this if one day they do decide to walk that path?  

I don't know if there's anything in the constitution, but that is correct. I highly, highly, doubt it'd ever happen today, anyway. I don't know if you can even find proponents of the idea in the FPÖ these days.

Some very few, Tender can correct me if I'm wrong, but if I remember correctly Johannes Gudenus or some other guy like that said something on this some time ago. Not sure though.
But yeah, from today's point of view it will obviously never ever happen, not a chance.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Partly right, at least up to Napoleon. Said capital's hinterland, let's define it as Cisleithana, shall we! did include all of modern Austria (well apart from the Burgenland), however, modern (German)-Austria doesn't include all of these hinterlands even if those being divided by language lines (ever heard of South Tyrol, the Sudetes, Brno and Maribor?). Not that I want to undertake some good old historical revisionism here (quite a strong case could be made for South Tyrol though, if people wanted), but just pointing that out.

I was mostly being facetious, but can you really argue that Tyrol counts as Viennese hinterland? Or even Styria for that matter, though of course only parts of both historic provinces are even in Austria today.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Burgenland is hilarious though. What do we even call this strip of land? It has no name! Wait! It has some castles. Castleland it is!

[Cranberry]

Partly right, at least up to Napoleon. Said capital's hinterland, let's define it as Cisleithana, shall we! did include all of modern Austria (well apart from the Burgenland), however, modern (German)-Austria doesn't include all of these hinterlands even if those being divided by language lines (ever heard of South Tyrol, the Sudetes, Brno and Maribor?). Not that I want to undertake some good old historical revisionism here (quite a strong case could be made for South Tyrol though, if people wanted), but just pointing that out.

I was mostly being facetious, but can you really argue that Tyrol counts as Viennese hinterland? Or even Styria for that matter, though of course only parts of both historic provinces are even in Austria today.

No, of course not, the "Viennese hinterland" is no bigger than Lower Austria; but I decided to use your facetious terms as well, if more for "humour" than anything else.

But you are right, Tyrol is just as much a seperate cultural entity as it is part of the Austrian cultural entity, for lack of better terms. No wonder, given the sense of Tyrol as something of a cross-border nation/region elevating us above the other Austrian states in terms of "we're so special", if you can get my point.

Burgenland is hilarious though. What do we even call this strip of land? It has no name! Wait! It has some castles. Castleland it is!

It actually wasn't even named after the castles. It was named after the cities of Sopron, Bratislava and Mosonmagyarovar, which in their German names all have -burg as ending (Ödenburg, Pressburg, Wieselburg). The name Burgenland thus comes from cities that aren't even in it (anymore), so that should give you a perfect view on how important it is

[buritobr]

I think that Wien is for Austria and Berlin is for Germany the same as New York City is for the USA

A city that is very diferent to the countryside

[Hnv1]

On topic though, it is relevant to remember that the entire Austrian identity was formed by the idea that we are anything but German, that we are somehow different from them. Nations and peoples usually have some sort of defining principle, be it language (Italians, French) or some sort of (long) common history (Belgium, Switzerland...). Austria, in relation to Germany, lacks that, there was nothing really dividing us, so when they started to plant the idea of an Austrian nation and Austrian nationalism into people's head after WWII, they had to start with the only thing that came to their minds - creating an artificial notion that we are not Germans, we are not like them; and which sadly (then conveniently) also heavily included the notion "we are not Nazis", giving Austrians in their mind a cart blanche on denying their part in the crimes of Nazism.

That isn't to say that there are no or were no differences of culture or mindset between Germany and Austria. Largely however, they were artificially created after WWII to forever bury the possibility of a second Anschluss.

Yes, this does sound quite accurate to me. Whether in 1918 or in 1945, it's clear that Austrians would have willingly opted for Anschluss by a wide margin. Nations are funny things...

Oh, and also, I was imagining a post-1945 restoration rather than a post-1918 rump.

correct me if I'm wrong but I recalls the Allies forcing as part of the post-war settlement that Germany and Austria will not be united.

is there a constitutional barrier to this if one day they do decide to walk that path? 

I don't know if there's anything in the constitution, but that is correct. I highly, highly, doubt it'd ever happen today, anyway. I don't know if you can even find proponents of the idea in the FPÖ these days (a significant portion of the old FPÖ's were ardent supporters of another Anschluss).

Just checked, the Austrian State Treaty signed by the Allies and the second republic forbids unification with Germany

[politicus]

So what is next? How similar are France and Belgium? How different are they?

[ag]

So what is next? How similar are France and Belgium? How different are they?

[Simfan34]

So what is next? How similar are France and Belgium? How different are they?

If you draw a line down the middle...

If not for Napoleon's defeat Wallonia would probably be part of France. It may still be yet...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why would Wallonia even want to be part of France? No matter how rough the past few decades have been for the place you only have to nip across the border to see how much worse it could be: as a part of France the area would not just be a postindustrial basketcase, but an ignored postindustrial basketcase.

[Blue3]

So what is next? How similar are France and Belgium? How different are they?

How about US and Canada? Or US and UK?

[politicus]

So what is next? How similar are France and Belgium? How different are they?

How about US and Canada? Or US and UK?

It was a joke. Those examples are not funny.

[ingemann]

I think the comparison of Wallonia and France with Austria and Germany are quite interesting, mostly because it show the difference. Wallonia outside the occassional occupation have never been under France, and is in my opinion much more cultural German than French. Austria on the other hand was the centre of German culture for centuries, a fully independent Austrian identity have only developed after WW2.

But where I think Austria and Germany differ, are what kind of states they are. Austria are the remnant of one of the old dynastic states which dominated Europe for a millenium, while modern Germany as a state (not as a nation) are a 19th century construct created to large extent by popular demand.

[buritobr]

France produces wine and Belgium produces beer

[DavidB.]

I think the comparison of Wallonia and France with Austria and Germany are quite interesting, mostly because it show the difference. Wallonia outside the occassional occupation have never been under France, and is in my opinion much more cultural German than French.

Apart from the German-speaking area in the east of Wallonia, this is simply untrue. Wallonia is culturally most similar to northern France.

[MaxQue]

France produces wine and Belgium produces beer

Northern France produce beer and no wine.

[Georg Ebner]

As nations do - since nationalism, which itself was a clandestine internationalism - not exist any longer, we can say objectively, that Austria was german: FAUST's pantheism (deifying hic et nunc) and romanticism (disdaining hic et nunc) was present in the austrian SubSubStyle of the southgerman BaroqueSubStyle, in GRILLPARZER or v.HOFMANNSTHAL. (But perhaps Austria was some kind of "Germany's EmergencyExit"?)

[politicus]

As nations do - since nationalism, which itself was a clandestine internationalism - not exist any longer, we can say objectively, that Austria was german: FAUST's pantheism (deifying hic et nunc) and romanticism (disdaining hic et nunc) was present in the austrian SubSubStyle of the southgerman BaroqueSubStyle, in GRILLPARZER or v.HOFMANNSTHAL. (But perhaps Austria was some kind of "Germany's EmergencyExit"?)

lol

[Simfan34]

France produces wine and Belgium produces beer

Northern France produce beer and no wine.

Define "Northern France". Is it merely Picardy and Artois? Champagne is hardly central, much less Southern.

One could admittedly argue, however, that it would be more "logical" for Nord départment to be be in Belgium rather than in France,

[MaxQue]

France produces wine and Belgium produces beer

Northern France produce beer and no wine.

Define "Northern France". Is it merely Picardy and Artois? Champagne is hardly central, much less Southern.

One could admittedly argue, however, that it would be more "logical" for Nord départment to be be in Belgium rather than in France,

Yes, Picady and Northern. Perhaps Normandy too. I would say Champagne is Eastern.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

As nations do - since nationalism, which itself was a clandestine internationalism - not exist any longer, we can say objectively, that Austria was german: FAUST's pantheism (deifying hic et nunc) and romanticism (disdaining hic et nunc) was present in the austrian SubSubStyle of the southgerman BaroqueSubStyle, in GRILLPARZER or v.HOFMANNSTHAL. (But perhaps Austria was some kind of "Germany's EmergencyExit"?)

jao

[Tender Branson]

I thought about posting that the main difference is that Germany can play good football, while we can't ... but that's not true anymore these days.