What could Austria Hungary could of done to fix its Over Diversity and National instability in its Ethnic army, and government.

[Vitruvius]

Actually, it was the poorest province in Austria

I was under the impression that when it was first acquired in the first Partition of Poland it was wealthier than some of the territories in southern Hungary/Slavonia/Croatia just largely due to how long it took those regions to recover from the damage inflicted by the wars with the Ottomans. But I could be wrong.

All the more reason why I don't think it was particularly useful. Just setting aside the history or the need for a POD from a strategic point of view Austria would probably have been better served to have Wallachia and/or Serbia than Galicia and Bukovina. Bringing the majority of the Serbs and Romanians under the aegis of Austria instead an additional ethnic group (the Poles) while adding more Danubian lands instead of territory beyond the Carpathian mountains which was hard to defend. But that's just in an ideal world.

 

[marcinL]

I was under the impression that when it was first acquired in the first Partition of Poland it was wealthier than some of the territories in southern Hungary/Slavonia/Croatia just largely due to how long it took those regions to recover from the damage inflicted by the wars with the Ottomans. But I could be wrong.

All the more reason why I don't think it was particularly useful. Just setting aside the history or the need for a POD from a strategic point of view Austria would probably have been better served to have Wallachia and/or Serbia than Galicia and Bukovina. Bringing the majority of the Serbs and Romanians under the aegis of Austria instead an additional ethnic group (the Poles) while adding more Danubian lands instead of territory beyond the Carpathian mountains which was hard to defend. But that's just in an ideal world.

I dont know about Hungarian part, but it was at least poorest in Austria. It wasnt called Pooricia and Famineria for no reason.

 

[Qastiel]

As much as I want to give due consideration to the Magyar position I have to concede that the intransigence of the Magyars on the issue of minorities within Hungary was a serious problem. I understand somewhat their perspective. They suffered a lot after the country was essentially partitioned by the Ottoman invasion with mass displacement of peoples, economic decline, a sort of broken state. And they faced Austrian domination with Leopold's imposition of the counterreformation even as early as the 1660s so it wasn't as if expelling the Turks really revived the Hungarian state to what it had been. However that doesn't really excuse their approach the non-magyar population of historic Hungary in the 19th century.

I've always wondered if nationalism took a different route in the early to mid-1800s. If the Magyars had been more accommodating. ITOL there was a brief movement among Slovak intellectuals to reconceptualize Hungarian identity/nationality in a non-enthnic or supra-ethnic fashion. It involved a linguistic slight of hand that would form the framework for conceptualizing a Slovak-Hungarian identity alongside a Magyar-Hungarian or German-Hungarian identity. The idea was to rethink Hungary as multi-ethnic state state rather than a national state of the Magyars.

Mad'ar would become the Magyar Hungarians and Uhor would describe all Hungarians in the Slovak language with a suggestion to use Magyaren and Ungarn in German. So for example a German speaker in Hungary would call himself a German-Hungarian and his Magyar neighbor a Magyar-Hungarian but they were still both equally Hungarians. But to the Magyars Hungary was Magyaroszag, the country of the Magyars, and they refused to countenance the idea that Hungary could be anything other than their state to which the other peoples living within its borders would have to accommodate themselves. So even the most liberal Magyar position if not seeking outright assimilation of minorities still felt that theirs was the national culture of Hungarian society and the minorities would have to accept that.

But I've wondered if such a pluralist/multiethnic view of Austrian or Hungarian nationalist could have been achievable. Perhaps not, perhaps its just my American sensibility, where one can be Italian American or Korean American without either loosing their unique cultural/ethnolinguistic background or their identity as 'Americans'. But on the other hand I think about Great Britain. After the act of Union the English, while you could argue that they dominated the new state, did agree to give up the Kingdom of England and subsume the idea of Englishness or English identity into a new British national identity. One could be an Englishmen or a Scot or even Welsh and still be British. Obviously you can make the argument that its easier because language is not such a profound barrier with the majority of Great Britain speaking the same language but it still suggests that such an outcome is possible.

Ultimately I think the Magyars need to be presented with a viable path towards accepting a plural multi-ethnic society without feeling like they're losing face or seeing their traditional historical state dismantled. Give the Magyars the fig leaf of historic Hungary but reconceptualize the state as a supra-ethnic entity and allow the minorities a buy in to the collective history and tradition of that state.

So its federal in a less radical way that the United States of Austria and leans more heavily into tradition and the history of the realms constituting the Empire. The idea being to reconcile and and bond the peoples of the the Empire to the state in a foundational way. A Slovak or Romanian in Hungary could see the Kingdom of Hungary as their state and its history as their history and thus its preservation and continuation as being in their interest. And if its workable in Hungary then why not Galicia, you could be Polish-Galician or Ukrainian-Galician and The Kingdom of Galicia just forms an autonomous state of the Austrian Empire. ditto Bohemia with its Czech and German population. Maybe also an 'Illyria' with Croats and Serbs. Ultimately its a path to multi-ethnic federalism that relies more upon heritage and tradition than a radical reordering of the empire into new states based upon discrete ethno-linguistic population blocks.

Maybe its utterly fanciful, pie the sky utopianism. I concede it runs counter to the development of Nationalism in central and eastern Europe but I think it better accommodates the dynastic origins and traditions of the Austrian state.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t approve of nor make any defence of Magyarisation policies or how hostile the Magyars were to the minorities in the Crown of St Stephan. I’m pointing out that they did those policies because they had the power to assert themselves as such after enduring multiple decades of attempted Austrian Absolutism especially after the failed Hungarian attempt at independence.

It’s arguable that they could’ve evolved down the route of civic nationalism. I genuinely think it’s possible tbh, the Magyars themselves radicalised in response to what they saw as a betrayal caused by the compromise that created Austria-Hungary and the other competing nationalist revolts they dealt with as they attempted their own independence. I wont say the root of Magyar chauvinism came from the attempt at Austrian dominance/absolutism because there was signs of it even before but it definitely intensified afterwards. So either you somehow make the Austrians pursue a federative idea (I’m not sure where this would’ve come from tbb) instead of the Absolutism that resulted in the Hungarian attempt at independence or following that, the Austrians make an agreement with the Croats/Slavs to keep the Hungarians in check after putting down the Hungarian revolt.

Whatever compromise the Austrians make with the Hungarians, they’ll still be an intransigent bloc in the Empire after putting down their attempt at independence. So either you prevent the Hungarians from attempting to leave from Austrian imposition or you have the Austrians keep the Hungarians down by force which has its own effects because the Hungarians were a large and powerful group in the Empire. If Austria doesn’t make any compromises they go bankrupt and likely have a multinational Public Debt Administration forced on them. Which would be a hit to sovereignty and prestige but would free up Austrian spending for the military again. If Austria does make a compromise with the Slavs instead of the Hungarians then honestly I’m not sure. I think the Slavs would be less intransigent towards the Austrians in all honesty but I can’t really guess more than that.

I genuinely think that either way just avoiding WW1 would buy the Austrians enough time for things to cool down whatever choice is made. I don’t think multiethnic/multinational states were doomed. I think they doomed themselves because they thought they were doomed. Attempting to convert from multinational states to nation-states and treating their minorities as colonial populations was what caused their fragility across the world.

 

[Vitruvius]

Don’t get me wrong I don’t approve of nor make any defence of Magyarisation policies or how hostile the Magyars were to the minorities in the Crown of St Stephan. I’m pointing out that they did those policies because they had the power to assert themselves as such after enduring multiple decades of attempted Austrian Absolutism especially after the failed Hungarian attempt at independence.

It’s arguable that they could’ve evolved down the route of civic nationalism. I genuinely think it’s possible tbh, the Magyars themselves radicalised in response to what they saw as a betrayal caused by the compromise that created Austria-Hungary and the other competing nationalist revolts they dealt with as they attempted their own independence. I wont say the root of Magyar chauvinism came from the attempt at Austrian dominance/absolutism because there was signs of it even before but it definitely intensified afterwards. So either you somehow make the Austrians pursue a federative idea (I’m not sure where this would’ve come from tbb) instead of the Absolutism that resulted in the Hungarian attempt at independence or following that, the Austrians make an agreement with the Croats/Slavs to keep the Hungarians in check after putting down the Hungarian revolt.

Whatever compromise the Austrians make with the Hungarians, they’ll still be an intransigent bloc in the Empire after putting down their attempt at independence. So either you prevent the Hungarians from attempting to leave from Austrian imposition or you have the Austrians keep the Hungarians down by force which has its own effects because the Hungarians were a large and powerful group in the Empire. If Austria doesn’t make any compromises they go bankrupt and likely have a multinational Public Debt Administration forced on them. Which would be a hit to sovereignty and prestige but would free up Austrian spending for the military again. If Austria does make a compromise with the Slavs instead of the Hungarians then honestly I’m not sure. I think the Slavs would be less intransigent towards the Austrians in all honesty but I can’t really guess more than that.

I genuinely think that either way just avoiding WW1 would buy the Austrians enough time for things to cool down whatever choice is made. I don’t think multiethnic/multinational states were doomed. I think they doomed themselves because they thought they were doomed. Attempting to convert from multinational states to nation-states and treating their minorities as colonial populations was what caused their fragility across the world.

I agree. I think its hard to pull off without an early POD. I discussed the idea of Hungaro-slavism with @Fehérvári a while ago in the context of what Hungary would have looked like had the Ottoman conquest not happened. The thinking was that without the trauma of the 16th-17th centuries that a stronger more confident Magyar population might have been more willing to accommodate other groups in the socio-political system of the Hungarian state.

And its possible that's what might have been required to achieve a different perspective from the Magyar population on nationality issues within the lands of the crown of St Stephen. So maybe its not workable without a very deep POD that renders irrelevant any discussion of OTL 19th century Austria. I don't know, its so speculative but I'm kind of fascinated by the idea of an ATL conception of nationality that transcends the pure ethnolinguistic national groups that came to dominate IOTL.

It just seems to me that there is something there worth considering. That there could be a viable path forward that would preserve the historical states, like Hungary but also potentially Austria, Bohemia, Croatia etc while at the same time providing a means to reconcile the populations like the Slovaks, Slovenes, Rusyns etc who didn't have historical states. The federative model of the United States of Austria solves the issue of the rights of the 'non-historic' peoples by just dismantling the historical/traditional states and creating a whole slew of ethno-states in an Austrian Federation. But there's something so radical and contradictory in that idea that I don't know if it can be reconciled to the Austrian state that had emerged from what was essentially a Habsburg dynastic union. It seems like the stability and continuity provided by preserving the historical states would bolster the Empire if the minorities could just be brought into a supra-ethnic nationality which could then re-invigorate the constituent states of the Empire.

 

[Gloss]

The thinking was that without the trauma of the 16th-17th centuries that a stronger more confident Magyar population might have been more willing to accommodate other groups in the socio-political system of the Hungarian state.

Hungarians would have just assimilated its minorities in that timeline.

 

[Bones101]

So to start off, I don't think Austria-Hungary really had serious ethnic tensions, any real study into the matter shows most minorities just wanted their own place within the empire but were still loyal(as we saw when they fought the worst war in human history in terrible conditions for 4 years) and supported the empire overall. So I think the best path for AH is something like this:

-Reform Cisleithania into a US style federal system, based off the old crown lands. I'm thinking they get the same amount of autonomy the kresmier constitution gave. The Kaiser appoints all state ministers and has an absolute veto over state policy to keep everyone in line, this shouldn't be too hard for anyone to accept as most people in AH were monarchists. Make German the secondary language across Cisleithania, children would be taught their mother tongue up until middle school when they would be taught German, should be acceptable to most people.

-Destroy the power of the Hungarian aristocracy, full male suffrage for all.
-Create Croatia as a federal state of Hungary similar to the solution with the Austrian half of the empire.
- DONT end magyarization, excluding Croatia, end magyarization there. Magyarization was actually quite successful, with 50% of Hungarian citizens speaking Hungarian by 1914, much higher then the 30% German in Austria. If Magyarization is allowed to keep going, by the 1940s or 50s there would likely be a giant 70-80% Hungarian speaking majority, Hungary would become a giant block of stability in the empire.


-Create as many shared institutions between Austria and Hungary as possible, to make the emperors subjects feel united instead of split. Wherever cooperation is possible, it should happen.

-Create a common Austro-Hungarian parliament that would vote on issues regarding the shared institutions, army funding, war credits, etc. This would unite people further, 50% of the reps would be from Austria and 50 from Hungary, the parliament would be chosen by voting so no more negotiations with the Hungarian aristocracy. The Emperor has absolute veto over this parliament as well to make sure things like army funds are never an issue.

I think with these reforms, you have a pretty good dualist system that should encounter very few issues from its people's. Oh and no more ausgleichs, the common parliament should be able to handle everything the ausgleichs did.

 

[Bones101]

The Army was just a mess of laungages, which caused the army to be disorganized

Which doesn't prove how it was unstable. It was a relatively stable country in peacetime, and the army wasn't disorganized, it made some very bad decisions early in the war that cost it bad. The army had a well organized system that had ran a multi ethnic multi lingual army for 300+ years at this point.

 

[Bones101]

Buddy with the Russians in the Victorian era starting by answering thier call to arms during the crimian war (the Russians expected the austrians would assist them after putting down the Hungarian rebelion) so the austrians can lean on the Russians to assist with future revolts.

Hungarian Revolution of 1848 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In order to not become dependent on russian support and cut down on minority realms at the same time with minimal german presence sell Galicia to the Russians and use the funds to modernize the nations east and creating opertunitys in new urban centers and made more easily accessible with modern rail lines to promote german colonization of the interior (make the east a colonization hub like the prussians wanted with the baltics) a lot of germans left for amarica during the Victorian era and creating opertunitys in the east may help to capture part of this otl population on top of whatever german populatioms come there naturally. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1044516/migration-from-germany-to-us-1820-1957/
On top of that the sale of Galicia should help to cool tensions with Russia and may help to salvage the otl failed attempts later in this period like the league of 3 emporors.

League of the Three Emperors - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Wouldn't work. Russia wanted control of the danubian principalities, having Austria join Russia in the Crimean war is making Austria subordinate to Russia as Russia controls the lifeblood of Austria, the Danube now. Galicia was important as a buffer between Hungary and Russia, selling it off significantly reduces the chances of Austria surviving any Russian aggression in the future and would make Austria even more subordinate now that they have a much worse border. An Austro Russian alliance could never really work as Austria needed control over the Balkans.

 

[Nivek]

-Reform Cisleithania into a US style federal system, based off the old crown lands. I'm thinking they get the same amount of autonomy the kresmier constitution gave. The Kaiser appoints all state ministers and has an absolute veto over state policy to keep everyone in line, this shouldn't be too hard for anyone to accept as most people in AH were monarchists. Make German the secondary language across Cisleithania, children would be taught their mother tongue up until middle school when they would be taught German, should be acceptable to most people.

FF tried..he realized he would just divided the empire to potential enemies...he learned the USA secret, a defacto national culture and wanted to push germany...but got killed before getting any real power

 

[Bones101]

Austria could have put down the Hungarians on their own, the war in Italy was winding down so the other half of the Austrian Army (and the more competent officers that come with it, like Radetzky) would soon be free to be redeployed against Hungary. Add on that the rebel regions were poorer, less populous, and much less industrialized than the areas loyal to the Empire. Basically, Austria had the resources to win (and the army actually protested FJ's request for Russian aid) but it'd be a slower and bloodier affair similar to the American Civil War.

FJ chose a more convenient solution.

I wonder if fighting the hungarians to the end without Russian aid would be the better solution. A longer, bloodier war, would likely end in the complete defeat of the old Hungarian order, and giving Vienna permanent, total control of Hungary. Perhaps if they fought it out and bled the hungarians, even in the face of a defeat to Prussia, Austrian wouldn't have to resort to compromise with Hungary as the old order would have been completely defeated.

 

[Bones101]

Ho

And well did raising everyone from their unstable empire go?
This answers my question.

No way your telling me Austria lost against perhaps the greatest military mind in human history? No fucking way. Austria actually performed really well against Napoleon all things considered. They gave Napoleon his first defeat, and were able to preserve their standing as a great power through 5 defeats, unlike say Prussia which was reduced to a second rate power..

 

[Bones101]

FF tried..he realized he would just divided the empire to potential enemies...he learned the USA secret, a defacto national culture and wanted to push germany...but got killed before getting any real power

Franz Ferdinand didn't try, he never became Kaiser. If he ever did then maybe we get some national culture, and I think adopting German as the official secondary language would help with that.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

I wonder if fighting the hungarians to the end without Russian aid would be the better solution.

Maybe. I've posited elsewhere that such a drawn out war could be the shot in the arm needed to resolve a lot of Austria's political-will related deficiencies. Less because of removing the Hungarian elite or anything like that and more just because it would necessitate higher military spending and a more amicable settlement for Hungary's minorities -and the Hungarians themselves.

even in the face of a defeat to Prussia

The Prussian army is kind of a trainwreck in this window. Even if the Prussians try to force through the Erfurt Union while Austria is sidelined by civil war I think the Four Kings Alliance and Denmark stand a good chance at checking Prussia.

 

[Bones101]

Maybe. I've posited elsewhere that such a drawn out war could be the shot in the arm needed to resolve a lot of Austria's political-will related deficiencies. Less because of removing the Hungarian elite or anything like that and more just because it would necessitate higher military spending and a more amicable settlement for Hungary's minorities.


The Prussian army is kind of a trainwreck in this window. Even if the Prussians try to force through the Erfurt Union while Austria is sidelined by civil war I think the Four Kings Alliance and Denmark stand a good chance at checking Prussia.

I wasn't referring to the erfurt union in regards to Prussia, but rather the aftermath of an Austro Prussian war which Austria lost, to show that even in a worst case scenario, Hungary wouldn't be an issue if it was properly defeated.

 

[Fehérvári]

What could Austria Hungary could of done to fix its Over Diversity and National instability in its Ethnic army, and government?

Austria-Hungary didn't need any "fixing". Both Austria and Hungary were already going through dynamic political developments (just like any other European state at the time). The idea that the Habsburg Monarchy needed some kind of drastic and radical intervention to save it from collapse/dissolution is based on a superficial understanding of it. The same could be said about the trope of "le evil Hungarian aristocrats" too.

The only actually real problem that needed some kind of fixing was the one concerning the funding of the army. The defence budget could (and did) fall victim to political fights way too easily. I see two kinds of solution to this issue:

The first option is going the British way. Some kind of standard needs to be set which the Common Army (and the Navy) needs to meet at a minimum. The funding to meet this minimum is automatically granted. To prevent abuse of policy, both governments are provided means to keep the handling of the funds under scrutiny and the ability to challenge decisions. The greatest hurdles of this approach are agreeing to the exact standards and pushing them through the legislations. It has to go through only once though.

The second option is the expansion of national armies and the deprioritisation and eventual dissolution of the Common Army. "A shared horse's back is dirty", as the saying goes, so might as well not bother with it at all. This is the easier and more likely approach in my opinion. I think things IOTL were already heading towards this direction. Cohesion between the two armies could be kept via the shared supreme commander and official communication channels/cooperative boards. Perhaps some kind of NATO-esque command structure could be established.

 

[Tibi088]

I wonder if fighting the hungarians to the end without Russian aid would be the better solution. A longer, bloodier war, would likely end in the complete defeat of the old Hungarian order, and giving Vienna permanent, total control of Hungary. Perhaps if they fought it out and bled the hungarians, even in the face of a defeat to Prussia, Austrian wouldn't have to resort to compromise with Hungary as the old order would have been completely defeated.

I dont think it would have worked. In the spring of 1849 the hungarians have just kicked out the army of Windisgratz from Hungary, have retaken the capital and seemed to be winning in Transylvania. Throughout the spring the hungarian army was able to defeat numerically suprior imperial armies - and nearly managed to encircle and destroy it. The austrian army attacking Hungary in the summer of 1849 was about 170 thousend strong. The hungarian forces numbered about 160 thousend.

What im trying to say is that without foreign intervention I think Hungary would have been able to either win outright - meaning successfully defend its freedom and independence - or at least force the austrians to accept a favourable compromise peace.

 

[Tibi088]

Austria-Hungary didn't need any "fixing". Both Austria and Hungary were already going through dynamic political developments (just like any other European state at the time). The idea that the Habsburg Monarchy needed some kind of drastic and radical intervention to save it from collapse/dissolution is based on a superficial understanding of it. The same could be said about the trope of "le evil Hungarian aristocrats" too.

Fully agree. The Empire was pretty stable and not at all on the verge of falling apart - absent the world war and it would have been fine for a good while. I also dont think the hungarians have been significantly more (or less) nationalistic/chauvinistic than any other nation in Europe at the time. IMO the myth of evil hungarians being so prevalent comes from two sources:
1. Hungary and the hungarians were done really dirty after WWI. But if their were evil - as the neighbouring countries were ready to assert - than they deserved it as just punishment - we dont have to feel bad about it or admit to any wrong on our part
2. Looking at the fate of the hungarian minorities in the neighbouring countries, they have endured much worse and much longer than anything that was done to the minorities in Hungary. But stressing (and magnifying) how evil the hungarians were before WWI makes these seem more acceptable.

The only actually real problem that needed some kind of fixing was the one concerning the funding of the army. The defence budget could (and did) fall victim to political fights way too easily. I see two kinds of solution to this issue:

The first option is going the British way. Some kind of standard needs to be set which the Common Army (and the Navy) needs to meet at a minimum. The funding to meet this minimum is automatically granted. To prevent abuse of policy, both governments are provided means to keep the handling of the funds under scrutiny and the ability to challenge decisions. The greatest hurdles of this approach are agreeing to the exact standards and pushing them through the legislations. It has to go through only once though.

The second option is the expansion of national armies and the deprioritisation and eventual dissolution of the Common Army. "A shared horse's back is dirty", as the saying goes, so might as well not bother with it at all. This is the easier and more likely approach in my opinion. I think things IOTL were already heading towards this direction. Cohesion between the two armies could be kept via the shared supreme commander and official communication channels/cooperative boards. Perhaps some kind of NATO-esque command structure could be established.

I think the big problem with the common army was that it was the Emperors. Bringing it under civilian control would have made the pairlaments much more ready to found it I think.

 

[Fehérvári]

I dont think it would have worked. In the spring of 1849 the hungarians have just kicked out the army of Windisgratz from Hungary, have retaken the capital and seemed to be winning in Transylvania. Throughout the spring the hungarian army was able to defeat numerically suprior imperial armies - and nearly managed to encircle and destroy it. The austrian army attacking Hungary in the summer of 1849 was about 170 thousend strong. The hungarian forces numbered about 160 thousend.

What im trying to say is that without foreign intervention I think Hungary would have been able to either win outright - meaning successfully defend its freedom and independence - or at least force the austrians to accept a favourable compromise peace.

Not to mention that Komárom would have been an enormous obstacle to Austrian operations if the bulk of both armies would have concentrated in Northern Transdanubia (which would have been the case without the Russian intervention and Kossuth's moronic Temesvár strategy). Time wasn't really on Austria's side either, considering how Prussia was gearing up for some tomfoolery.

 

[Diego]

I think that there are two systems, both mentioned in this thread that could be used:

United States System: A system where you divide the empire into states based on where the biggest nationalities live and federalize those regions, with each state having its autonomous regions for minorities.

United Peoples System: A system where you divide the people into nationalities and each nationality have equal representation, at least those that are recognized. People would vote for their "delegates" independent of where they live, so a German in Budapest would vote for the same candidates as the germans in Vienna.

It would be important though to first expand voting rights, if not for every male, at least for everyone that knows how to read or everyone that is employed and receive a certain income, provided that such income is low enough to encompass the majority of the employed population. I think that such reform could have been thought and implemented after 1849 or 1867.

 

[rfmcdonald]

-Reform Cisleithania into a US style federal system, based off the old crown lands. I'm thinking they get the same amount of autonomy the kresmier constitution gave. The Kaiser appoints all state ministers and has an absolute veto over state policy to keep everyone in line, this shouldn't be too hard for anyone to accept as most people in AH were monarchists. Make German the secondary language across Cisleithania, children would be taught their mother tongue up until middle school when they would be taught German, should be acceptable to most people.

[. . .]

- DONT end magyarization, excluding Croatia, end magyarization there. Magyarization was actually quite successful, with 50% of Hungarian citizens speaking Hungarian by 1914, much higher then the 30% German in Austria. If Magyarization is allowed to keep going, by the 1940s or 50s there would likely be a giant 70-80% Hungarian speaking majority, Hungary would become a giant block of stability in the empire.

This is not going to work. If anything, it could backfire.

For starters, minorities definitely wanted their languages to be fully represented in higher education and public life. This was particularly the case for the Czechs, who were not only a numerous and powerful groups but who had understandable historical sensitivities about their language's past marginalization. Charles University was split into separate sections based on language. Other groups may have had less active, but this is a consequence of issues including their numbers and their levels of humans development.

Beyond that, even if you did get significant language shift, that in itself hardly guarantees that the people involved will identify ethnically with the language group or that they will be seen as coethnics by others. The example of Ireland should come to mind. Meanwhile, the example of Hungarian Jews, who despite enthusiastically Magyarizing themselves were first discriminated against in the interwar era and then sent off to the death camps by radical nationalists, shows how even sincere assimilation does not necessarily create people seen as equals to the old stock. (For that matter, the case of the Irish also shows that.)