3 ms·
Like many major events in history (including most wars and revolutions), it's probably best interpreted as the product of both large-scale and systematic factor
by kafkaesq 10y ago
Like many major events in history (including most wars and revolutions), it's probably best interpreted as the product of both large-scale and systematic factors as well as happenstance and small-scale interventions -- like the timing (and relative speediness, compared to a boat) of this particular chartered flight.
To refer to an even larger-scale example: clearly the Russian Empire was in the throes of an extended period of turmoil and conflict in the last years of the House of Romanov, which by that point was unlikely to stay in power for very long in any case... but at the same time things might very well not have turned out quite the way they did had not the German government approved that famous train ride from Zürich to Petrograd for Lenin and his entourage in February of 1917 (as nifty way, so they thought, of seeding just the right amount of chaos to induce in the Empire to soften its resolve to continue the fight against the Central Powers).
- JorgeGT 10y agoI agree, it is reductionist to claim that WWI happened just because Gavrilo Princip, or that the Kaiser "engineered" the birth of the Soviet Union with the sealed train. In this case the coup was too advanced to be aborted (top generals were already too implicated) so it would have happened one way or another. That the war itself and the dictatorship afterwards could have changed if Franco had to resort to other transport is indeed quite possible, but we will never know.