shit
>>59548101
depends on where you lived
>>59548101
shit
people starved
>>59548164
Where were the starving places? the not Hungary and not Austria parts? even just all the non Austria parts?
>>59548238
Galicia.
"Bieda Galicyjska" - Galician poverty. Austrians couldn't administrate for shit.
>>59548280
Maybe they just didn't like polish people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician_slaughter
muh trianon
Gott Erhalte!
>>59548101
it was shit,i m glad its dead
>>59548101
>Army destroyed by the Russians in 1914-1915
>Russians...
probs not lol
brits wanted to destroy it so it must be doing something right
>>59554045
this
What do you mean?
For your average bourgeois citizen is was pretty good. For capitalists and magnates, pure awesome. For a low class worker or peasent, not as much but there was nevertheless a slow improvemenet over time.
The dualist period was when most of lands of Hungary and Croatia got dragged out of Balkans tier development, when most modern institutions, infrastructure, hospital and education system etc were built.
It was a period of pretty wild capitalism with several crisis but overall very good rates of economic expansion.
It was when our larger cities from dusty backwater spots become Europe-wide known centers of finance, industry and agriculture.
I was a huge change and it was felt throughout all society.
These were without doubt big pro changes.
cont with the bad stuff
Many feudalistic traditions lived over (and basically only got abolished in 1945), social mobility grew alot but was still very hierarchial and rigid. See those residental complexes built in Budapest at time, most of them are stunning outside but the room layouts are tellers, they are full of small dark rooms for servants and plebs in general.
Investments were rife with corruption, theres a very good book on this subject, to tell one a Budapest bridge was originally awarded to a German company but got balatantly pushed to a Hungarian owned one, despite Germans offering technically superior solution.
Or as Budapest expanded rich magnates bought up plots in advance and sold them for high prices. This kind of stuff was common.
Then theres the matter of ethnic conflicts. IMHO many people misthink this, in actual life there were no problems between different groups, the actual issues happened on political scale.
Basically Hungarian cultural expansion hit the awakening of ethnic minorities, Hungary tried to repeat what France did but was 100 years too lat, iIt couldn't manage to assimilate the minorities (except Germans and Jews in cities), the big homogenous ethnic blocks remained virtually untouched, but did enough to cause worry in ethnic leaders. Still there were no talks of secession at time, that only came late in the war -s y no Romanian in Transylvania wanted to join the much poorer Romanian Kingdom.
Learning German/Hungarian was forced, although you shouldn't ignore that in most places there were no schools before to begin with, and this practice was not particularly harsh for the 19. century. Ironically the language laws themselves were quite liberal but their application was a different story.
The largest single causer of conflicts were state bureaucrats that were sent down from Budapest to localities and ignored old unwritten agreements and traditions.
Overall for the nations that lived in its border they were good times.
There were conflicts and aging leftover system, but it wasn't an archaic rotten empire.
It wasn't as dreadful as ex-minorities say it was, but it wasn't such pure golden times as Hungarians think.
>>59560762
Death to Hedervary.
t. Croat
>>59548101
Read The Eagles Die.
