In regards to Himmler, he was crazy but that's not the same as stupid. He may very well realize he isn't well liked at all, and as such he may support someone else outside the SS to take over power. Himmler remains in the shadows as power behind the throne.
What does Nazi Germany do next?
- Thread starter AussieHawker
- Start date
Generaloberst
Banned
Hitler's mental and physical health only really started to falter when the cracks began to show after Stalingrad. This is when his excited rants and raves began to start and he began to lose touch with reality.
I agree with you Julian. There would be no accepted system of power transfer post-Adolf, so that those of Hitler's henchmen with power bases would be trying to grab the leadership for themselves. And that is my point, Speer et al were essentially powerless, only Himmler's SS and the Army had a chance of grabbing control. As you point out, Hitler had done his best to defang the Generals, leaving Himmler in pole position. And as Himmler also controlled the security services he also would probably have had the advantage of knowing before his rivals when Hitler was about to die. I imagine Gestapo agents backed up by SS squads would be making midnight raids on the sleeping quarters of hundreds of Wehrmacht senior officers in an attempt to decapitate the Army's leadership before they knew what was going on. It would be Night of the Long Knives scaled up a dozen times.
That doesn't mean the Army wouldn't have a chance to try to grab power, it's possible they might get early warning or be waiting for such a move, but they wouldn't be the favoured horse in this race. No one else would be in the running though.
That doesn't mean the Army wouldn't have a chance to try to grab power, it's possible they might get early warning or be waiting for such a move, but they wouldn't be the favoured horse in this race. No one else would be in the running though.
He sent well over an hour ranting and screaming after the second battle of El Alamein.
"In regards to Himmler, he was crazy but that's not the same as stupid. He may very well realize he isn't well liked at all, and as such he may support someone else outside the SS to take over power. Himmler remains in the shadows as power behind the throne."
Even if the title of Fuhrer went to someone else Himmler and the SS would be the ones in power in that case. The name of the puppet is not really important when the puppet master is Himmler. Actually, I don't think Himmler was crazy, he was evil but chillingly sane.
Even if the title of Fuhrer went to someone else Himmler and the SS would be the ones in power in that case. The name of the puppet is not really important when the puppet master is Himmler. Actually, I don't think Himmler was crazy, he was evil but chillingly sane.
Himmler's political position does not necessarily translate into actual political power. Everything he had, even his authority, came from Hitler (Or claiming to be doing what Hitler wanted). Remove that and I find in doubtful that he can maintain the legitimacy to seize power outside of a small core of loyalists. Bormann and the Gauleiters, parts of the SS (An enormous organization), parts of the military, etc will all oppose him. Without Hitler no one has the power to cement control because they derived it originally from him.
The Nazis wanted a limited number of long term slaves, mainly in General Government area, mainly very young, who could be brought up in conditions similar to those found in the Antebellum South (kept illiterate, raised to be chattel, etc.). Older people (which was anyone over about 35, although it would have varied by local Gauleiter) were going to be wiped out. Hitler was utterly serious when he talked about eliminating the Slavs.
Read Generalplan Ost. The plan was to eliminate 85% of the population of Poland and Lithuania, 2/3 of the population of the Ukraine, 3/4 of Russians (60% killed, 15% transported to Western Siberia) and Belorussians, half of the Czechs, Latvians, & Estonians. The Plan would have taken 25 years, but the goal was to clear all of the East for fresh settlers, leaving 14-15 million slaves. The Plan talks about relocation, but relocating 100 million people is a fantasy (much like the idea of relocating the Jews of Europe to Madagascar), especially when one reads of how "Slavic" cities were to be obliterated so that no evidence of the existence remained, and how Saint Petersburg/Leningrad was to be razed and replaced by a massive lake, all the work to be done, by hand, by the local populations.
There is a general, usually unconscious, effort to mitigate exactly how utterly evil the Reich and its leaders actually were, putting them into a "sick bunch of (*&^%$, but you know, Stalin and Mao were almost as bad" category. IMO this is because the average person's mind recoils at exactly how far the Reich planned to go, was willing to go and meant to do once they won. Because of this the Holocaust tends to get all the attention because, as horrific as it is, it is something that one can almost get their mind around in the "Nazis = Antisemitism" sense. That the Nazis intended to murder over 100 MILLION people, literally because they were in the way, is simply so far over the top that it is unimaginable to most people.
Fortunately the Nazis were stupid enough to have actually written Generalplan Ost out and made sufficient copies (including almost 4 MILLION copies of pamphlet describing how to identify the sub-human elements of the population) that they were found and are available for review.
Studying the Nazis plans is one of those efforts where every time you think you have seen it all, an entirely new stack of terrible appears.
Generaloberst
Banned
Yes, but, they didn't become a daily occurrence until after Stalingrad. The failure of the Sixth Army and Paulus' dishonorable conduct in surrendering himself to the Russians made something snap inside Hitler which would only get worse as the final defeat drew near.He sent well over an hour ranting and screaming after the second battle of El Alamein.
Yes, I think a fair bit of it had to do with the fact Hitler himself made a lot of the decisions in regard to Stalingrad so he had no one else to blame, hell he even made Paulus Field Marshal right before he surrendered himself. We are talking a man with an ego the size of a planet having no way out from the fact his judgment was bad.
Generaloberst
Banned
He made Paulus a Field Marshal to put weight on his shoulders not to surrender.
Honestly, in an Axis Victory, Hitler might be completely competent and at the helm for at the very least a decade.
"Himmler's political position does not necessarily translate into actual political power. Everything he had, even his authority, came from Hitler (Or claiming to be doing what Hitler wanted). Remove that and I find in doubtful that he can maintain the legitimacy to seize power outside of a small core of loyalists. Bormann and the Gauleiters, parts of the SS (An enormous organization), parts of the military, etc will all oppose him. Without Hitler no one has the power to cement control because they derived it originally from him."
Okay, I agree that Himmler does not necessarily win, but he is still in the best position. Bormann and the Gauleiters had power under Hitler's reign, but they didn't command the military power that Himmler did. Or the Gestapo. The Gauleiters' power derived directly from Hitler, they were in the worst position once he died as they did have an independent source of power. Either they would have to kowtow to Himmler or the Generals, or maybe Bormann, for the reason you point out, their legitimacy wouldn't have been recognised by the rank and file once Hitler died.
Bormann might have a chance but only by siding with the Army, similarly to his attempt to setup a three man junta in 1943. But in this case I am not sure why the Army would want to work with him for long. He might be useful in bringing in enough Party apparatchiks to present themselves as the legitimate successors, but I suspect he would be disposed of as quickly as possible by his allies. And a good thing too, Bormann would probably be a bigger disaster for the population of Europe than Himmler would have been.
As I mentioned before, the military would be very likely to oppose Himmler but they are not in a strong position. As for other SS rivals? That's possible as there would be no shortage of aspiring tyrants in that lot, and an accident could be arranged by one of them, but even still it's the SS and Gestapo in charge. With another blood soaked racist in charge.
But, in counterpoint, the example of Stalin shows that a hated psycopath with no real friends can hold onto power for a remarkably long time.
In the long term the Reich would implode, but it could take quite a few years.
Okay, I agree that Himmler does not necessarily win, but he is still in the best position. Bormann and the Gauleiters had power under Hitler's reign, but they didn't command the military power that Himmler did. Or the Gestapo. The Gauleiters' power derived directly from Hitler, they were in the worst position once he died as they did have an independent source of power. Either they would have to kowtow to Himmler or the Generals, or maybe Bormann, for the reason you point out, their legitimacy wouldn't have been recognised by the rank and file once Hitler died.
Bormann might have a chance but only by siding with the Army, similarly to his attempt to setup a three man junta in 1943. But in this case I am not sure why the Army would want to work with him for long. He might be useful in bringing in enough Party apparatchiks to present themselves as the legitimate successors, but I suspect he would be disposed of as quickly as possible by his allies. And a good thing too, Bormann would probably be a bigger disaster for the population of Europe than Himmler would have been.
As I mentioned before, the military would be very likely to oppose Himmler but they are not in a strong position. As for other SS rivals? That's possible as there would be no shortage of aspiring tyrants in that lot, and an accident could be arranged by one of them, but even still it's the SS and Gestapo in charge. With another blood soaked racist in charge.
But, in counterpoint, the example of Stalin shows that a hated psycopath with no real friends can hold onto power for a remarkably long time.
In the long term the Reich would implode, but it could take quite a few years.
He sent well over an hour ranting and screaming after the second battle of El Alamein.
Where's that from? Pardon my ignorance please...
This assume the man in the spotlight is happy to have a Himmler in the shadows.
Goering isn't going to.
Any of the generals? Those who were already toying with the idea of getting rid of Hitler, but gave up because of his popularity? Those who considered the SS their rivals, Himmler a buffoon, and the Waffen-SS a bad joke?
No.
Himmler is in the same position of the Soviet leaders of their variously named secrete police forces; everyone else in the regime can barely tolerate him because they are afraid of him, and they are afraif of him because Hitler protects him. Remove Hitler, and Himmler is a snowball in hell.
Where "parts" means 99%, I'd say. I'll buy at 95%.
Hear, hear. The exception is those actually having the barrel of the gun, i.e. the generals. The police and the SS also have guns, but they have no chance if the Heer turns against them.
"The police and the SS also have guns, but they have no chance if the Heer turns against them."
That should be if a coordinated Heer turns against them. That would be the big if. The SS has more than a few guns, more than a few tanks too, so it would need a coordinated move by the Generals to successfully oppose them. Himmler, or for that matter Bormann or any other SS man with aspirations, isn't going to wait around to give the Generals the luxury of planning what to do. If anyone from the SS or Party wants to gain power they would realise they have to bring the Generals to heel very quickly. It's a perfect setting for a palace coup type affair. If Hitler is on his deathbed then Himmler is going to be signing arrest and death warrants in a frenzy. Goering would need to be careful in getting to some reliable troops very quickly as I imagine his name would be top of the Himmler's list. Now if the Generals get the chance to secure themselves amongst their troops beforehand then they can have the muscle to challenge Himmler. But that's also a big if.
That should be if a coordinated Heer turns against them. That would be the big if. The SS has more than a few guns, more than a few tanks too, so it would need a coordinated move by the Generals to successfully oppose them. Himmler, or for that matter Bormann or any other SS man with aspirations, isn't going to wait around to give the Generals the luxury of planning what to do. If anyone from the SS or Party wants to gain power they would realise they have to bring the Generals to heel very quickly. It's a perfect setting for a palace coup type affair. If Hitler is on his deathbed then Himmler is going to be signing arrest and death warrants in a frenzy. Goering would need to be careful in getting to some reliable troops very quickly as I imagine his name would be top of the Himmler's list. Now if the Generals get the chance to secure themselves amongst their troops beforehand then they can have the muscle to challenge Himmler. But that's also a big if.
What I find surprising is that you don't see the specularity of each and every consideration you make.
The Heer needs coordination - so do the Waffen-SS.
Himmler is not going to wait - why would the generals, who, as we know, were planning coups against Hitler quite a long way before. Probably they have a Fall Schwartz already planned since the first day they noticed Hitler's health was failing.
The generals need to secure themselves among loyal troops - why wouldn't the SS leadership need to do that, too.
And so on.
Therefore, it's down to numbers, and if the proportions are not unlike 1944-45 - the time frame when the Waffen-SS were at their most powerful - the SS can force a bloody civil war, but it will be short and they'll be the losers.
Not to mention that while 99% of the armed forces would be against the SS, it's not a given that 99% of the SS would be against the generals.
I guess the advantage the US would have over the OTL Cold War is that it'd be harder for the Nazis to act as the noble vanguard of anti-colonialism in the Third World, the way the Soviets often did. There'd still be some opportunists taking up the mantle of fascism the way folks like Castro arguably did with Communism IOTL, but I think it'd be harder for the Nazis to sell their "alternative world-system" on the world stage than it was for the Soviets.
Last edited:
TBH, failings in agriculture turned out to be a lot more important than successes in physics to the fate of the USSR, though. Though a lot of those failures were more political or even climatological in origin than scientific (it wasn't scientific misunderstanding keeping the Politburo from expanding private plots or building better storage silos on collective farms, after all).
Also, saying economics isn't worth noting isn't quite fair: Just to name a few, Nikolai Kondratiev, Leonid Kantorovich and Wassily Leontief all came up with valid and useful economic discoveries and/or theories. But we're getting way off topic.
I've come to believe we're already unlucky enough to be in a timeline where the Nazis were insanely lucky. Taking over the government in 1933, getting the industry of Czechoslovakia without a fight, defeating France when one change of plan or traffic jam in the Ardennes could have stalled the whole mess, catching Stalin completely by surprise... If ATLs were real and random, for every Nazi Victory ATL there would be tens of ATLs (with PODs in the '20s or '30s) where Nazism was thankfully a historical footnote.