Belarus after the war? Ukraine after the war? Really? Did you ever hear of Generalplan Ost? If the Reich is victorious, USSR surrender or collapses and Hitler and Himmler and the rest live, it will be executed. Hell it was being executed even during the war...
It means two thirds of population of the area that ends up under Nazi occupation ends up in mass graves. Or in ovens... Or starved to death. The rest is made into slaves and dies slowly.
Why is it hard to tell what happens to the Ukraine after Hitler? Why would the Nazis abandon their plans?
The Germans started to mollify their stance towards Ukranians in the last part of the war. They realized they actually needed them in order to help fighting the Soviets.
Yes. This was a serious strategic mistake.
But it makes very little sense.
They could have lied to the Ukrainians, win the war first and screw them afterwards.
But it makes very little sense.
They could have lied to the Ukrainians, win the war first and screw them afterwards.
They couldn't have. They did not have enough resources to convincingly lie to so many people.
But it makes very little sense.
They could have lied to the Ukrainians, win the war first and screw them afterwards.
And logic and common sense aren't things that go together with the Nazis or Hitler.
Why are you dragging my discussion of nazis down with talk of genocide?
Why? Because the point of the Nazis were to kill eveyone in Eastern Europe. The Nazis wanted genocide, please grasp that fact.
...I'm going to try to get this back on topic...
Harry Turtledove did a novel about a reforming victorious Nazi Germany as well, entitled In the Presence of Mine Enemies. Haven't read it... or anything by Turtledove... but a friend said he liked it.
Führerprinzip flies out the window once the Führer dies, unless the Führer puts his son on the throne. But he has no son and if someone else tries to become Führer then all the others trying for the same position are just going to fight him for it and destroy the Reich in the process. Therefore if Nazi Germany actually got its act together and "won" WW2, it means that the Führerprinzip has been negated or only applied to Hitler. After that the Nazis, for the sake of stability, might stress "Aryan order" or something, and you end up with a post-Mao/post-Stalin style system.The heart of Nazism is Fuhrerprinzip, which is the worst possible leadership style. Do nothing, and let your subordinates fight and solve problems themselves, meanwhile micromanaging everyone and once in awhile arbitrating disputes all the while not studying anything in depth and ignoring professional opinion. Combines all the worst parts of authoritarianism and totalitarianism without the stability of a God King or legitimacy of an aristocracy. It's not about stability or victims it's about in no other system including monarchy and dictatorship does one weak link at the top ruin everything catastrophically.
Realpoltik would not change Fuhrerprinzip or ineffective government, because the concept and idea of Fuhrerprinzip is central to Nazism. You can very easily argue, without talking about racism and romanticism, that facism and Nazism in particular are the worst forms of human government and utterly ineffective and bankrupt.
First, the explicit motivations of these regimes aren't that important.
Mao said he was trying to help the worker when he starved tens of millions of them to death. Who gives a fuck what he said he was trying to do. Hitler said he was trying to build a thousand year Reich and make life better for the German people. Everyone sells some positive goal of trying to help others (the worker, the German people). Their propaganda is meaningless, look at what they do. Results matter.
Second, its not like these leftists totalitarian regimes didn't kill whole classes of people because of ethnicity, class, disloyalty, or anything else. What do you think things like the Cultural Revolution were?
In a way Stalin might actually have been better then some of the alternatives. Imagine these wackos trying to export the revolution which many of them wanted to do. Communism has done so much evil and killed so many people I don't see how anyone can say its better then Nazism, its clearly done more harm.
I think that a lot of people have a blank space where "pure evil" is in their mind and they put Hitler there so when someone asks the question if anyone is pure evil they've got that one guy to mention. He was certainly an evil guy, but we aren't talking about Satan on this earth. He was a human being, if we forget that then I don't think we can really understand how this happened to accurately prevent it again. A symptom of this is the desire to raise up everything, even communism (by FAR the worst thing in the 20th century), above him morally on some wacko pretenses like that they said stuff about loving the worker while they were starving, torturing, and executing them.
Yup. Japan did the same thing in South East Asia. Their stupidity cost them a great deal of potential support.Yes. In 1944/45 when they already were on the verge of losing Ukraine. They had the real opportunity to be friend with Ukrainians in 1941, but not only did they spit on that chance, they raped it, killed it, burned it and then danced on its grave.