AHC: Have a victorious Nazi Germany undergo China-syle reforms

Why is it hard to tell what happens to the Ukraine after Hitler? Why would the Nazis abandon their plans?
 
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.
 

Deleted member 1487

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.

If I can plug my TL I'm currently writing, I included a section on what the Nazis would be doing if they were winning by 1943 in the East in my post a few moments ago:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=359315&page=5

There is no coming back from that.
 

Zagan

Donor
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.
 
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. 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.
 

Zagan

Donor
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.

But they needed Ukrainian ressources to prevent starvation of German population. And here is Nazi logic:

Oh, let's starve to death these Untermensch-Slaven, nobody will ask after we win the war and as a master race, we have the right to do it anyway.
 
...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.
 
...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.

That novel involves millions of people who die in Eastern Europe, which has been resettled, and American POWs dying of radiation poisoning as they pull the melted statue of liberty out of the ruins of Philadelphia. It also pretty clearly had the Culture intervening behind the scenes, because it never explains why all of Germany goes "let us emulate the discredited ideology of liberty, which has failed so clearly."

I don't see how discussing the actual Nazi plans for Europe is off topic.

Now, can you get a Germany that reforms? Sure. But it's going to go through tens of millions of people in the interim, and the reforms will be part of a clusterfuck that sees German education trashed, Ghost Cities in the East, centralized planning on a Soviet scale, and the intentional destruction of cultural treasures.
 
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.
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.
 

Dorozhand

Banned
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.

Absolute rubbish. Communism is the ideal of people's liberation from the oppression of class and private capital. All of the worker's states established after Stalin's rise to power in the USSR were degenerated because they took their cues from a degenerated state, which the USSR was after the nationalist fascist backsliding of Stalin's regime. The early Soviet Union was a fascinating "society under construction" that accomplished stupendous feats of economic recovery from the First World War and the Civil War, rebuilding the country's agricultural base, setting up the framework for proletarian-centred industrialization, and building up comprehensive utilities and infrastructure. It was a time of great motivation and perhaps the only real taste of Socialist life humanity has had before the age of fascism and Stalin's anti-Communist line.

I would argue that, in terms of death toll and general human misery, merchant capitalism overshadows all else by miles upon systematic miles.
It is a cloud of destruction and oblivion that hangs over human history. It is the prime mover of industrial slaughter and slavery on national and continental scales.
 
Last edited:
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.
Yup. Japan did the same thing in South East Asia. Their stupidity cost them a great deal of potential support.
 
Top