The Holocaust, I could possibly see. But Generalplan Ost calls for the liquidation of the vast majority of Germany's conquered territory. That's a far greater scale than can be hidden, especially with refugees fleeing.
Effect of a Nazi Victory on the US/Britain?
- Thread starter Touland
- Start date
The Holocaust, I could possibly see. But Generalplan Ost calls for the liquidation of the vast majority of Germany's conquered territory. That's a far greater scale than can be hidden, especially with refugees fleeing.
Deleted member 94680
Clear evidence exists that Winston Churchill was privy to intelligence reports derived from decoded German transmissions in August 1941, during which he stated:
Whole districts are being exterminated. Scores of thousands – literally scores of thousands – of executions in cold blood are being perpetrated by the German police-troops upon the Russian patriots who defend their native soil. Since the Mongol invasions of Europe in the sixteenth century, there has never been methodical, merciless butchery on such a scale, or approaching such a scale.
— Winston Churchill, 24 August 1941.
During the early years of the war, the Polish government-in-exile published documents and organised meetings to spread word about the fate of the Jews (see Witold Pilecki's Report). In the summer of 1942, a Jewish labor organisation (the Bund) leader, Leon Feiner got word to London that 700,000 Polish Jews had already died. The Daily Telegraph published it on 25 June 1942, and the BBC took the story seriously, though the U.S. State Department doubted it.
Wiki page on Responsibility for the Holocaust
Whats the point when you can do what happened in otl and leave everything up to the locals with the resource extraction being handled by Western companies. This also doesn't solve the problem of dealing with insurgencies and the strategic unimportance .
JSchafer
Banned
Unless you allow for a let-off valve and let Russians and others run across Urals. We didn’t kill them they moved away can be a decent defense in a time without satellites, internet and with a totalitarian state controlling what is heard and what is not.
Was not aware of that. But even with it sounds less dangerous than what the real truth was.
The best resource extraction colony and most profitable one is where the local people are left uneducated, tribal and ignorant of world affairs. Education and participation in military matters amongst the colonials brought about the successful decolonization.
Local governments are corrupt. Zimbabwe can be a perfect example how a country can change under inept leadership. And in a world preparing to either repell a German invasion or to undertake an anti Nazi crusade few things can be allowed. Sure, Nigeria May be irrelevant. Chad too. Libya. But India. Malaysia. Hong Kong. There are colonies that form the backbone of an empire.
Bookmark1995
Banned
The effect of a Nazi victory on the US and England really depends on the circumstances of "victory" and the ramifications. The rule of speculative history is that one can never be sure about what happens, but many alternate historians still try.
In my Nazi Victory TL, the result of the Soviets collapsing and the Nazis winning is a Cold War is between the US and the Nazi Reich. The Nazis massacred one-half of Europe while subjugating the rest.
OTL, the big enemy for many Americans in the latter-half of the 20th century was Communism. This influenced everything: politics, culture, geopolitical strategy, rhetoric by politicians, civil rights, etc. After the Soviet Union failed, that failure became the justification for the neoliberal consensus. The one that says "capitalism must be free in order to be free." The world we live in comes from that geopolitical struggle that lasted from 1946-1991.
TTL, the big enemy is not a dictatorship run by a poorly managed statist model, but a dictatorship with a perverted obsession with racial purity, an open contempt for elected forms of government, a hard-on for conquest, and obsession with mass murder and racial stratification.
TTL, many Americans would see the Nazis as worse than communism. The Nazis, if they brought their nightmarish visions to reality, would not be merely seen as a dictatorship, but an existential threat to human civilization. They've conquered all of Europe, are willing to slaughter millions of millions of people for an autarkic dream, and have nuclear weapons.
How does American racial policy change when a dictatorship that takes American institutional racism up to new heights is the great enemy?
What covert guerilla groups does your secret government agency fund?
What economic policies do you pursue when facing down such an evil regime, and without a communist boogieman?
How does Britain treat its colonies?
What kind of movies and TV are made about Nazis?
In short, there are massive, massive ramifications if the Nazis do conquer of all of Europe.
OTL, however, the US and other governments often looked the other way at these reports. The US didn't bomb Auschwitz when it had the chance, the US balked at welcoming Jewish refugees, and many Allied leaders didn't want to make the war a "Jewish war" in a time when antisemitism was still far less taboo. It was only when US soldiers came across the rotting zombies in the concentration camps that people really took these horrors seriously.
The crimes were so unimaginable, that Raphael Lemkin had to invent genocide to give them meaning.
TTL, I picture it being a few years before anyone would take these reports seriously.
Still...information finds a way.
In my Nazi Victory TL, the result of the Soviets collapsing and the Nazis winning is a Cold War is between the US and the Nazi Reich. The Nazis massacred one-half of Europe while subjugating the rest.
OTL, the big enemy for many Americans in the latter-half of the 20th century was Communism. This influenced everything: politics, culture, geopolitical strategy, rhetoric by politicians, civil rights, etc. After the Soviet Union failed, that failure became the justification for the neoliberal consensus. The one that says "capitalism must be free in order to be free." The world we live in comes from that geopolitical struggle that lasted from 1946-1991.
TTL, the big enemy is not a dictatorship run by a poorly managed statist model, but a dictatorship with a perverted obsession with racial purity, an open contempt for elected forms of government, a hard-on for conquest, and obsession with mass murder and racial stratification.
TTL, many Americans would see the Nazis as worse than communism. The Nazis, if they brought their nightmarish visions to reality, would not be merely seen as a dictatorship, but an existential threat to human civilization. They've conquered all of Europe, are willing to slaughter millions of millions of people for an autarkic dream, and have nuclear weapons.
How does American racial policy change when a dictatorship that takes American institutional racism up to new heights is the great enemy?
What covert guerilla groups does your secret government agency fund?
What economic policies do you pursue when facing down such an evil regime, and without a communist boogieman?
How does Britain treat its colonies?
What kind of movies and TV are made about Nazis?
In short, there are massive, massive ramifications if the Nazis do conquer of all of Europe.
OTL, however, the US and other governments often looked the other way at these reports. The US didn't bomb Auschwitz when it had the chance, the US balked at welcoming Jewish refugees, and many Allied leaders didn't want to make the war a "Jewish war" in a time when antisemitism was still far less taboo. It was only when US soldiers came across the rotting zombies in the concentration camps that people really took these horrors seriously.
The crimes were so unimaginable, that Raphael Lemkin had to invent genocide to give them meaning.
TTL, I picture it being a few years before anyone would take these reports seriously.
Still...information finds a way.
That then begs the question. Why are millions of people fleeing Europe? Especially voluntarily? As only mortal peril should explain a mass movement of that size.
JSchafer
Banned
Allies allowed quite easily for German expulsion and in some cases extermination at the end of WW2. In Czechia where my great grandpa is from Germans were lined on the road and ran over with Opel trucks and it was shown on TV. Nazis hated non Germans. Think it would be clear why they’re running. But invading Germany after it wins in the east is impossible.
Deleted member 94680
You can disregard it any way you want, try to explain away why they didn’t react to the Holocaust earlier. Fact of the matter is OTL the WAllies knew about the holocaust before the end of the War.
Whether the WAllies react to the facts is another matter.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Again, it would take a massive blowing of the whistle before the public really cared. Bill Cosby's crimes went on for a while until several dozen woman openly accused him, largely because it was unimaginable for a man who represented American TV wholesomeness to be so horrid of a person.
OTL, German crimes went on because the crimes were unimaginable. It is particularly telling that Auschwitz was not even the worst place in the war. The other exterminations like Treblinka were even more horrid.
ITTL, it would take a few years before a massive whistleblower and countless eyewitness reports make people aware of the horror story going on in the East.
Unless it had nukes, it wouldn't be impossible. Just really, really costly.
JSchafer
Banned
Nuke the beaches. Send men in. Nuke the cities like Paris or Amsterdam where Germans will hole up. Nuke the Westwall. Nuke the oil fields. Nuke Norway submarine bases and nuclear research facilities. Nuke Brest, Lorient and St. Nazaire facilities. Nuke Wilhelmshaven and Kiel. Nuke Rome. Yeah it can be nuked but one wonders what effect that has. And if Germans did win and are settling East German cities may not be as great of a target due to depopulation.
Deleted member 94680
It’s not unimaginable if you know it is happening. They were already aware as reports reached them as early as ‘39 and definitely by ‘41 - that’s recorded fact.
My post was a post about whether the WAllies knew about the Holocaust before the camps were liberated. It wasn’t about whether the WAllies would act about the Holocaust.
Whether by British and American latent antisemitism or simply the logistics of doing something, whatever. OTL they didn’t so ATL they probably won’t either.
Bookmark1995
Banned
ITTL, the answer is simple: they wouldn't do anything.
In my case, an isolationist America wouldn't have the means to militarily invade Nazi Europe.
The question is: how does the public react to the Germans systematically enslaving and killing millions of people? What does the American public react say, in the late 1940s, to the Germans committing the most horrid crime in history.
indeed.
The big problem the Germans will have is fascist economics and corruption mean a zombie economy in the years after the war.
Mad civil engineering projects like building Germania or massive broad gauge railways will put a big strain on the economy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_(city)
Expanding German settlement in to Russia will be a project of many generations.
Controlling eastern Europe will be a big strain on the Heer.
Bring Europe up to the Urals to German Standards of infrastructure will take massive resources and time.
Germany's policies in Russia of genocide and slave labour will lead to conflict between the 2 policies.
For the economy Germany to survive they will need massive reform and to ditch fascist economics.
A lot depends on who takes power after Hitler dies.
I suspect with his health problems he will not live past the early in 1950s
On the plus side the American might not fight in Korea or Vietnam
No red scare in America.
No communism in China.
UK with an early exit for the war is less damaged and has less debts and is in a better position to Empire.
Without Soviet arms being sent to rebels in European empires it will make control easier.
No Suez criss
No state of Israel.
No Castro in Cuba.
German will be seen as a land power without the resources for a big navy.
Germany has all the resources it needs within its empire and does not care about trade with rest of world.
Germany might go for space race if they have the resources for it.
Last edited:
Deleted member 109224
The Germans couldn't win the War. Even minus the US, Britain would stubbornly hold out and the Soviets would eventually grind the Germans out of their country.
The closest thing to a "success" would be a Cold Piece: All sides get so exhausted that they just quit fighting (for the time being).
If Churchill opened up fronts in the "soft underbelly" of Fortress Europa - Italy and the Balkans - the British might be exhausted into a stalemate.
If the US stays out of the war, that's a lot of men for the eastern front. At its peak, 1.9 million Germans were on the Western Front during WWII (and 8 million throughout the war). In the east it peaked at 3.9 million.
The question is, at that point - both in time and geographically - does an eastern front stalemate occur? Quisling OTL urged Hitler to set the line at the Dnieper IIRC. Dnieper plus Baltics?
The closest thing to a "success" would be a Cold Piece: All sides get so exhausted that they just quit fighting (for the time being).
If Churchill opened up fronts in the "soft underbelly" of Fortress Europa - Italy and the Balkans - the British might be exhausted into a stalemate.
If the US stays out of the war, that's a lot of men for the eastern front. At its peak, 1.9 million Germans were on the Western Front during WWII (and 8 million throughout the war). In the east it peaked at 3.9 million.
The question is, at that point - both in time and geographically - does an eastern front stalemate occur? Quisling OTL urged Hitler to set the line at the Dnieper IIRC. Dnieper plus Baltics?
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 109224
Fidel Castro might be a Fascist. He was an admirer of Mussolini and when Franco died he sent flowers.
Israel would probably still exist. Most of the people who fought in the war there had arrived before 1945. Plus the only well-organized Arab army facing off against the Zionist forces was the Jordanians, and the Jordanians were in cahoots with the Zionists.
Germany OTL looked beyond Europe. They sponsored al-Husseini in Palestine and supported a coup in Iraq.
You're right on the country having big economic issues.
The Nazis were pretty into animal rights, anti-smoking, and the environment.
Germany might be a bit more advanced in medical research because of their complete disregard for human life.
Bit late for that and require a very different British policy than anything suggested at the time.
So how is that suppose to make the ever increasing number of locals, slaves to the equally unbenefical British rule.
Which came under black rule in 1980 and why is inept leadership a bad thing for European companies
Whats the point of dying for Zambia when your suppose to be getting ready to fight Germany.
India was becoming increasingly violent and given it's massive population for Britain to try to hold on to it would be insane and extremely costly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India#1946_Election,_Cabinet_Mission,_Direct_Action_Day,_Plan_for_Partition,_Independence:_1946–1947
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Indian_Navy_mutiny
What justification does Britain have to hold on to Malaysia when white supremacy is no longer a thing
" bombing auschwitz" wasn't really an effective option. We're talking about a period when the only reliable way to hit a particular target with a bomb via high altitude level bombing was to have a couple hundred aircraft bomb in formation at the same time. And even then actual effect varied. Bombing railroad tracks was often a waste and even if damage was caused repairs could be quickly done. I believe the camps in Poland were also out of range of the allied bombers based in Britain. They could try shuttle bombing and using Soviet bases but OTL that was pretty much a disaster.
Deleted member 109224
Further elaborating on this (and the prior bit I quoted which raised the idea that there'd be no Castro), I think that Batista's management of Cuba would mean that there'd still probably be a revolution. OTL when Fidel first took charge it wasn't clear that he was Communist, and indeed his views weren't that solidified at the time. His brother Raul was the committed Communist.
So if the Soviets aren't in so hot a position, the Nazis dominate Europe, and Mussolini is still running things in Rome. I think it's plausible that his ideology would be more influenced by Fascism than Communism here. Heck, adopting the title of Lider OTL was sort of fashy (Hitler being Fuhrer, Mussolini being Duce, all three terms/titles basically meaning Leader). If he is not Mussolini-Fascist, than Francoesque Synidcalism might be the name of the game.