Fatherland:What happens next?

As far as knowledge of the holocaust is concerned it is worth noting that the essential facts of it were reported in OTL in 1942 by Ed Murrow.
 
Theoretically possible but definitely unlikely, since Nazi empire shall have rather less economic problems than SU, so a collapse more radical than the USSR grows rather unlikely.

I reckon it might be the other way around.

The Soviets had to deal with:

1.Economic strangulation from the west

2.The inherint economic failure of Communism.

3.An arms race

4.A space race

The Nazis will have to deal with:

1.Economic strangulation from America,Canada,China,Japan,Korea,Australia and likely most of the rest of the world.

2.A large powerful partisan resistance inside its borders.

3.Constant terror attacks

4.The economic problems that come with Fascism

5.A long,costly war with horrendous casualties which has shown no signs of stopping and probably never will.

6.An arms race

7.A space race.
 

General Zod

Banned
1. Economic strangulation is definitely much less of a problem for the Nazis since they control all of continental Europe and in all likelihood most of Africa and the Middle East. They can tap on a much better share of world population, industry, and resources. This is compounded by 2, below, which makes them less dependent on external trade links (e.g. they most likely never develop a food deficit).

2. The circumstantial evidence of history is strongly in favor of fascism being rather less harmful to economy than communism. While almost surely they develop a technological and economic gap with the USA in the very long run, it's never going to be as severe as the Soviet one.

3. Constant low-intensity terror attacks are not that much harmful on the economy, see Israel, UK, Spain.

4. Indeed the endless war in Russia is the albatross around their neck, a continental-size Vietnam or Afghanistan, the main factor that is dragging their regime down. Although by the novel's time, there is circumstantial evidence they have not (yet) done so, it is quite possible, as we discussed upthread, that an innovative Nazi leadership takes over (quite possibly because of this very problem) that takes feasible steps to reduce the bleeding: restructuring the colonies and the occupation to reduce heavy military presence to territorially-continous, heavily-colonized, resource-rich areas, withdraw garrisons from the rest and deal with insurgent concentrations there with periodic bombings and tank raids, make a major effort to share the military burden with European fascist vassals (one thing is 80-100 million Nazi Germany occupying 100-150 million European Russia, another is 250-300 million Nazi-EU doing so).

5. Space race is as much a boost to economy as it is a resource drain.

6. As other posters told me, a Nazi-Europe/America arms race is going to be less burdensome than OTL Cold War. It's going to be mostly ICBM/SLBM, air-naval (but less submarine warfare), and the conventional armies to fight a Gulf War on steroids.
 
Last edited:
As far as knowledge of the holocaust is concerned it is worth noting that the essential facts of it were reported in OTL in 1942 by Ed Murrow.

Nevertheless, it would get brushed away as American ignores the extermination of Eastern Europe.

the Germans have uniforms, after all.
 
1. Economic strangulation is definitely much less of a problem for the Nazis since they control all of continental Europe and in all likelihood most of Africa and the Middle East. They can tap on a much better share of world population, industry, and resources. This is compounded by 2, below, which makes them less dependent on external trade links (e.g. they most likely never develop a food deficit).

2. The circumstantial evidence of history is strongly in favor of fascism being rather less harmful to economy than communism. While almost surely they develop a technological and economic gap with the USA in the very long run, it's never going to be as severe as the Soviet one.

3. Constant low-intensity terror attacks are not that much harmful on the economy, see Israel, UK, Spain.

1.The Nazis have no colonies or control in the middle east or Africa even though the British empire has expanded so theyll have at least some influence but not enough to use the Arican and Middle Eastern peoples as a labour force.

2.I agree fascism,at least economically tends to be superior to communism but if you lok at the Nazi curriculum in schools that amount of militarism and hatred is seriously going to have an effect on your buisness opportunities.Als it would be hard to find a country that would actually deal with a Nazi Germany outside their puppets at least the Soviets could still trade with non-comecon members.

3.Id disagree I mean the terror attacks on Berlin alone look pretty frequent with in the space of a few days,soviet partisans kill an SS officer and his wife and March acts like hes hearing about an average murder case.Also Britain and Spain are peanuts compared to the amount of hatred for the Nazis and presumably massive amounts of popularity for Partisan movements,even Israel is better off as not that many people openly support Hamas and Hezbollah but these partisans and the Soviet Union will probably have international sympathy in the non fascist world.
 

General Zod

Banned
1.The Nazis have no colonies or control in the middle east or Africa even though the British empire has expanded so theyll have at least some influence but not enough to use the Arican and Middle Eastern peoples as a labour force.

Actually, the Nazi control Nazi-EU (of which UK is full member, they are vassals just like France, Italy, and Spain, even if Canada and Australia are US satellites), it retains control of European colonial empires, so they have control of Africa and the Middle East, and all their resources. Those they need, but but with control of all European manpower and industry (although Russia is rife with insurgency), what need they would ever have for colonial labor force ????

Even just control of all Europe without the colonies would increase their resources in comparison to Soviet bloc hugely. But IIRC there is nothing in the novel stating that they lost control of Africa and Middle East, and given the TL it would be bizarre.

2.I agree fascism,at least economically tends to be superior to communism but if you lok at the Nazi curriculum in schools that amount of militarism and hatred is seriously going to have an effect on your buisness opportunities.

Not that much amping up on militarism, really, that would be trivial. The Nazis would shoot in the foot of their educational system with their ridiculous racist theories messing with proper teaching of history, politics, social sciences, biology, physics, and stuff. Wilhelmine Germany was pretty militaristic and had a top-class educational system.

Als it would be hard to find a country that would actually deal with a Nazi Germany outside their puppets at least the Soviets could still trade with non-comecon members.

Are you saying that a Nazi bloc would have any more difficulties to trade with "free world" than the Soviet bloc did ? Please, that is outrageously unrealistic, business is business and eats moral outrage away very very quickly.

Besides, in this world, Stalin with his Holodomor is the popular culture incarnation of ultimate evil for the Nazi bloc and the democratic bloc alike, tales of mass killings in Eastern Europe are just overblown propaganda of anti-Nazi fanatics. Nazi Europe is a rival superpower with deeply questionable political system, international policies, and treatment of subjects, which we are locked in a deadly contest for global hegemony with strong ideological overtones, but we can and do business during detente phases.

3.Id disagree I mean the terror attacks on Berlin alone look pretty frequent with in the space of a few days,soviet partisans kill an SS officer and his wife and March acts like hes hearing about an average murder case.

And this is different from Israel at the peak of the suicide bomber wave, how ? Still Israeli economy survived nicely. Also not that much different from UK and Spain at the peak of the IRA/ETA terror offensives, or Italy or West Germany during the zenith of the left-wing 70s terrorism.

Also Britain and Spain are peanuts compared to the amount of hatred for the Nazis and presumably massive amounts of popularity for Partisan movements,even Israel is better off as not that many people openly support Hamas and Hezbollah but these partisans and the Soviet Union will probably have international sympathy in the non fascist world.

This is very true... to a degree. In occupied Russia, public order is almost surely akin to a continent-sized Vietnam/Afghanistan. Public opinion in the democratic bloc probably wavers between hawkish defiance and desire for detente and business as usual as it did in the OTL Cold War. It always maintains strong sympathy and sufficient comittment to anti-Nazi resistance that the Nazi can't use really extreme means like nuking the rump SU, but probably level of practical support (money, weapons, etc.) to anti-Nazi partisans waxes and wanes according to the level of detente or hostility betwen the blocs like it did OTL for anti-communist armed movements.

Nonetheless, the Nazi bloc is still a very powerful nuclear superpower, it means that there some limits that the democratic world does not dare defy for fear of escalation, this Cold War is still waged with some unwritten rules like the OTL one. No nukes for the Soviers, American support to Soviets and partisans is grudgingly tolerated within limits, such as no American combat troops, Africa and the Middle East is Nazi Europe strategic turf, etc.

As for terrorism within Germany and other fascist European states, it exists, but its support basis (radical antifascist activists and surviving Slav slave underclass) is in all likelihood much more restricted and can only sustain a ongoing bombing and assassination campaign like IRA/ETA/RAF/Red Brigades/Hamas, not the huge guerrilla of occupied Russia. In the eastern territories, the Slav natives face the naked genocidal/enslaving fist of the Nazi regime, for them rebelling is natural, so the insurgency naturally gets the support of the vast majorty of the natives. In Nazi Europe, the citizens see the gentle face of the regime, consumerist economic prosperity and an efficient welfare state, it is only when one purposefully rebels that they see the fist. Only a minority does, and a tiny minority does it to the point of bombing. Most dissidents (out of moral outrage, political dissent, psychological individualism or lack of sufferance for the regime's stifling mass conformism and cultural stagnation) choose apathy or counterculture.
 
Last edited:
Very very bad idea. Post-Nazi Germany is still going to have a truckload of nukes and conventional weapons, it is very unlikely that the collapse of the regime would completely stop their ability to use them (as many posters have stated, this Nazi Germany has less reasons than SU to collapse, so any regime fall is likely going to be less severe in disruption of the state machinery and the military), and even any reasonable post-Nazi democratic Germany would still almost surely find a casus belli in large-scale ethnic cleansing of its nationals. Collective guilt over Nazi atrocities in post-Nazi Germany is almost surely going to be as half-hearted as the one about Communist atrocities in post-Soviet Russia, if not even lesser than that, definitely not enough to make the German people meekily accept the ethnic cleasing of millions of nationals in retaliation.

To make a comparison, how post-Soviet Russia would have reacted if post-Soviet Ukraine had stated "Well, Stalin's Holodomor gives us the moral right to expel/kill our Russian minority". In the best of cases, it would have been Russian tanks rolling back in Kiev. In the worst, it would have been Kiev getting a nuclear tan (for the purposes of the comparison, I'm neatly ignoring the fact that OTL post-Soviet Ukraine did have some nukes of their own, since it is very questionable whether rump SU would have them; IMO one of the unwritten rules in the Cold War between Nazi Germany and the USA is that the rump SU is not allowed to have nukes of their own). And neither America nor Europe would have have dared react to armed retaliation against such a clear-cut casus belli.

*Bump I just read teh book:p*

At the very least the USSR will claim most of its land back, as any German settlers will still be vastly outnumbered by Slavs etc.

The Germans may hang on to parts of Belarus or Ukranie, but Moscow and Caucas? I doubt it...A post-Nazi leadership will be to busy trying to get their house in order to worry much about keeping hold of land were the people have spent the last 20 year fighting them to the death.

Chances are the German population and Wehrmacht will be war-weary and suffering from a post collpse malise similar to but not as bad as Russia's.
 
*Bump I just read teh book:p*

How did you find it? :)

At the very least the USSR will claim most of its land back, as any German settlers will still be vastly outnumbered by Slavs etc.

Yes probably a situation similar to the Soviet collapse yet much more extreme.

The Germans may hang on to parts of Belarus or Ukranie, but Moscow and Caucas? I doubt it...A post-Nazi leadership will be to busy trying to get their house in order to worry much about keeping hold of land were the people have spent the last 20 year fighting them to the death.

I doubt they would get parts of the Ukraine or Belarus,maybe parts of Poland though.

Chances are the German population and Wehrmacht will be war-weary and suffering from a post collpse malise similar to but not as bad as Russia's.

It would be much worse than the Soviet collapse not better,the collapse of the Nazi regime will be very bloody.
 
How did you find it? :)

Borrowed it from a library


Yes probably a situation similar to the Soviet collapse yet much more extreme

It'll be a funny world with a 'Greater Germany' still around with the USSR regaining its former land, and still very pissed off about the 20+ years of crap they just went through.

I doubt they would get parts of the Ukraine or Belarus,maybe parts of Poland though

Poland for sure, the Baltics and part of western Ukranie and Belarus could be settled to a poiny where Germany wont just give them up.

It would be much worse than the Soviet collapse not better,the collapse of the Nazi regime will be very bloody

Germany itself has no real ethnic problems at this point aside from maybe the Czechs. There'd have to be an outright civil war for things to get really bad.
 
Borrowed it from a library




It'll be a funny world with a 'Greater Germany' still around with the USSR regaining its former land, and still very pissed off about the 20+ years of crap they just went through.



Poland for sure, the Baltics and part of western Ukranie and Belarus could be settled to a poiny where Germany wont just give them up.



Germany itself has no real ethnic problems at this point aside from maybe the Czechs. There'd have to be an outright civil war for things to get really bad.

No I meant did you enjoy it :)

I doubt Germany would keep all of Poland,likely all of Prussia though,in the final days of the Reich I'm guessing there will be protests in Germany and likely outright revolution in estern Europe from which the German army will likely bail and try and keep it's borders.

And although there won't be outright civil war I think it will be a situation vaguely similar to OTL 1944/1945 settlers being slaughtered by slavs hungry for revenge.
 
Possibly the post-war Nazi gradually adjust their ideology so that while Germans are still set up a rung above the rest, all Aryan Europeans are acknowledged to have a racial "special destiny" of global hegemony. Frighteningly, if they go this way, and the Nazi EU is good enough to sustain the livelihood of the WE masses, this angle could win substantial support for the system in Western Europe.

This is more or less their ideology OTL. The Nazis were happy enough to recruit Aryans from all over Europe for the SS 'to fight communism', after all, in units like

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28th_SS_Volunteer_Grenadier_Division_Wallonien
 
Last edited:
A few points:

1. Nazi germany was not a well-organized society. It was an almost feudal system of party chieftans largely unanswerable to anyone except those above them in the heirarchy (and then only answerable if they lacked an "in" with Hitler). It was highly corrupt, and never was able to exploit the resources it controlled as well as the americans, the British, or the Soviets. (Hint: if you're _less efficient_ than the Soviets, you are clearly doing something wrong).

Much depends on whether the Nazi Party can change itself after Hitler's death into somthing like an actual political party, with genuine party discipline and respect for the "rules", rather than a fraternity for Hitler's thug pals. This probably can't be achieved without a thorough bloodletting. (Some may argue that this is what is going on in the book, along with the cleanup of Holocaust evidence: but then the whole thing is out of character, Hitler was generally far more loyal to his subordinates than Stalin ever was, as long as they obeyed and kept up the ass-kicking. Roehm was something of a special case.)

2. The Nazis are unlikely to benefit much from their empire in Africa and the Soviet Union. Purely extractive raw-materials economies like African colonies produce very little wealth compared to that of advanced, industrialized countries, and it's hard to see the Reich relocating it's industries and Aryan jobs to sweatshops in the Congo. In any event Africans are likely to be treated little better than slaves, if not expelled or outright exterminated in areas suitable for white people. As for the Soviet Union, economic production depends on people, and with the plan being for extermination, expulsion, or reduction to ignorant serfdom, the Russians aren't going to be producing much: as for German settlers (who don't want to move out there), they would probably be better off economically, and more productive, back in Germany. Agriculture in the east will be either backwards and unproductive, or if modern, won't require many people (the grain states of South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas have about the same area as the Ukraine, but around 1/9 it's population.)

3. The "partisans in the Urals" thing makes no sense. "Partisans" fight _within_ occupied territory: presumably there is a Soviet North-Vietnam equivalent in the Urals and parts east, supplying and supporting a "Vietcong" in Nazi Russia, frequently bombed and shelled, but not invaded, because to do so would be to invite WWIII, as was feared OTL. "Detente" with the US probably would have included the US dropping its support for the Soviets or at least reining them in as a prid quo pro.

Given the probable existence of US sympathizers with the Soviet cause, I wouldn't be surprised if the Soviets have a nuclear weapon of their own before long (after, Mao's China got it OTL in the 1960's), which will make life more interesting for Germans planning bombing raids over Omsk. Just what exactly is in that garbage truck being driven by the Polish laborer? And it's not like the Germans are going to win hearts and minds among the Slavic population in occupied Russia, and solving the problem by "draining the lake" - say, killing or expelling every Russian within 200 miles of the Soviet border - won't be good at all for business with the Americans.

Bruce
 
Any part of the occupied USSR is going to, 20-30 years after WWII have the local population reduced to illiterate serfdom. Large areas will be given to German settlers, both farmers and workers of the productive and extractive industries. Some of the population will be aryanized by taking "suitable" young slavs (very young children) who meet certain criteria away to be raised in aryan households as good Germans - increasing aryans, decreasing slavs. This was occuring OTL. In Czechoslovakia the Czechs will be 2nd class citizens, you may se the persistence of Slovakia. Yugoslavia will be chopped up between Croatia, Hungary, and Bulgaria. The Baltic States will be Germanized. What was the General Gouvernment OTL, the rump Poland used as a dumping ground for expelled Poles from the areas bordering Germany and Eastern European Jews prior to direct shipment to death camps will end up like occupied USSR, only more so as it is closer to Germany. In western Europe germany gets back Alsace & Lorraine and perhaps a bit more, Luxemburg, and perhaps slices of Holland and Denmark.

Looking at this with a "Germany collapse like USSR" scenario, probably later than USSR as their economy not so screwed up, The German core of German speakers and those that consider themselves GERMAN would be OTL Germany, plus Austria, plus Alsace-Lorraine, Luxemburg, bits of Holland and Denmark, at least the western half of Poland, the Baltic states, and Most if not all of OTL Czech Republic. Eastern Poland, and Ukraine/Byelorussia/Russia west of the Urals will have a large German population which owns everything and has education, the "locals" may or may not have a population that exceeds the German population, however they have no education and no leaders - so am not so sure you would see them break away.

Two points, first a low level war with perhaps 25,000 casualties/year (German) would probably be considered by the Grossdeutschesreich as a worthwhile expense and training/hardening ground for their troops & new weapons. Secondly, there is some evidence that Hitler may have had teriary syphilis, in which case lasting until the 1950s in a functional manner was a crap shoot, let alone the 60s. You can butterly away the drug addiction if Germany wins early on.
 
Top