How Long Could a Successful Third Reich Realistically Survive

It depends on who is running Germany.

If Heydrich hasn't died, he was sharp enough to keep the thing going. Less ideological, more efficient and ruthlessly pragmatic.


He reminds me a bit of Stalin, though less paranoid.
 
Last edited:
I would argue that the Nazi’s utter lack of moral scruples when it comes to the treatment of enemy populations would actually be quite helpful in this regard. There can be no partisan war in the east if all the people there have either been killed, starved or deported.
The issue is how the Nazis get there, when (assuming we aren't in the near-ASB scenario where UK/US decide to suspend support to whatever is left of the Soviets altogether) there's an overall lack of infrastructure and they're trying to control an armed population larger than their own. Genociding their way through Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltics is already a daunting task, and the further east you go the harder it is. I find the idea that a victorious Nazi Germany would be able to somehow control Russia up to the Urals, much less past them implausible, given the state of German logistics (obligatory horse-drawn carriages meme here). And whatever they do end up controlling, they will be massively overstretched doing it.

I mean, as far as I know there was no partisan war in the Ukraine during the Holodomor either, and I suspect Nazi policy in the east would basically be a Holodomor on steroids.
As terrible as it was I think it's very clear the Holodomor was not intended to kill the entire population of Ukraine, in contrast to Nazi policies which would be aimed at doing exactly that.

I also see no reason for any protracted and sustainable rebellions in the occupied territories of western Europe (France etc.). There weren‘t any such rebellions in OTL (at least prior to the Allied invasion of France), so I wouldn‘t expect them in case of a Nazi victory.
Yugoslav partisans come to mind.

There might at one point be equivalents to the OTL anti-communist uprisings we saw in Hungary in 1956, or Poland in 1981, but I‘d expect their fates to be similar.
As oppressive as the communist regimes behind the Iron Curtain were, they did not exist to genocide their population out of existence.

The issue here is that although the German occupation of France, Denmark, and Norway were oppressive, they didn't exist to remove their peoples from the Earth. In the situation where you, your family, your friends, your children, and the future of everyone you know die with a 99% chance within the next decade or so I suspect most people would opt to die fighting instead.

Furthermore, I would expect the long-term economic foundations of a victorious Nazi Germany to be much stronger than that of the USSR or other communist countries
An economy that would quite literally be run on slave labour. And in the short to mid term run on war economy as they continue to churn out the weaponry needed to keep the the situation in the east under control. I'm not sure this is much, if any better than the economic foundations of the USSR.

Nazi Germany fundamentally suffers from having a ton of extraordinarily stupid ideas driving it and the people who come up with these extraordinarily stupid ideas also happen to be in total control of the country. Your argument is that the Nazis can avoid the consequences of these very stupid ideas all while fighting a perpetual war as they try to genocide everyone in European USSR while the US/UK are supporting every possible rebel movement that could lead to their downfall. All while their market is probably limited to Europe (not a huge detriment I know, but not exactly a selling point either) unless the US/UK somehow isn't blockading them.
 
Top