Or Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Shirer. Or Hitler: A Study in Tyranny by Bullock. Or basically any book about German rearmament under Nazi rule.
If Hitler had not invaded Czechoslovakia?
- Thread starter Erick
- Start date
Or Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Shirer. Or Hitler: A Study in Tyranny by Bullock. Or basically any book about German rearmament under Nazi rule.
Originally posted by Wyragen-TXRG4P
2. Germans probably considered Czech industry smaller than Soviet, but most certainly of much better quality.
3. While Czech were considered Slavs, compare occupation of Bohemia with extremely brutal occupation of Poland. Or what happened to Slovakia. Not all Slavs were treated or considered by Nazis as muck - at least as long as they were useful Slavs. Also, Bohemia was part of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation and then Austrian Empire, which, in Hitler's eyes, probably gave Czechs somewhat better status as Slavs with a lot of German blood or even Slavicized Germans.
4. According to Nazis Soviet industry was worse not only because it was Slavic, but also and probably especially because it was created andf governed by the Jewish-Communists. Also, Germans didn't actually known that much about Soviet industry. Czech industry they knew very well.
1. Before operation Barbarossa Germans had at their disposal not only German industry, but also Polish, Dutch, Belgian, French, Norwegian and...oh, yes, Czech industry too! And German industry was fed by captured resources and workforce. In 1939 they had none of it.They saw the industry of the Soviet-Union as lesser than their own before operation Barbarossa, true or false?
They saw Czech industry as smaller than that of the Soviet-Union, true or false?
They saw Czechs as Slavs, true or false?
They saw the Soviet technology and industry as inferior because it was done by Slavs, true or false?
Just how much did they dismisse Soviet technology and industry because of that? To the point they lost the fight and the Red Army eventually not only rejected them (Stalin was a bad, bad anti-German racist)but eventually rolled into Germany itself and seized the German capital.
So if they still somewhat underestimated the Red Army before Operation Bagration, I´m pretty sure they where dismissive of Czech industry 6 years earlier, even if they did exploite it to a certain extent.
2. Germans probably considered Czech industry smaller than Soviet, but most certainly of much better quality.
3. While Czech were considered Slavs, compare occupation of Bohemia with extremely brutal occupation of Poland. Or what happened to Slovakia. Not all Slavs were treated or considered by Nazis as muck - at least as long as they were useful Slavs. Also, Bohemia was part of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation and then Austrian Empire, which, in Hitler's eyes, probably gave Czechs somewhat better status as Slavs with a lot of German blood or even Slavicized Germans.
4. According to Nazis Soviet industry was worse not only because it was Slavic, but also and probably especially because it was created andf governed by the Jewish-Communists. Also, Germans didn't actually known that much about Soviet industry. Czech industry they knew very well.
I Blame Communism
Banned
You seem to be seesawing with your argument. First we heard that Czechoslovakia was part of Lebensraum, but now we learn that at the stage German policies weren't radical.
So, your source - against the word of numerous reputable historians - is anecdote.
Did your folks even say that the whole country was richer, or was it just them? Obviously if you were unemployed in 1933 and not in 1939, that was a plus.
I have never read a specific source one way or the other. They were confident of winning, but that meant confidence in their ability to destroy the Red Army in the field and take Moscow, Leningrad, and Kiev. I don't see why they'd have to believe their industrial capacity was larger than Russia's.
Seraphim makes an excellent point: the Germany of 1941 had gobbled up much of Europe and was running it as an economic colonial empire to feed itself, including Czechia.
In absolute terms, duh. In per capita terms, no, because it wasn't. In terms of 1938, when we're talking about a Germany at the limits of its capacity rather than a victorious Germany ruling Europe, it came in very handy, because as is a matter or record, numerous Czech tanks were used by the Germans in France. Christ.
No!
Wait, yes.
Partly, yes, but this assumes that their racial ideology was coherent and made sense, which is clearly untrue (they shunted races about for political reasons) - and of course Czechia was formerly a part of A-H and hence everything could be put down to its having been ruled by Germans, as opposed to the Russians who were ruled over by Gypsy-Tatar-Jews.
Just how much did they dismisse Soviet technology and industry because of that? To the point they lost the fight and the Red Army eventually not only rejected them (Stalin was a bad, bad anti-German racist
The Germans had to miscalculate exactly once: believing that they could beat the Red Army in a lightning blow. They couldn't, and after that it wasn't a matter of underestimating the Russians whether they did so or not. Each sides attempts to estimate the capabilities of the other was just one part of the incredibly complex process of war.
So industrial utility and military capability are now the same thing?
All I'm seeing is a series of spectacular leaps of logic and weird conclusions without a single academic source.
Last edited:
Hard currency has no value in itself really. Why do you think everyone abandoned the gold standard? What do you think helicopter Ben is doing? Why do you think most central banks have, in the long run, consistently decreased the proportion of gold in their reserves? Why do you think having all that gold didn't really benefit Spain all that much in the end? And how do you think Germany could rearm and put their production back to the natural level even though they didn't have any big heaps of yellow metal?
Olivier Blanchards Macroeconomics is a good start. Because, frankly, explaining economics to the un-initiated is a daunting task. There are so many misconceptions in the way, that you hardly know were to start.
But I can tell you this much: A economy can function fine without any hard currency. Fiat money baby, oh yeah.
"Because the German armed forces had rearmed so rapidly that they severely strained the economy, there was a massive temptation on Hitler's part to resort to war in order to obviate such economic difficulties. As he well knew, the acquisition of Austria brought with it not only another five divisions of troops, some iron ore and oil fields, and a considerable metal industry but also $200 million in gold and foreign-exchange reserves. The Sudetenland was less useful economically, and by 1939 the Reich's foreign currency position was critical. It was scarcely surprising, therefore, that Hitler was greedily eying the rest of Czechoslovakia and rushed to Prague in March 1939 to examine the booty once the occupation occurred. Apart from the gold and currency assets held by the Czech national bank, the Germans also seized large stocks of ores and metals, which were swiftly used to aid German industry, whale the large and profitable Czech arms industry could now be exploited to earn currency for Germany by selling (or bartering) its products to clients in the Balkans."
From The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers (copyright 1987).
Hearts of Iron I was released in 2003.
So, somehow Kennedy is using as a source a game that won't be produced for another sixteen years.
That's pretty impressive.
Handwavium, the same way that the Nazis manage to overcome any other shortages of crucial supplies.
Seriously, where did the idea that Germany doesn't need every ounce it can get its hands on come from?
So, 3 dollars per person. I bet it was worth it.
Assuming that the booty in Czechoslovakia was similar, that means that for the cost of occupying another country (there goes the five Austrian divisions!) and further isolating Germany internationally, Germany gained a grand 3 dollar per capita.
Given Germany's economic situation, and given that much as you would like to argue otherwise that currency is valuable for Germany's hand-to-mouth build up? Yes.
It also is not counting any other booty pried loose, obviously.
I think others have beaten me to posting how useful Czechoslovakia was, so I'm just going to point you at their posts.
I still want to know how you think Kennedy used a game produced after his book as a source, though. I mean, are you actually intent on implying he used time travel into the future to do his research on this period, or just ignoring that?
There is a natural rate of production. That natural rate of production is achieved in the short and medium run when unemployment is at its natural level. In the long run there is, as well, a gdp trend , essentially reflecting the time-preferences (for saving or consumption) of the households in the closed economy as well as technological progress. Due to the Great Depression Germany was below natural production, and Germany's capital stock was way below the trend. By stimulating demand through a mix of expansionary (non-gold backed) monetary and fiscal policy Germany could achieve rapid growth by returning employment to the natural level and production to trend. Its basic keynesianism, and it doesn't really matter if you do it by building tanks or hospitals. That's merely a matter of your preferred consumption, and obviously the Nazis preferred consuming tanks over welfare.
Trust me, people got the Nobel prize for this kind of stuff.
Ah, thats good then. So all that requirement for payment in international trade in hard currency is obviously a myth...
Daft statement. You can do what you like with your INTERNAL currency - granted, little things like inflation and so are can be a problem - because your central bank prints the stuff, and your population usually hasnt much choice but to get paid in it.
However other countries demand payment in hard currencies. If you have a good economy, they will take yours at a defined exchange rate (this is before the period of flexible exchange rates, remember...). If they consider your currency a dud, they will demand payment in dollars, pounds or gold. Which was why Germany had to cut back repeadedly on purchaces of essential materials for armament production.
No economy can do international trade with a fiat currency UNLESS its currency is also the international trading currency, as the dollar is today. And even then, countries start looking at alternatives when it gets to iffy.
Well, it would look better for you to acknowledge that the idea that Germany needed the gold is not from Hearts of Iron.
I mean, I know that you want to sound like you think you know something on economics, but this is ridiculous just on general principles.
People get the nobel prize for all sorts of rubbish, sadly....
Economics is about as much a science as astrology, which is why we keep getting into these economic disasters with monotonous regularity.
Typo
Banned
So dude tell me, what do German factory workers who spend their day working in factory producing Panzers buy with their fiat currency when the country is devoted to manufacture weapons?
Also you seem to be incredibly confused about the concept of fiat currency and the fact that gold has value on the open market, like the two are not mutually exclusive.
Like Spanish gold didn't benefit much the Spanish because of the arms embargo on them, the gold ended up going to the USSR and ended up paying for machine-tools, Germany rearmed because they had hard currency from the Weimar era, and looted resources from annexed/conquered territory.
They buy tanks, obviously.
(Through the taxes they pay.)
And a fiat currency has value itself as well. That's why it is traded.
Typo
Banned
Fiat currency has value precisely because of a restraint in creating them, if you just print out money to cover all expense it becomes worthless.
Also I did not realize tanks are a consumer good
Since you didn't respond to the below I'm reposting
Also you seem to be incredibly confused about the concept of fiat currency and the fact that gold has value on the open market, like the two are not mutually exclusive.
Like Spanish gold didn't benefit much the Spanish because of the arms embargo on them, the gold ended up going to the USSR and ended up paying for machine-tools, Germany rearmed because they had hard currency from the Weimar era, and looted resources from annexed/conquered territory.
They are government consumption. Government consumption is paid by taxes. The workers pay taxes, and thus forsakes private consumption for government consumption. Just replaces tanks with hospitals if that makes you happy, it doesn't really make any difference. Its just a matter of (national) preferences.
I'd be happy if you understood anything about what "running the economy into the ground' means.
Forsaking private consumption for government consumption like this is bad for the economy...thus even limited amounts of gold are necessary because instead of producing a healthy economy and a strong military, the former is being sacrificed for the latter.
Germany is eating its seedcord here. I think someone earlier used some phrase like that.