If Hitler never existed?

WWII would be delayed until the nuclear age. All major belligerents will have nukes and still as warlike and immature as the 1930s.

It could all be ashes by now.

If all sides have nukes and everyone knows it, M.A.D. doctrine would be much more likely to take hold. As warlike as someone might be, the end of civilisation is firmly placed on the top of the "MUST avoid" list. The only people crazy (or stupid) enough to go through with a nuke war are Hitler and the Enclave. Neither exsist ITTL.

I don't know about the butterflies, but given that the First World War still happens and Germany loses, some nutcase that is not Hitler but identical to him in terms of fiery speeches and relatively strong ideology would come to power. That is, if the Communists don't beat him to it. Post-WW1 Germany had the perfect conditions for people like these.

People tend to underestimate how singular and remarkable Hitler`s rise to power was. Id place severe doubts in others doing something similar.


kenmac, you`re back!

From my point of view a world without Hitler would be very different, maybe Stalin would be the conquer and try to take over all of Europe,

As much as I love Red Alert, the plausability of such a scenario falls apart on the seams.
 

world

Banned
world, would you like to offer the slightest shred of evidence to support any of these claims, starting with the German communists receiving support far beyond anything they ever received OTL even during the Depression?

The communists were effectively working with the NSDAP in striking the Social Democratic Party and like minded moderate groups, which had the effect of crippling the communist ability to work with or gain voters from the very parties which might have worked with them against the Nazis. If the communists try the same game with a more sane party replacing the Nazis then their support is more likely to decline than grow.

The German people wanted an end to the depression only the Communists and Nazis promised this.
With no Nazis the Nazis OTL poorer voters will turn to the Communists while those who were Nazis for reasons of Nationalism will turn to the German National Peoples Party.

As for why anyone would imagine a good portion of Nazi support being natural communists as their second choice...:rolleyes:

Why would they not?
National Socialism and International Socialism have much in common.
As Hitler himself said "ex-communists make the best National Socialists".
 

world

Banned
Given that pre-WWII SPD was already a good deal more socialist than present-day SPD, I'd say that any left wing splintering from them should be nearly indiscernible from the communists anyways (thus why not directly joining them?) unless the latter have that much differing political aims that getting 37% is close to ASB

The SPD was working with Capitalist parties and offering no answer to the depression.
The Democratic Socialist split from them would be brought about with the final straw of them entering a coalition led by the Nationalist Right.
The Communists getting 37% in depression hit 1930's Germany with no Nazi alternative is very realistic.
It was only in the 1970's that the Communists were getting a third of the vote in Italy.
 
I'm more or less of the view that a no-Hitler scenario would probably cause the NSDAP to fail, or it would fall into inter-party fighting pretty quickly. If that is the case, it's maybe the Weimar Republic continues in some form or another, though for how long is anyones guess
 
WW2 doesn't happen, and a lot of people don't die. But medicine is less advanced, and more people die.
 
If all sides have nukes and everyone knows it, M.A.D. doctrine would be much more likely to take hold. As warlike as someone might be, the end of civilisation is firmly placed on the top of the "MUST avoid" list. The only people crazy (or stupid) enough to go through with a nuke war are Hitler and the Enclave. Neither exsist ITTL.

That's optimistic. What we had going for us in the Cold War was two superpowers with no border disputes and tempered by the unprecedented destruction of WWII. Those conditions would be absent in this alternative world. Europeans pre-WWII were completely different to those you're familiar with now. Today war is completely unthinkable, back then it was something many people looked forward to, even after the blooding of WWI.

In a world with multiple nuclear powers, sharing disputed borders, a European warlike tradition, that has a recipe for disaster written all over it. US and the Soviet Union nearly came to blows several times, some occasions unintentionally. Europe of this time line would in grave danger from itself. If they're lucky there would be a limited nuclear war to raise awareness of the existential danger before it's too late. Otherwise, nukes wont deter war anymore than Alfred Nobel or Hiram Maxim's supposedly war-ending inventions.

Nukes were partly caused by WW2, with no WW2 less money will be spent on developing them.

It would happen anyways, just later. Without the horror associated with it's use, it would be seen as just another weapon.
 
Today war is completely unthinkable, back then it was something many people looked forward to, even after the blooding of WWI.

Are you aware that the majority of Interbellum Europe wanted to avoid another major war after WWI because they didnt want to repeat the destruction and horrors associated with it? Hell, its why Munich happened in the first place! Hitler`s advisors begged him not to attack France because they were scared shitless of the concept of fighting a Great Power.

In a world with multiple nuclear powers, sharing disputed borders
The only real "nuclear" border dispute I see happening between states capable of using nuclear weapons is Alsace-Lorainne, a piece of territory the Germans had all but given up after Locarno. What you would see is border disputes between nuclear powers and small states not capable of owning such weapons, even assuming shotgun diplomacy didnt satisfy the expansionist great powers before the invention of nukes.

European warlike tradition, that has a recipe for disaster written all over it.
Europeans were not all warhungry maniacs, and you massively underestimate the effect of WWI. This isnt the era of cabinet wars. War had evolved.

If they're lucky there would be a limited nuclear war to raise awareness of the existential danger before it's too late. Otherwise, nukes wont deter war anymore than Alfred Nobel or Hiram Maxim's supposedly war-ending inventions.
Those inventions werent superweapons capable of levelling cities. Once the great powers test these new weapons, and see the destructive potential they hold, they are going to become very scared of going to war with other powers that could throw these weapons on them.

It would happen anyways, just later.
You have yet to present a reason why WW2 must happen ITTL. It didnt even have to happen IOTL.
 
Top