Non-anti-semitic nazism

What would a non-Anti-Semitic Nazism look like,like the Italian fascism of the beginning?The Nazis would not have to spend so much money on concentration camps,many nationalist Jews like Kantorowicz would also adhere,and peobably the Nazis would always be seen as a figure but not absolute evil like IOTL.
 
What would a non-Anti-Semitic Nazism look like,like the Italian fascism of the beginning?The Nazis would not have to spend so much money on concentration camps,many nationalist Jews like Kantorowicz would also adhere,and peobably the Nazis would always be seen as a figure but not absolute evil like IOTL.
So basically ... what if the Nazis weren't the Nazis. Anti-semitism was one of the central components of Nazism, and without it the whole movement would be unrecognizable.
 
What would a non-Anti-Semitic Nazism look like,like the Italian fascism of the beginning?The Nazis would not have to spend so much money on concentration camps,many nationalist Jews like Kantorowicz would also adhere,and peobably the Nazis would always be seen as a figure but not absolute evil like IOTL.

They aren't going to rise to power as a grievance party without blaming Germany's WWI defeat and the economic crises on somebody, what alternate group will that plausibly be in TTL?
 

Deleted member 107190

I really don’t think you can have Nazism without antisemitism. Racism is integral to fascism. Mussolini’s government, whilst not openly genocidal towards Jews, was still opposed to the idea of an open and pluralistic society where people could worship freely. Take a look at the genocide in Libya. What you CAN do is create a totalitarian, militaristic ideology in Germany that wants Jews to integrate (I.e. marry into German households, stop sending their children to yeshiva, etc) rather than wanting to exterminate them but that’s not Nazism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nazism without antisemitism is like... I don't know. But it is not possible. Antisemitism was core part of nazism. They wouldn't are nazis anymore. You would even need completely different leadership and it would be totally different party.
 
They aren't going to rise to power as a grievance party without blaming Germany's WWI defeat and the economic crises on somebody, who will that plausibly be?
As socialists, yet not of the Marxist orthodoxy, the ITTL NSDAP would be more than happy to blame incompetent generalship, the industrialist class for war profiteering, and the nobility as the bloated bourgeoisie who betrayed the working class and peasantry to try and preserve their station.

As for their Jewish policy, they would certainly excoriate Jewish Communists and the KPD as a foreign, degenerative influence, however when it comes to Jewish WW1 veterans and Orthodox Jews, they would be praised for their loyalty to the Fatherland, and they would be encouraged to purge the Bolsheviks and money-manipulators from their community.

This timeline is basically what would have happened if Hitler had died in the Beer Hall Putsch and Strasser had become the leader after and the NSDAP had had help from a Jewish Freikorps in the uprising.

Jewish FK leader after the Putsch to Strasser: "For you, the loss of 12,000 soldiers on the Western Front is a statistic, but for us it is a national tragedy, and one made meaningless and nearly honorless by the traitors and Communists in both of our nations." (Strasser's anti-semitism was founded on his economic beliefs and his left-wing politics much more than any eugenic/racial component.)
 
Last edited:
peobably the Nazis would always be seen as a figure but not absolute evil like IOTL.
Because everybody knows that the Nazis were only anti-Semitic, amirite?
They didn't have any plans for the Slavs at all, no no nooo....

Srsly, why do threads like this keep popping up? What is the motivation to somehow make the Nazis merely bloodthirsty warmongers instead of being genocidal bloodthirsty warmongers? "I swear, I can fix him!"

You cannot remove any of the major elements of Nazism from it because those elements didn't originate with the Nazis. The Nazis were just the final evolution of those elements, which had been marinating in the German far-right for over 50 years by that point. See below for details.
 
Last edited:

Crazy Boris

Banned
Nazism without antisemitism is like Communism without collectivism, you get rid of that and you don't have Nazism anymore, you have a totally new ideology.
 
What would a non-Anti-Semitic Nazism look like,like the Italian fascism of the beginning?The Nazis would not have to spend so much money on concentration camps,many nationalist Jews like Kantorowicz would also adhere,and peobably the Nazis would always be seen as a figure but not absolute evil like IOTL.
Nazism without antisemitism is like... I don't know. But it is not possible. Antisemitism was core part of nazism. They wouldn't are nazis anymore. You would even need completely different leadership and it would be totally different party.


Guys just look up. The fascists of Norway were not anti Semitic, so you need something like a German Quisling.
 
Guys just look up. The fascists of Norway were not anti Semitic, so you need something like a German Quisling.
The fascists of [non-German country] were not antisemitic.

But the fascists of Germany WERE, and you need a POD somewhere before the 1870s to change that. Because that's how far back you need to go to preempt concepts like Aryanism, racial purity, blood and soil, lebensraum and uber- vs. untermensch becoming overwhelmingly popular in German far-right circles.

Edit: and if you want to preempt those concepts altogether just to be safe, you need to go before 1853, which was the year when Arthur de Gobineau published this little essay,(1) which kicked off the whole race-craze in the first place.

(1)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Inequality_of_the_Human_Races
 
Last edited:

marktaha

Banned
Mussolini only turned Against the Jews under Hitler's influence. If the Nazis hadn't been antisemitic I suspect they'd have won the war with the scientists they'd have had working for them.
 
If the Nazis hadn't been antisemitic I suspect they'd have won the war with the scientists they'd have had working for them.
Let me ask the following questions:

1. How much time and money did the Manhattan Project take up?
2. How much security from attack did the Manhattan Project have?
3. How much free money, resources, time and manpower does Germany have for such a project compared to the US?
4. Finally, where are the nearest major sources of uranium to Germany?

Here are the answers:

1. Too much for Germany to contemplate, because Germany has one problem that America didn't have: a massive land war to fight.
2. Complete security, which is far more than what Germany could guarantee at any point after 1940 and especially 1943.
3. A small fraction. The Fuhrer is not going to be spending the kind of money necessary to continue the Manhattan Project in late 1944 when the Soviets are banging on Germany's doorstep.
4. The Urals.
 
Last edited:
If the Nazis hadn't been antisemitic I suspect they'd have won the war with the scientists they'd have had working for them.
Germany developing a nuke is not going to instantly cow everyone else into submission. All a German nuke will do is spur the Allies to bomb Germany into oblivion that much harder, because no one city or center could be bombed and thus knock a country out of the war. Japan, Germany and Britain were all bombed to hell and back with far more TNT-equivalent than both the nukes used IOTL combined, and none of them surrendered because of that. The Soviets lost over 10 million casualties to the Germans, and yet they didn't surrender either. What makes you think they would collapse ITTL upon being hit with a nuke?

The Manhattan Project was not an instant win button that turned the tide of the war in the Allies' favor. It was the final blow against a crippled enemy whose defeat was already beyond doubt. Even if Germany can pony up the money for the project, somehow procure some uranium, get it done on time and manage to not have the building site bombed to smithereens before the nuke can be delivered, Germany is not facing that situation in 1945.
 
I actually read a short story in Peter G. Tsouras's book Third Reich Victorious, were Hitler instead of joining the army actually joins the navy. He is helped to curb his anti semitism, an instead turns his hatred towards the British.
 
I actually read a short story in Peter G. Tsouras's book Third Reich Victorious, were Hitler instead of joining the army actually joins the navy. He is helped to curb his anti semitism, an instead turns his hatred towards the British.
That was by far my favourite one in the anthology. Rommel becoming Fuhrer after a successful Bomb Plot was a close second.
 

Deleted member 107190

I think the idea that you can have Anglos replace Jews in the Nazi racial hierarchy is silly because Anglos are a Germanic people (at least partly) Anglo-SAXONS remember. Not saying you can’t have these hypothetically non antisemitic German authoritarians HATE Britain but having them replace Jews requires a much earlier POD imho.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the fascists of Germany WERE, and you need a POD somewhere before the 1870s to change that. Because that's how far back you need to go to preempt concepts like Aryanism, racial purity, blood and soil, lebensraum and uber- vs. untermensch becoming overwhelmingly popular in German far-right circles.

Those concepts are all pretty intrinsic to Nazism - however they are a lot farther away from antisemitism, and certainly from genocide (of jews), though most Jews killed otl would still be killed, they would just be killed for being slavs instead.

Nazis who aren't antisemitic is a bit weird (and implausible considering the period), but ultimately still nazis.
 
Top