Possible British Nazi Collaborators

Gll25

So, suppose the UK was forced into peace due to German bombing and/or any other reason (I know it was essentially impossible, but that's not my point here). Can you point me to politicians who would cooperate with the nazis in forming a friendly, client government, similar to Petain and quite a lot of mainstream french politicians in Vichy? Mosley is the usual choice, but I sincerely doubt the Germans would give him any real power, instead using figureheads from the major parties to legitimize the changes imposed in the country. Perhaps some hardline conservative tories, maybe labour members with an inclination towards fascist economics.

Also, would Churchill escape to resist abroad? Would the royal family go along with him?
 

Cryhavoc101

I do not really see how the British can be forced into anything or become a 'puppet' without Jackboots marching down Whitehall - certainly their might be those with Nazi Sympathies who might crow about how effective the Nazis had been etc - they had been around in the 30s - but Nazism is too far to the right of mainstream British Politics to take root

I think if the British agreed to peace then the Germans are going to say 'thanks a lot' let out a long held breath of relief and crack on with their plans for the 3rd Reich - which involves Russia and fellows called General Winter and General Mud.
 

Nik

Edward VIII may, or may not have signed the 'Windsor Protocol'. Didn't Jack Higgins spin 'Thunder Point' from this ?

Churchill would either shoot his way out, or go down in a blaze of glory...

Push comes to shove, I suspect a lot of fascist sympathisers would be hastily lynched before the Germans could sent in their Gauleiters to co-opt them...

IIRC, the Royal Princesses were trained to shoot and drive. Liz received 'pistol-fu' training and would happily change truck tyres, clean spark-plugs etc. I've no doubt she'd be a 'force of nature' on the way to the coast...
 

Gll25

Sorry for bumping this, but I'm researching the info for a future timeline. To me it seems pretty plausible that the germans would indeed attempt to reinstate Edward VIII as a puppet monarch, to add legitimacy. However, I was actually looking for more mainstream politicians who had a degree of fascist sympathy, or at least strongly imperialist-reactionary views. I don't think the germans would go for someone like Oswald Mosley, for example, due to the fact that he was too much unpredictable. I was actually considering people like Lord Halifax, "Bobetty" Salisbury, and maybe for a later date Enoch Powell. Anyone?
 
Techdread

Techdread

Archibald Murray Ramsay is someone to take a look at - Scottish Unionist MP, anti-Semite, founder of the Right Club, and only MP detained under Defence Regulation 18B.

I wouldn’t consider other Salisbury or Powell as potential collaborators. Whilst they might have well-deserved reputations for staunch social conservatism that veers towards the reactionary, there’s no chance either would ally themselves with a pro-Nazi regime. Powell was disgusted by the policy of appeasement for one. (Paging Dr @Gonzo)
 

DuncanI

I've seen David Lloyd George used as a possible head of a Nazi puppet government. If in the event Germany somehow managed to successfully form a puppet state within Britain, he is not an unrealistic choice. He himself has had some interesting things to say about Hitler, and to the British public he already has a reputation as "The Man that Won the War". Not to mention he visited Hitler himself in 1936 and was very impressed.

Edward VIII on the other hand, while also a possible choice, was sent to be Governor of the Bahamas specifically for this reason. If the Germans manage to successfully kidnap him as they tried in Operation Willi then he is also possible, this entirely depends on whether the Germans would keep the monarchy in place.
 

sprite

Donor
I'd say quite a few members of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-German_Fellowship would be interested in government roles and keeping the peace. It attracted the kind of upper class conservative who thought "better Hitlerism than Communism". There was open admiration for what Hitler had done economically. They would turn a blind eye to everything else.

As for Enoch Powell, he was for Britain and Britain alone. I don't think he would be happy with any sort of subservient role.
 

Gll25

Techdread said:
Archibald Murray Ramsay is someone to take a look at - Scottish Unionist MP, anti-Semite, founder of the Right Club, and only MP detained under Defence Regulation 18B.

I wouldn’t consider other Salisbury or Powell as potential collaborators. Whilst they might have well-deserved reputations for staunch social conservatism that veers towards the reactionary, there’s no chance either would ally themselves with a pro-Nazi regime. Powell was disgusted by the policy of appeasement for one. (Paging Dr @Gonzo)
Click to expand...

sprite said:
I'd say quite a few members of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-German_Fellowship would be interested in government roles and keeping the peace. It attracted the kind of upper class conservative who thought "better Hitlerism than Communism". There was open admiration for what Hitler had done economically. They would turn a blind eye to everything else.

As for Enoch Powell, he was for Britain and Britain alone. I don't think he would be happy with any sort of subservient role.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I had never heard of this guy, nor of the Right Club and this Fellowship. These are surely interesting names to consider.

I agree that Powell was first and foremost an uncompromising British nationalist, but one must consider he joined active politics only in the 50's. So, if he stayed behind in Britain after the German victory, his only real option to serve the nation is to serve the german-aligned monarchy of Edward VIII. As this government would be most certainly socially conservative and nationalist (I'd guess something close to a British version of the Revolution Nationale of Petain's France), it would mostly fall in line with Powell's political views, I think. The only question is how much autonomy do the Germans allow the British, since Powell would never collaborate with an entirely subservient UK.

DuncanI said:
I've seen David Lloyd George used as a possible head of a Nazi puppet government. If in the event Germany somehow managed to successfully form a puppet state within Britain, he is not an unrealistic choice. He himself has had some interesting things to say about Hitler, and to the British public he already has a reputation as "The Man that Won the War". Not to mention he visited Hitler himself in 1936 and was very impressed.

Edward VIII on the other hand, while also a possible choice, was sent to be Governor of the Bahamas specifically for this reason. If the Germans manage to successfully kidnap him as they tried in Operation Willi then he is also possible, this entirely depends on whether the Germans would keep the monarchy in place.
Click to expand...

Lloyd George was quite old in World War II, and as a member of the Liberal Party I don't see his political views aligning with Hitler. However, I had never heard of this visit to the Fuhrer in the 30's. Could you provide a link?
 

Gudestein

It might also be prudent to consider how nazism creeps up on thosevin charge. Might not be like Poland or Russia, but more like France or even Denmark.
In Denmark, occupation was initially felt as harmless and only later came the orders to arrest jewish people and so forth.
Many people would join from a desire to make the Best of a bad situation (and personal opportunity) and only later wonder what evil they have gotten themselves into.
N.B. “Later” might wary.
 
Clandango

Clandango

jonnguy2016 said:
Oswald Mosley
Click to expand...
He is too much of a British patriot.


Now, are we think about a satteliate state, an almost literal puppet, another Axis state, a member of the Pact of Iron, an ally... There are so many different levels of collaboration. I don't see the Germans getting very far if they try the Vichy model of occupying half the country, demanding massive payment for the privilege, etc. Besides, the British empire would have provides the Germans with loads of raw goods and luxuries. This could be paid for with war booty from Eastern and Western Europe, been markedly off as part of reparations, whatever. We should look at the Low Cuintries for a model. Luxembourg? Small and instantly swallowed up to be part of a Gau. The Netherlands on the other hand were initially not planned to be outright annexed, instead being kept as a puppet state so as to get the Dutch East Indias kept under their thumb.
 
Clandango

Clandango

Gudestein said:
It might also be prudent to consider how nazism creeps up on thosevin charge. Might not be like Poland or Russia, but more like France or even Denmark.
In Denmark, occupation was initially felt as harmless and only later came the orders to arrest jewish people and so forth.
Many people would join from a desire to make the Best of a bad situation (and personal opportunity) and only later wonder what evil they have gotten themselves into.
N.B. “Later” might wary.
Click to expand...
Plus the Danes were threatened with Copenhagen being leveled if they didn't immediately say the Germans marching through their country had been 'invited'.
 

Gll25

Clandango said:
He is too much of a British patriot.


Now, are we think about a satteliate state, an almost literal puppet, another Axis state, a member of the Pact of Iron, an ally... There are so many different levels of collaboration. I don't see the Germans getting very far if they try the Vichy model of occupying half the country, demanding massive payment for the privilege, etc. Besides, the British empire would have provides the Germans with loads of raw goods and luxuries. This could be paid for with war booty from Eastern and Western Europe, been markedly off as part of reparations, whatever. We should look at the Low Cuintries for a model. Luxembourg? Small and instantly swallowed up to be part of a Gau. The Netherlands on the other hand were initially not planned to be outright annexed, instead being kept as a puppet state so as to get the Dutch East Indias kept under their thumb.
Click to expand...

I agree, the British would probably be offered an easier deal than France. Ribbentrop developed a severe Anglophobia in his time as Ambassador to St. James, as he felt slighted by the British aristocrats scorn (he was a dumb idiot), however he was surely in a minority position here. Hitler and a lot of the nazis were sympathetic to the British Empire, nearing a point of Anglophilia. According to nazi ideologies, the British people was of a "purer" Aryan strain than even the germans themselves, due to their insular nature as a "volk". The British Empire was seen as a grand accomplishment of aryan superiority; Hitler even lamented when the Japanese captured Singapore. Also, the nazis had no real interest in their former colonies, and so weakening British, and even French, colonial structure would only serve german enemies (such as the soviets and/or US). So, you cold see some people who were far from being nazis cooperating with this new regime in order to save at least a remnant of the Empire, instead of embarking on a likely doomed crusade with Churchill towards Canada or any other pro-allied dominion.
 

DuncanI

Gll25 said:
Lloyd George was quite old in World War II, and as a member of the Liberal Party I don't see his political views aligning with Hitler. However, I had never heard of this visit to the Fuhrer in the 30's. Could you provide a link?
Click to expand...

Lloyd George was quite old, but he was 7 years younger than Pétain. Pétain was 84 upon taking over the Vichy regime. Still, for Lloyd George you would have until 1945 for him to be used as a leader unless his death was to be butterflied slightly.

As for the 1936 visit:
https://lloydgeorgesociety.org.uk/en/article/2008/0130361/lloyd-george-and-hitler
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/LloydGeorge.htm
 

Theodoric

If the Reich had a bit more so in the matter (like involving an occupation), they'd probably go for influence and party size over ideological similarity when it comes to setting up a puppet regime or collaborator government. That's how they went about it in occupied Europe, for the duration of the war at least. Chances are after they'd won, they'd just replace the collaborators too and entirely remove the vestiges of the old political system, possibly including the monarchy.

Don't forget that ultimately collaborators exist at the expediency of the occupier/overlord. They make the final decisions as to who is in charge, that's kind-of the whole point.
 
Clandango

Clandango

Theodoric said:
If the Reich had a bit more so in the matter (like involving an occupation), they'd probably go for influence and party size over ideological similarity when it comes to setting up a puppet regime or collaborator government. That's how they went about it in occupied Europe, for the duration of the war at least. Chances are after they'd won, they'd just replace the collaborators too and entirely remove the vestiges of the old political system, possibly including the monarchy.

Don't forget that ultimately collaborators exist at the expediency of the occupier/overlord. They make the final decisions as to who is in charge, that's kind-of the whole point.
Click to expand...
Part of why Hitler preferred having Petain and Laval running Vichy France. Meant a lot less German manpower spent, plus the pair of them gave him whatever he wanted. He figured having French Fascists take charge would have helped revitalize France, which he was rather against.
 

eltf177

Mosley stated in his memoirs that if offered a role in a Nazi government he wouldn't accept. Take that for what it's worth.

I think the Germans would have a hard time finding willing collaborators. And collaborators having a hard time staying alive, I see lots of assassinations as warnings about making a poor choice.

I think someone would have to be brought in...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top