Society in a nazi victory WW2

Do not get me wrong I am not saying the Nazi's are all kittens and rainbows, but honestly it irks me slightly that as many history buffs as we have here the only future with a nazi victory is mass enslavment and return of nordic gods, while Hitler sits on a throne made of Stalin's bones. The Soviets won WWII yet the predictions of what such a victory would mean did not go all the way through.

Much of what we look to to show the horrors of a Nazi victory in WWII is based on the writings of various people. Just because we have an idea does not mean it will go through.


Well, as Nazi defeat involved mass enslavement and murder and this was the plan for Nazi victory this seems a not unreasonable assumption for actual Nazi victory, at least initially.
 
Well, as Nazi defeat involved mass enslavement and murder and this was the plan for Nazi victory this seems a not unreasonable assumption for actual Nazi victory, at least initially.

Right but almost every way we envision a Nazi victory is around 1941-42. Bad time to be non-German, but not the worst.

More over the Soviets had mass arrests, systematic forced labor, and many other things which ended a few years after the war. Yes people got arrested but not on the scale of the purges. So just cause it happened does not mean it goes on for decades as many post-Nazi victory TL's have us believe.
 
Right but almost every way we envision a Nazi victory is around 1941-42. Bad time to be non-German, but not the worst.

More over the Soviets had mass arrests, systematic forced labor, and many other things which ended a few years after the war. Yes people got arrested but not on the scale of the purges. So just cause it happened does not mean it goes on for decades as many post-Nazi victory TL's have us believe.


If you systematically enslave tens of millions of people you need to keep them down. If you plan to starve tens of millions to death there is going to be violence when you make sure that happens.

Most TLs even mass brutality for 20-30 years, which seems plausible.

It is worth noting that German soldiers had been trigger happy about shooting civilians since the 1870s, that political repression and anti-Semitism were rife in Wilhelmine Germany - what is happening is not exactly an aberration. A great victory won by brutal violence is not an incentive to liberalisation.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
One primary thing we should remember was that, Nazi Germany left the production of new weaponry and replacement material to corporations, which mean that while the national universities may suck the real research and feats of enginering would happen in these corporations. That means also that there won't be the wall between military and civil technology which USSR, where military scientist was isolated from the rest of society, and little of the progress got to the civil sector. Here if a tank get a stabilisator, it could very well end up in civil car down the road too.

My guess is while German pure science would suck, in practical use they would do quite well. Of curse a few exception as in chemistry and health the would exist, the Nazis focus on these would likely place them on 1st place even in pure science department.

While the GDP per capita would be lower than OTL West, it would quite likely be higher than OTL East Block.

My guess is that Nazi Germany would look like a cross between East Germany and post-war Italy.
 
Do not get me wrong I am not saying the Nazi's are all kittens and rainbows, but honestly it irks me slightly that as many history buffs as we have here the only future with a nazi victory is mass enslavment and return of nordic gods, while Hitler sits on a throne made of Stalin's bones. The Soviets won WWII yet the predictions of what such a victory would mean did not go all the way through.

Much of what we look to to show the horrors of a Nazi victory in WWII is based on the writings of various people. Just because we have an idea does not mean it will go through.

Sure, I was only sort of pointing out that the next generation coming through to replace the Himmlers, Goerings etc are likely to be drawn from those whom the likes of Himmler saw as "successful" and promoted

But the Nazi state being an amorphous entity has several different routes to power, including the HitlerJugend, the party itself (and emasculated SA) and of course the military, so its not as if the camp commandmants, Gauleiters, and Obergrupenfuhrers are the sum of those coming through

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
If you systematically enslave tens of millions of people you need to keep them down. If you plan to starve tens of millions to death there is going to be violence when you make sure that happens.

Most TLs even mass brutality for 20-30 years, which seems plausible.

It is worth noting that German soldiers had been trigger happy about shooting civilians since the 1870s, that political repression and anti-Semitism were rife in Wilhelmine Germany - what is happening is not exactly an aberration. A great victory won by brutal violence is not an incentive to liberalisation.

The draconian occupation methods are bad, but outside of the Nazi'[s making a bomb most victory TL's are due to speed on the part of the German army. Occupation is a brutal thing for the Germans in general based on their military doctrine. Yet if the Kaiser won WWI would we have mass enslavement? I think we would have occupation being a hard thing, but I do not see slavery. The need for forced labor was due to the lack of such resources as the war dragged on. With a victory some soldiers will return home, that means the factories will be staffed again. Add in the need to incorporate areas into the Riech, or perhaps go the opposite and assume puppet regimes and the Riech laves Western Europe alone, and the need to be utterly horrid to the masses is lowered. With in the German army some saw the need to be nice to the Slavs as a way to get more men for the East, a few years of occupation and perhaps this idea has merit? Then again maybe Hitler has a nuke and bombs a city just to show people not to screw with the Germans? It can happen either way, but why is the worst possible outcome always the outcome for a Nazi victory?
 
One primary thing we should remember was that, Nazi Germany left the production of new weaponry and replacement material to corporations, which mean that while the national universities may suck the real research and feats of enginering would happen in these corporations. That means also that there won't be the wall between military and civil technology which USSR, where military scientist was isolated from the rest of society, and little of the progress got to the civil sector. Here if a tank get a stabilisator, it could very well end up in civil car down the road too.

My guess is while German pure science would suck, in practical use they would do quite well. Of curse a few exception as in chemistry and health the would exist, the Nazis focus on these would likely place them on 1st place even in pure science department.

While the GDP per capita would be lower than OTL West, it would quite likely be higher than OTL East Block.

My guess is that Nazi Germany would look like a cross between East Germany and post-war Italy.

Is that entirely true ? The idea of design bureaus became quiet prominent later on (Kurt Tank etc) whilst the actual production of designs ended up franchised off between diferent manufacturing companies

You also have to factor in that depending on when hostilities cease, the SS may or may not have a big roll. If you're looking later, then however well the Reich is doing, its still likely that things will get rationalised into some sort of chaotic over-arcing structure, and whilst Kammler won't end up the supremo of everything, he will probably have an important little SS empire gathered together, rivalling a civil one headed by Speer

Best regards
Grey Wolf
 
The draconian occupation methods are bad, but outside of the Nazi'[s making a bomb most victory TL's are due to speed on the part of the German army. Occupation is a brutal thing for the Germans in general based on their military doctrine. Yet if the Kaiser won WWI would we have mass enslavement? I think we would have occupation being a hard thing, but I do not see slavery. The need for forced labor was due to the lack of such resources as the war dragged on. With a victory some soldiers will return home, that means the factories will be staffed again. Add in the need to incorporate areas into the Riech, or perhaps go the opposite and assume puppet regimes and the Riech laves Western Europe alone, and the need to be utterly horrid to the masses is lowered. With in the German army some saw the need to be nice to the Slavs as a way to get more men for the East, a few years of occupation and perhaps this idea has merit? Then again maybe Hitler has a nuke and bombs a city just to show people not to screw with the Germans? It can happen either way, but why is the worst possible outcome always the outcome for a Nazi victory?

Well, the Nazis planned for a quick win and they planned to let most of the population of the European USSR starve. Desperation in war was certainly radicalising, but this radicalisation was achieved early on.
 
Sure, I was only sort of pointing out that the next generation coming through to replace the Himmlers, Goerings etc are likely to be drawn from those whom the likes of Himmler saw as "successful" and promoted

But the Nazi state being an amorphous entity has several different routes to power, including the HitlerJugend, the party itself (and emasculated SA) and of course the military, so its not as if the camp commandmants, Gauleiters, and Obergrupenfuhrers are the sum of those coming through

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

I will try to find the book but this student wrote his ideas of a Nazi victory and it really stuck with me. It seemed like a rational move. In it the Nazi's had victory by 1942, with the Soviets giving up Ukraine, and Belorus, the UK accepted a general cease fire and fell silent. It had Hitler getting sick by 1948, and the army, Nazi party, and SS circling him. What happened was Speer made a deal with the army, and the party, along with the major corporations in Germany. The SS were brutal, violent, and had these radical ideas like Company Oversight Boards, and Racial Purity Tests for the General Staff. So Speer shifted the blame of all the mass murders, and really violent oppression to the SS. The secret police and the army arrested the leaders rather quickly and the Nazi Regime was stable under a leader picked by the army and the party.

So it was still a racist nation with a firm grip on everything, but it was made out to be a state which removed the parts it needs to survive. The writer compared it to the removal of the SA, as before Hitler came to power the group of thugs was needed. Afterwards their ideas for national militia's and national socialist reconstruction of society was not popular to the masses, or to those with economic and political power. After the war the SS, whose skill was fanatic devotion to Hitler, and a security network, was no longer required as the army was freed from combat to take up the occupation duties, as well as the government needing more direct control over the intellegence service. It seemed like an interesting idea in that for Nazi Germany to survive it would need to make a series of compromises between the army, the force that defends the nation, the corporations, the force that employs the nation, and the party, the "popular" side of Germany. If any side gained utter power the others would decline and cracks would form with in the state. By having a compromise the Nazi's could last for a long time.
 
Nothing stops Germany from reforming into a more moderate posture, although the structures in place would at least continue to push the momentum of the hardliners.

The worst outcome is Hitler living for a long time, or another radical taking the helm. The Church would get Nationally Socialized, the Army gets merged into the Waffen SS, and views on ethnicity are further solidified. The Polish question may be answered through similar means to the Jewish question as well.

Someone like Heydrich, Hans Frank or Erich Koch would probably continue the hard line of the Nazi's ideology; there is little reason that Hitler wouldn't want to back the SS as his favored faction in German politics in such a scenario.

It is possible that moderates can take control--the Armed Forces, The Industrialists--but I would think that whoever replaces Hitler is going to be his appointed successor. If this successor is forced out, there is still the question of the radical/moderate split in German politics. And the real strength of the radical position is that Hitler was vindicated. It is hard to see the next fueher of Germany being a moderate after Hitler.

A moderate will emerge sooner or later, to be sure. But that may be the 1970s-80s when it happens. Germany is going to fall behind the USA technologically (its education system is not going to work) and some kind of slave system for Slavs in the Reich is probably going forward, which will further retard economic growth. Indeed, Nazi Germany achieved little economic growth through its own merits, Ian himself wrote a good essay on that point.

Nazi Germany isn't going to fall like the Soviet Union--what its going to do is withdraw to a homeland, which will probably include Poland, the Baltic States, and Crimea, and then try to set up some kind unstable puppet in the East, which will not work and leave Germany stuck in a Super-Vietnam. Given that this is Nazi Germany, we could not rule out Germany throwing nukes against the Guerrillas.

It won't be dystopian, though. It'll just be a matter of some people really lose and some people don't. Ukranians, Russians, and other Slavs are going to get enslaved; the Poles are going to get wiped out, and Germany probably annexes Denmark, the Netherlands, and Germanizungs a bunch of territory.
 
The only problem with the secret police arresting the SS is that they are the secret police - in fact they are all the police

IMHO you need military backing, and perhaps have non-SS panzer grenadiers, or mountain troops, or paratroops, whatever passes for elite non-SS units, do the arresting

But in a victory scenario there will be less likelihood I think of a sudden collapse. However, you can take a leaf ourt of the SA's being put down, and emasculate the SS, have it continue like the SA did (tho everyone forgets that) but removing its top cadre, and quashing its more radical plans

The SS economic unit could be spun off from the centre, and be more or less like a state corporation, perhaps along the lines of S Korea's weird ones, as someone else mentioned

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Some ideas, based on the presumption we are talking about US culture in a world in which Nazi Germany completely defeated the European allies in the west and has occupied most of the western USSR and reduced the unoccupied portions of the USSR to a fairly minor irritant.

(1) On a superficial level, a Nazi-dominated Europe might appear less threatening and monolithic to the USA than OTL's Warsaw Pact. It is reasonable to presume Germany's european satellites might exhibit superficially more independence and continuity with prewar goverments and traditions. I am thinking here of France (Vichy), Hungary, Spain, Italy, Romania, and Finland. Britain is hard to figure - it might be an occupied territory or an essentially free nation which has been neutralized as Finland was in OTL.

(2) The Nazis would pursue their ethnic cleansing agenda throughout Europe, but perhaps at a slightly slower rate, and the evidence for this would be less apparent to the outside world. Without the direct evidence for the holocaust provided by US troops liberating concentration camps, there would always be a significant number of people willing to believe the best about German Europe and happy to do business with Germany and its satellites. As mentioned elsewhere, there may be a significant influx of east european immigration to the new world

(3) It is very reasonable to presume the US would directly occupy/annex or establish nominally independent protectorates over all or most western hemisphere territories associated with conquered European nations (Greenland, Iceland, the Bahamas, etc). The US would not tolerate German military bases in the new world, period.

(4) I tend to think that, in many ways the US would shift rightward, not to the left. With the existence and apparent permanence of a frankly racialistic Nazi regime in much or Europe, you would see the same general trend toward "peaceful co-existence" and "detente" which marked the 1960's and 1970's in OTL. Many intellectual and business elites would seek business as usual with the Nazis, and find excuses to ignore Nazi excesses. The USA would stay more racist, if for no other reason than this would be important to do business with that half of the world ruled or dominated by the Nazis. A racist mentality would also be a key element of US policy toward Japan, regardless of how the Pacific War gets butterflied in this TL.

(5) As opposed to OTL in which the US "civic religion" gradually became more inclusive and tolerant of racial diversity, the US "civic religion" might become more aggressively a celebration of the Nation's founding and expansion as an Anglo-Saxon success story, making the conflict with German dominated Europe one between races and peoples rather than ideologies.
(5) Eugenic movements and values would not be discredited among intellectual elites

(6) Colonialism would be less discredited and the US would probably step up its overt acquisition of military basis overseas.
 
Who is making the weapons, or anything else for that matter is irrelevant. The people doing it still must come from the population. If the education system introduced by the Nazi's stays in place for even 10 - 15 years you'll have an entire generation of utterly useless scientists and engineers.

It's worth remembering a lot of the USSR's advances were stolen from the West. Would the Nazi's find as many sympathisers among the secret projects of the West? I'm not convinced.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Is that entirely true ? The idea of design bureaus became quiet prominent later on (Kurt Tank etc) whilst the actual production of designs ended up franchised off between diferent manufacturing companies

You also have to factor in that depending on when hostilities cease, the SS may or may not have a big roll. If you're looking later, then however well the Reich is doing, its still likely that things will get rationalised into some sort of chaotic over-arcing structure, and whilst Kammler won't end up the supremo of everything, he will probably have an important little SS empire gathered together, rivalling a civil one headed by Speer

Best regards
Grey Wolf

Well even if they do it that way, the corporations will get access to the new reseach and technic by producing the designs, in some way this is superior, because they all get access to it. Beside it mean that they can headhunt engineer in public service.
 
It is worth noting that German soldiers had been trigger happy about shooting civilians since the 1870s, that political repression and anti-Semitism were rife in Wilhelmine Germany - what is happening is not exactly an aberration. A great victory won by brutal violence is not an incentive to liberalisation.

Well first, I don't see evidence of any extreme differences between Germanic troops from the other powers at be. French, Belgium and various other nations all have incidents in the 19th century concerning colonial brutality. The same with 'political repression' during the time period. Germany was well ahead of other European states, and I think without WW1 coming along you would have seen real and major political changes in the German empire starting with the SPD forcing an exchange of power. The old system was giving way. Racism? Again, find any country in which there wasn't anti-Semitism during that time period? I believe German Jews in Wilhelmine Germany were actually probably more successful than France for example.
As to the ATL postwar Germany. I again tend to think that the system and state as it was run was not sustainable. I think much like after the death of Stalin, Germany after Hitler and especially that inner circle you would see change. Competition with the USA in industrial and economic terms would dictate a change in priorities from ethnic and racial identity to things like the Space Race, Military and Scientific bragging rights. Continuing barbarous programs, constant infighting, and watching most of the world be chased into the American camp from fear is going to bust open some doors. Like Fenwick I'm not predicting flower gardens and rainbows but I think after a generation different priorities and economics mean a different German state.
 
Well first, I don't see evidence of any extreme differences between Germanic troops from the other powers at be. French, Belgium and various other nations all have incidents in the 19th century concerning colonial brutality. The same with 'political repression' during the time period. Germany was well ahead of other European states, and I think without WW1 coming along you would have seen real and major political changes in the German empire starting with the SPD forcing an exchange of power. The old system was giving way. Racism? Again, find any country in which there wasn't anti-Semitism during that time period? I believe German Jews in Wilhelmine Germany were actually probably more successful than France for example.

About 3 days into World War One the Germans shot a number of their own people in Alsace purely upon rumours that there had been shooting. It is not possible to imagine the other powers doing this.

Regarding political repression Wilhelmine Germany planned to start any war by rounding up and arresting all the social democrats. Luckily for them in practice they came out in favour very early. This is unimaginable elsewhere, as is THE ARMY spying on political radicals.

Racism was such that Jewish Census of the army was held in 1916 to investigate allegations of Jewish shirking. In contrast in other countries the war helped integration.
 
About 3 days into World War One the Germans shot a number of their own people in Alsace purely upon rumours that there had been shooting. It is not possible to imagine the other powers doing this.


Regarding political repression Wilhelmine Germany planned to start any war by rounding up and arresting all the social democrats. Luckily for them in practice they came out in favour very early. This is unimaginable elsewhere, as is THE ARMY spying on political radicals.

Racism was such that Jewish Census of the army was held in 1916 to investigate allegations of Jewish shirking. In contrast in other countries the war helped integration.

Depending on the parts of Alsace, during wartime and with the eminent threat of a French invasion to the region and potential civil rebellion ... who knows what troops in such a situation are capable of. I'm not defending the actions, but there could be a lot of factors involved. You don't think Russia or say Italy were capable of something like that? Italian treatment of their own soldiers is mind boggling. Who knows what they would have done in newly taken Austrian/Italian villages.While not on the continent, I would think it's also easy to imagine such things taking place in colonial areas such as the Congo or elsewhere in Africa by French or other European troops.

There were talks within some of the military leadership of such a thing, although I have not seen any actual plans or attempt to implement it. Again, if a monarch or government is afraid that a Marxist worker rebellion or popular revolt is being planned by a party upon entering a major war, I don't think it's crazy to imagine the government stepping in and attempting to nix such an attempt by arresting the leaders. If the British had real concern or knew of actions being planned during the Easter Rising, do you not think they would have crushed it ASAP?

As for Jews, it was a horrible time to be in any country. That probably got worse, the more east one goes. George Mosse is quoted as saying that French Jews during this time were treated as a "nation within a nation". I think the French actually benefiting in this regard because of the Dreyfus Scandal ... it brought to the publics eye a lot of such nonsense and they and the military were able to move past it before WW1. Germany and especially the Army were still ran with the same historically (in general not specific to Germany) racial attitudes ... seen in the 1916 report.
 
Top