There aren't enough Germans to colonize Ukraine. Germany will try and colonize Poland, and maybe get to the Baltics, but Ukraine is too big and there aren't enough Germans. After half the population is rolled back through the hunger plan the Germans are going to realize this. It probably devolves into a giant slave labour camp focused on resource extraction.
Ukraine at the scene of a Nazi victory
- Thread starter Real History
- Start date
Nazi Germany encouraged German women to have as many kids as possible. In fact, the Nazis gave out MEDALS to women who gave birth to a lot of children.
The Nazis were, to their core, firm believers in "Aryan" supremacy. They ate, slept, lived, and breathed extreme hatred for the Jews, Slavs, Romani, homosexuals, disabled, and communists. The Nazi Party's genocidal racism defined the political party, because it was the political party.
They can tell people this all they want, but I'm going to have a hard time believing that people living in cities on the Ruhr are going to have 12 kids and go off and sacrifice their quality of life to go and colonize a dangerous Ukraine that has no amenities and a bunch of angry Ukranian partisans, while they're doing the same thing in Poland and the Baltics.
Nazi ideology is going to come to loggerheads with demographics and economic reality when the war is done. There aren't enough Germans to do the colonizing and it's going to be forbiddingly expensive to colonize half if eastern Europe.
I think the Nazis would have gotten through settling Poland and the Baltics before giving up on Lebensraum and moving towards a more standard slave colonial system
The topic of Generalplan Ost has been thoroughly discussed in these threads.
I think of the various elements that made up Generalplan Ost the actual genocide part would likely be the easiest to accomplish. Considering the Reich managed to kill over 15 million people within six years in the middle of a war with the most powerful countries in the world I don’t doubt that they could kill, deport and enslave tens of millions of Slavs in several decades if they won. It isn’t hard to kill people en masse through famine, disease, exposure and overwork. Stalin proved this in the Holodomor and Mao proved this in the Great Leap Forward. The Nazis were the same people who killed almost three million Soviet POWs in the span of eight months without the use of gas chambers as an afterthought. Imagine the horrors they could carry out with deliberation and free rein. The harsh Eastern European summers and winters would be very helpful for depopulation.
I think of the various elements that made up Generalplan Ost the actual genocide part would likely be the easiest to accomplish. Considering the Reich managed to kill over 15 million people within six years in the middle of a war with the most powerful countries in the world I don’t doubt that they could kill, deport and enslave tens of millions of Slavs in several decades if they won. It isn’t hard to kill people en masse through famine, disease, exposure and overwork. Stalin proved this in the Holodomor and Mao proved this in the Great Leap Forward. The Nazis were the same people who killed almost three million Soviet POWs in the span of eight months without the use of gas chambers as an afterthought. Imagine the horrors they could carry out with deliberation and free rein. The harsh Eastern European summers and winters would be very helpful for depopulation.
Last edited:
The most likely scenario is not pretty.
90% of the population is relocated to the West (death camps) and the remaining 10% is enslaved and worked to death.
The world Nazi is used as a derogerty term for a reason
90% of the population is relocated to the West (death camps) and the remaining 10% is enslaved and worked to death.
The world Nazi is used as a derogerty term for a reason
Germany's extermination plans and policies and "vibes" were all in conflict historically. Germany's government ran on bureaucratic competition between overlapping boundaries of control.
There will be no one singular extermination plan.
There will be multiple competing extermination plans.
There will be many multiple policies which necessarily require or allow for extermination.
There will be "vibes" in implementation bodies which allow for casual extermination while conducting other business.
So the answer is "A complex result depending entirely on who is on the ground, which departments and armed forces they represent, and who the officer or bureaucrat on the spot it, but almost certainly involving institutional & scientific, as well as casual and entertainment based murder, dislocation, starvation, rape, dehousing and physical punishment."
"Which plane would Nazi Germany build in 1945?" 7 different models, 4 of them experimental, spread across at least 2 government departments. Etc.
Also it'd be shut down after the atomic carpet allows for the invasion, and the resupplied Soviet Union (Pragmatist / Unsurrendered / Surviving) activates its partisan networks and begins weak reserve probes after the Wally landing. That's how long the "victory" would be.
yours,
Sam R.
There will be no one singular extermination plan.
There will be multiple competing extermination plans.
There will be many multiple policies which necessarily require or allow for extermination.
There will be "vibes" in implementation bodies which allow for casual extermination while conducting other business.
So the answer is "A complex result depending entirely on who is on the ground, which departments and armed forces they represent, and who the officer or bureaucrat on the spot it, but almost certainly involving institutional & scientific, as well as casual and entertainment based murder, dislocation, starvation, rape, dehousing and physical punishment."
"Which plane would Nazi Germany build in 1945?" 7 different models, 4 of them experimental, spread across at least 2 government departments. Etc.
Also it'd be shut down after the atomic carpet allows for the invasion, and the resupplied Soviet Union (Pragmatist / Unsurrendered / Surviving) activates its partisan networks and begins weak reserve probes after the Wally landing. That's how long the "victory" would be.
yours,
Sam R.
I agree. The argument that it would be 'Notzi' - and therefore implausible or even ASB - for the Nazis to do something outside their dogma isn't supported by their actions.
Besides they can still have genocidal objectives whilst also exploiting the hopes and fears of those people they want to genocide. Plus they would be contradictory or hypocritical in some cases depending on whether it was the personal, or practical or politically and diplomatically advantageous.
Hitler's chauffeur, and an SS member, was a Ruhr Pole.
The No. 2 member of the SS - after Hitler as No. 1 - was a mischling.
One of Goering's senior deputies was a mischling - or wasn't if you believe his excuses for not being.
Heydrich ensured a Jewish fencing rival was able to leave to the US.
So when it came to the personal they could be 'Notzi' in OTL.
When they were scrounging for votes pre-takeover they produced materials in the Slavic Masurian dialect to win votes in southern East Prussia.
The Russians were Aryans to some of their intellectuals but had been bastardised by interbreeding with Asiatics and therefore subhuman. Yet the Asiatic Japanese were honorary Aryans.
They even had similar views of the Chinese until it wasn't in their interests to do so. Chiang Kai-shek's adopted son was a Wehrmacht officer up until 1939.
Depending on what Gauleiter an occupied Pole found themselves under saw some become German at a stroke of a pen. The greatest single source of recruits for the western Free Polish forces was deserters and prisoners from the Wehrmacht.
The Nazis created two Slavic states Slovakia and Croatia. They recruited Ukrainians and Belarusians as auxiliary policemen.
So I wouldn't say it's implausible that they could have taken a different tack with Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltics. As said above Rosenberg even suggested it but since Hitler was at the height of his megalomania he opted for the Himmler Kool-Aid. Rosenberg got a full house at Nuremberg so I don't think he could be called a 'Notzi'.
If they had taken the Rosenberg route - of giving Ukrainians, Belarusians and Balts a *sense* of control - they could have maybe pacified their rear and had a greater reservoir of military manpower.
As it was they alienated a lot of them through almost instant repression. Then they belatedly realised they could exploit their national feelings with a puppet Rada in Belarus and a Ukrainian SS division. But by that time it was too late.
And those latter actions show they could have gone this route but screwed up because they were high on their own Kool-Aid.
EDIT: Addition. There's even a case of a concentration camp commander being tried and executed on charges that included ... 'premeditated murder'.
Karl-Otto Koch - Wikipedia
Last edited:
I think the most terrifying part of a Nazi victory is the fact that one can very easily see how the Nazis could develop not just a military industrial complex, but a genocide industrial complex, and quite quickly. There would be companies dependent on producing the tools of genocide.
Yeah. Part of the horror of the Holocaust, apart from the scale and cruelty, is that it was industrialised and bureaucratic. Two features of the supposedly civilised modern world.
Usually they were just some edict to a bunch of murderers or naive conscripts to go off and just kill 'em folk. No ledger or processing required.
You know the shit that happened under Stalin? Yeah, it's going to be a million times worse than that quite literally
I'd suggest a reading of Christopher Browning's No Ordinary Men.
Not a book I wanted to keep. Chilling.
Not a book I wanted to keep. Chilling.
They couldnt feed their own population so they killed their undesirables. The holocaust was an evil response to the blockade. This does not make the Nazis less culpable, murder is murder, but not admitting this ignores the culpability of the Allies who really didnt give a flying flock that there was a holocaust and did absolutely nothing to stop it, bomb transport to the camps, etc.
Wasn't it just "Ordinary Men". Saw the documentary. Yeah, it's a lesson in how just simple social and group pressure - no intimidation - makes murderers of, well, ordinary men.
The Holocaust was not a response to Allied blockade. You are right in that Nazi planners decided to implement the Hunger Plan in the Soviet Union and starve millions because they determined that they didn’t get enough food. But by common definition (more complicated, but for sake of argument) that isn’t the Holocaust, which was the specific targeting of Jews and Roma. The targeting of Jews long preceded the war, and the specific intent to ghettoize and eventually remove them from Europe preceded food crises. The evidence we have for why the Nazi bureaucracy began to organize mass killings of Jews in 1941 points towards the problem of the large amount of Jews in the conquered eastern territories. The simplest solution, in the eyes of Nazi plenipotentiaries, was to kill them rather than deal with building more ghettos and reserves. Soviet Jews were also seen as intrinsically more dangerous than German or even Polish Jews, having allegedly been complicit in the Bolshevik project by default - therefore they couldn’t be allowed to live. The Holocaust as a specific process of organized mass killing was prompted by the “success” in the initial killing programs of summer and fall 1941 and an increasing sense that this was a viable solution for the “Jewish Question” as opposed to the previous proposals like encouraged emigration, removal to Madagascar, or a large reservation in Poland. The bureaucracy shifted towards organized mass murder as its preferred method of choice, and we saw the result. That process had very little to do with the Allied blockade.
Even if it did, the Allies making it harder for the Wehrmacht to get adequate food while it invaded the Soviet Union doesn’t make them morally culpable for the German decision to starve millions to supply their armies and home front. The alternative is what? Allow food to go in unmolested and still have a race obsessed genocidal empire conquer Europe and carry out its exterminationist policies, but this time without a utilitarian justification?
Last edited:
Garrison
Donor
There was never any serious Nazi plan for an independent Ukraine, that was the fantasy of the relative handful of Ukrainians who chose to side with the Nazis, the only
variations in the Nazi plan is how many would be killed outright and how many would be worked to death or left to starve.
The victorious Germans are thinking more along the lines of French Algeria than colonizing Ukraine to the extent that it goes majority German. They also have a relatively broad definition of "German". As Ukraine was broken up into more controllable regions based on sub ethnicity, only eastern Ukraine and Crimea are targeted for influxes of colonists.
The Germans then go "French Algeria": Financial subsidies are used to boost enthusiasm. Volksdeutch from Serbia to Romania and anywhere in between are welcome. And..... if that is still not enough, colonial opportunities are opened up to sufficiently pro German Hungarians, Croats, Romanians, Balts (preference for Latvians- but Estonians and Lithuanians are workable) etc.
Last edited:
Where, in all the documented history of the Holocaust, did you find ANYTHING that indicated it was, in any way, shape, or form, the result of an Allied blockade? Unlike WW I the Reich had ALL of Europe to loot for foodstuffs. Civilians within Inner Germany had no problems with getting foods, even what would be seen as luxuries until late in the war, when the Allies had compressed the Wehrmacht back into or close to prewar German borders.
I would very much like to see your sources for this.
Say within four hours of your next login.
There's exhibits on this in the holocaust museum in DC. They blame the western allies for not bombing rail transport to the camps and taking a mote active role in trying to stop the holocaust.
Mass killings of Jews by the way began before the holocaust, but the final decision was made after the Wansee Conference. The main incentive behind yhe decision was to hold Jews collectively responsible for what Nazis imagined was the work of New York Jews in bringing the US into the war as part of a global conspiracy. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/235167
Nevertheless, this occurred after the blockade forced the shelving of plans of mass resettlements (which would have been deadly of course):
"However, because of the British naval blockade and the Nazis’ defeat in the Battle of Britain, the (Madagascar) plan never went into effect." Source: https://www.jns.org/column/antisemitism/23/9/3/315690/
Here is peer reviewed research that the blockade prevented significant red cross relief to holocaust prisoners during the war: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2639905
The germans had loot to feed their own population because they were starving everyone else.
This is the best i can do on short notice from work. But im ethnically ashlenazi, i am pro Israel in this war, and my comments are not meant to decrease German culpability. My point is that the Germans are not alone culpable. Ive cited legitimate sources. Hopefully you can accept that there is something to what i say.