View previous topic | View next topic

If Adolph Hitler had died/was killed during the Phoney War?

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

natalie.salat
1386039.  Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:34 pm Reply with quote

Of course, another possible outcome if Hitler dies after Poland but before Norway and the Low Countries is Germany might crash out of the war very quickly as different factions struggle inside Germany for control.

 
Jenny
1386153.  Tue Jul 27, 2021 10:21 am Reply with quote

I'm currently reading Time after Time by Ben Elton, the premise of which is that a time traveller can prevent many of the tragedies of the 20th century by preventing Gavrilo Princip from assassinating the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and going on to assassinate the Kaiser. It's a pretty good book so far. The writer makes an interesting case for the mission.

 
Alexander Howard
1386176.  Tue Jul 27, 2021 5:09 pm Reply with quote

There is an excellent twist, which I will not spoil. Ben Elton is a fine writer.

 
Jenny
1386225.  Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:18 am Reply with quote

Yes I just finished the book and I agree to both parts of your statement :-)

 
CB27
1386365.  Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:18 pm Reply with quote

Going back to the original discussion, would WWII and the Holocaust have still happened if Hitler died in 1939?

There's always going to be arguments for various outcomes, but my personal opinion is that to some degree they would have, and that it could have even been worse.

The main reason for this was the Enabling Act of 1933, which effectively made Germany a dictatorship under whomever was Chancellor.

So the question would then be who would have taken over, and manage to hold onto power?

Much has been written about the Stauffenberg assassination attempt, and various others, but many of the leading people in these attempts were more against Hitler's military leadership than any civilian policies (with a few exceptions). In fact, some of these plotters believed they could simply negotiate a ceasefire allowing Germany to retain their control over the territories they'd seized across much of Europe.

Add to this that Hitler and others in his inner circle had accumulated very large fortunes since the late 20s and had a lot of controlling power of several leading industrial corporation, as well as access to a large civilian militia as well as the army.

With all of this, it's hard for me to see anyone not deeply entrenched in Nazi ideology taking over, I doubt we would have had a soft power leader, and it could have led to someone perhaps more capable and more ruthless taking over.

As for what could have prevented WWII and Holocaust, it's never going to be just one or two events, it's a combination of events throughout history. The end of WWI, the way it started, going back to the wars of accession, and various conflicts over several centuries and because several thousand years ago Ugg killed Hurr with a stone and took over his cave.

And who knows what would have happened if only one or two things changed, or even something major as Hitler getting killed, we might even end up seeing Gluugsnergluug as the first squid on the moon in about 3 millions years from now (that's a possibility, look it up).

 
Jenny
1386369.  Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:58 pm Reply with quote

This is purely speculative, but based on what I think I understand of history.

If you look at popular fiction written in the 1920s and 1930s, it is rife with anti-Semitism. Even in my 1950s young childhood, there was prejudice against Jewish people that was expressed fairly openly.

I wonder whether, if there had not been the outrage of the Holocaust, that would have continued and whether smaller perpetrations of evil against Jewish people would still be happening. I think there is a case to be made that the obscenity of what happened to Jews murdered simply for being Jewish in some ways laid the groundwork for civil rights for black and gay people later, where the moral wrong of that kind of prejudice was so blatant. Absent the Holocaust, would those rights have been acquired when they were?

I wonder whether, without the Holocaust, if there would have been such a thing as the state of Israel and what would now be happening in the Middle East in that case (please note that I do not in any way suggest that Israel should not exist, but am simply speculating as to what the effect of it not existing would be).

 
Celebaelin
1386378.  Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:54 pm Reply with quote

Let us consider the superb construction that is this stuff (it was Karl Kraus FWIW).

So as far as I can tell the question is 'Would Germany have persisted along the road of Hitlerian fascism without Hitler?' In my opinion, yes, but without the same degree of ultimate commitment, dedication or internal competition.

Whether there is an implied secondary question about whether the British and the Germans are capable (mark me, 'capable',) of cooperating at recent points in history is a matter for others to determine, or at least debate, but at this post-Brexit juncture the matter seems to have been determined to be in the negative.

 
natalie.salat
1386384.  Sat Jul 31, 2021 4:12 am Reply with quote

Anyone who wasnít a reckless gambler like Hitler would have been happy to get up from the table with the prewar territorial winnings like Austria and the Sudetenland - to consolidate them. Remember too that much of the officer corps favoured some sort of return of the monarchy

 
Leith
1386471.  Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:05 pm Reply with quote

I sometimes wonder how European and World history might have played out if Joseph Chamberlain's attempts in the late 19th / early 20th century to make the UK a part of the Triple Alliance had been successful.

The breakdown of negotiations between the UK and Germany led to Chamberlain seeking an alliance with France instead, ultimately leading to the Triple Entente.

Had Chamberlain's first choice of alliance come about, we might have seen WWI breakout with the UK on the side of Germany, Austro-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, perhaps defeating France and Russia (would America still have got involved? On which side?).

Then Austro-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire survive the war intact, Africa is divided into British and German colonies rather than British and French, and who knows whether Fascism or Communism would have taken hold where or when they did.

 
natalie.salat
1386821.  Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:38 pm Reply with quote

If Lenin was smart, he would have understood that he could do more for himself, his Party and his revolution by ransoming the Tsar and family for pounds sterling than he could with dead bodies.

 
PDR
1386838.  Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:28 am Reply with quote

I'm not sure Lenin was in that much control of the situation. I suspect the decision to murder the royal family was taken by a local zealot and Lenin was probably livid when he learned what they had done.

PDR

 
Alexander Howard
1386850.  Fri Aug 06, 2021 5:46 am Reply with quote

The decision to kill the Tsar and his family may have been made by Yakov Sverdlov. The town where the murders took place was later named after him, and the region still is. I do not know what the Orthodox Church think of this.

Lenin's hands were drenched with blood and he would not have blinked twice over the Tsar. More immediate to his mind and Sverdlov's was the approach of the White forces to Yekaterinberg, who would have liberated the Tsar. They took the city just a week later and discovered the scene.

 
natalie.salat
1388243.  Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:54 am Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
The decision to kill the Tsar and his family may have been made by Yakov Sverdlov. The town where the murders took place was later named after him, and the region still is. I do not know what the Orthodox Church think of this.

Lenin's hands were drenched with blood and he would not have blinked twice over the Tsar. More immediate to his mind and Sverdlov's was the approach of the White forces to Yekaterinberg, who would have liberated the Tsar. They took the city just a week later and discovered the scene.


Iíve never understood why Lenin gets a free pass so often. Molotov, who knew them both, said Lenin was much more brutal and murderous than Stalin.

 
CB27
1388245.  Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:02 am Reply with quote

Simple answer: propaganda

 
Jenny
1388246.  Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:07 am Reply with quote

I think Lenin's death before Stalin's had much to do with it as well. De mortuis nihil nisi bonum.

 

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group