Would the world be a safer place if Hitler had won the war?

[TheMan]

(Incidentally, a very good friend of mine, has family who had to hide out in the forest for a number of years to escape the Nazi's. A film was made of their journey and trials, absolutely incredible that they survived and what they went through).

Excuse me for saying so, but the people you know seem to have collectively been through every kind of experience in the entirety of human history.

You think I make stuff up like this?

You may wish to watch this movie, this is my friends relative:

http://crestwood.on.ca/ohp/simon-zelcovitch/

If you wish to PM me, I can also tell you my friends name and put you in touch...

I don't make empty claims and can back up everything I say.

I don't make apologies for being well connected as a result of good work I have done over the years, and working diligently.

Here is the film in question, starring Daniel Craig
Defiance

My friend now works in the field of psychology, alongside his mentor who has worked with top sportsmen and athletes etc across the globe, and assisted top neuro scientists and the Brazilian Military cadet training schemes.

Hence I used to bother to try and share some of the more, basic information, in my positive thinking thread that was largely disregarded.

Excuse my curt reply, but I've had my credibility questioned on a few occasions now, I will begin to start defending what I say a little more... vehemently.

Putting something positive up, that is clearly not really appreciated or wanted - is one thing, however, making light of my friends relatives suffering and the inference that I may make this up is a different matter Sam.

 

[Fredward]

If he did win, I wonder if any American gangs would have defiled, corrupted and twisted the Norse runes and symbol for mjolnir (Thor's hammer) along with all the other religious cultures and symbols they have defiled to mean something completely unrelated to it's true heritage and make it a symbol for neo-nazism. A friend from my old job had Norse heritage and wore a mjolnir pendant with pride got in deep crap when he met some Americans and they claimed him to be Nazi...

Going off topic after finding about that recently... thought I would squeeze that fact/anecdote in their.

No the world will not be a better place. I would guess the cons would far outweigh the pros of that certain situation.

 

[TheMan]

If he did win, I wonder if any American gangs would have defiled, corrupted and twisted the Norse runes and symbol for mjolnir (Thor's hammer) along with all the other religious cultures and symbols they have defiled to mean something completely unrelated to it's true heritage and make it a symbol for neo-nazism. A friend from my old job had Norse heritage and wore a mjolnir pendant with pride got in deep crap when he met some Americans and they claimed him to be Nazi...

It's most unfortunate that Hitlers obsession with the occult has led to the hijacking of multiple symbols - even though I know better, the swastika still invokes the thought of Nazis rather than ancient cultures. That might be normal, if I was not so fascinated with ancient cultures!!

I believe he switched the direction though, so the original and Nazi one are mirrored.

Like you say though Fredward, it is hard for people whom know this, to freely wear attire suitable and representative of their beliefs/cultures that Hitler twisted the meanings of!

 

[DiogoJ42]

The wording of the original question is interesting. "Would the world be a safer place?" Safer... not "better".

Let's assume that after Hitler's eventual (natural) death, the Nazi party stayed in power, and that they are still there. Let's also assume that they continued to expand their empire. It's a safe bet that the whole of Europe would be under their control. Given seventy odd years, it is possible that they could have conquered both north and south America, as well as Africa. I find it very unlikely though, that they would have been able to defeat Russia.
So that leaves about three quarters of the globe under German rule. More than we ever managed with our empire.
(Is it wrong that I'm picturing this in my head as a Risk board?)

During the Roman empire, which lasted hundreds of years, many local people were quite happy living under occupation. Especially after a few generations when things had calmed down.
Just as no Russian premier was ever as extreme as Stalin, it is quite likely that successive Führers would have been more liberal than Hitler (not that that is hard).

So let's assume a theoretical best case scenario:
* The majority of the planet is one unified, (mostly) happy nation.
* The government, while still far-right, is not nearly as extreme as the Nazi party of the 1930's was.
* Law and order is kept with an iron fist.

The only real threat to world peace would be from Russia and China, as communists united against the rest of the world. So it is almost certain that a cold war would still have happened. Whether it would have turned hot or not is a different question, with too many variables depending on "what ifs" to say for certain.

Certainly, nuclear weapons would still have been invented by both sides. But would they have been used? If technology followed the same path, then the policy of M.A.D. is the natural consequence. Once locked in to such an arms race, I don't believe any nation (or empire) would be insane enough to make the first move and initiate WWIII. (The Russians never wanted war any more than the west did, they thought we were the evil bad guys who were going to nuke them). It's quite likely that the theoretical German empire would hold the same view of Russia. So I would like to think that while we would have had just as many years of living on the brink, and even a Cuba or two, no one would ever have actually "pushed the button".

So in that aspect at least, things wouldn't be much different.


For the sake of playing devil's advocate, just think how many wars would never of happened, had this alternative history played out. Off the top of my head; Korea, Vietnam, the Arab-Israeli war, the Suez crisis, the six day war, the Yom Kippur war, all those south and central American countries that the USA poked it's nose in to, both Gulf wars, all the crap that kicked off in eastern Europe when the iron curtain fell, and possibly hundreds of African wars.
Just take a look here, and I'll bet a good 95% of those conflicts would not happen.
... which is not to say that there wouldn't of been a whole host of other wars, of course. There would undoubtedly be horriffic conflicts as the empire expanded, as well as many attempts at revolution.

Now, here's the controversial statement: How many wars have involved Israel? Let's just leave it at that and move on, shall we?



So, with the rambling out of the way, we are back to the original question... would the world be a safer place today?

Very tricky to make that call. Certainly, in some aspects it would be. But then, the nature of a global, fascist dictatorship brings with it just as many, if not more dangers. We might find ourselves living in an Orwellian nightmare, where we have nothing to fear from our fellow subjects... but our leaders, on the other hand....

Safer? Possibly. Better? Definately not. It's certainly not a world I would want to live in, though it would be interesting to see from an outside observers perspective.

---

This is actually quite an interesting question, and as someone with a passion for modern history I have enjoyed pondering it. I feel like I've not written this much in one go since I left school! Well, unless you count RCT topics

Generic disclaimer: Just pondering the what ifs, Hitler was a bad man etc etc... what the hell do you take me for?!?

 

[BigT]

The wording of the original question is interesting. "Would the world be a safer place?" Safer... not "better".

Let's assume that after Hitler's eventual (natural) death, the Nazi party stayed in power, and that they are still there. Let's also assume that they continued to expand their empire. It's a safe bet that the whole of Europe would be under their control. Given seventy odd years, it is possible that they could have conquered both north and south America, as well as Africa. I find it very unlikely though, that they would have been able to defeat Russia.
So that leaves about three quarters of the globe under German rule. More than we ever managed with our empire.
(Is it wrong that I'm picturing this in my head as a Risk board?)

During the Roman empire, which lasted hundreds of years, many local people were quite happy living under occupation. Especially after a few generations when things had calmed down.
Just as no Russian premier was ever as extreme as Stalin, it is quite likely that successive Führers would have been more liberal than Hitler (not that that is hard).

So let's assume a theoretical best case scenario:
* The majority of the planet is one unified, (mostly) happy nation.
* The government, while still far-right, is not nearly as extreme as the Nazi party of the 1930's was.
* Law and order is kept with an iron fist.

The only real threat to world peace would be from Russia and China, as communists united against the rest of the world. So it is almost certain that a cold war would still have happened. Whether it would have turned hot or not is a different question, with too many variables depending on "what ifs" to say for certain.

Certainly, nuclear weapons would still have been invented by both sides. But would they have been used? If technology followed the same path, then the policy of M.A.D. is the natural consequence. Once locked in to such an arms race, I don't believe any nation (or empire) would be insane enough to make the first move and initiate WWIII. (The Russians never wanted war any more than the west did, they thought we were the evil bad guys who were going to nuke them). It's quite likely that the theoretical German empire would hold the same view of Russia. So I would like to think that while we would have had just as many years of living on the brink, and even a Cuba or two, no one would ever have actually "pushed the button".

So in that aspect at least, things wouldn't be much different.


For the sake of playing devil's advocate, just think how many wars would never of happened, had this alternative history played out. Off the top of my head; Korea, Vietnam, the Arab-Israeli war, the Suez crisis, the six day war, the Yom Kippur war, all those south and central American countries that the USA poked it's nose in to, both Gulf wars, all the crap that kicked off in eastern Europe when the iron curtain fell, and possibly hundreds of African wars.
Just take a look here, and I'll bet a good 95% of those conflicts would not happen.
... which is not to say that there wouldn't of been a whole host of other wars, of course. There would undoubtedly be horriffic conflicts as the empire expanded, as well as many attempts at revolution.

Now, here's the controversial statement: How many wars have involved Israel? Let's just leave it at that and move on, shall we?



So, with the rambling out of the way, we are back to the original question... would the world be a safer place today?

Very tricky to make that call. Certainly, in some aspects it would be. But then, the nature of a global, fascist dictatorship brings with it just as many, if not more dangers. We might find ourselves living in an Orwellian nightmare, where we have nothing to fear from our fellow subjects... but our leaders, on the other hand....

Safer? Possibly. Better? Definately not. It's certainly not a world I would want to live in, though it would be interesting to see from an outside observers perspective.

---

This is actually quite an interesting question, and as someone with a passion for modern history I have enjoyed pondering it. I feel like I've not written this much in one go since I left school! Well, unless you count RCT topics

Generic disclaimer: Just pondering the what ifs, Hitler was a bad man etc etc... what the hell do you take me for?!?

---

That was what my argument was during the original discussion with my pal but put a lot better than I could.
I don't think anyone with a sane mind could have argued the world would have been a better place if Hitler had won but safer then possibly.

I think it's an interesting question about what would have happened in the last 60 years if he had won (and he was very close) and deserves a little more thought than " no it wouldn't" and making jokes about it.

Perhaps those that have given short answers could elaborate on there reasons for saying "no" then we could have a proper debate about it.

 

[Sam]

The only real threat to world peace would be from Russia and China, as communists united against the rest of the world. So it is almost certain that a cold war would still have happened.

Your post shows a basic lack of knowledge about world history. Beijing and Moscow hated each other, and would certainly not have been "communists united against the rest of the world". The history of communism is more a history of division than unity - Tito's split from the Eastern Bloc, Hoxha's split from Maoism, Il-sung's split from almost everyone, Honecker's split from Gorbavhev.

Why are we even debating this topic?! The original post clearly implies the world might be a safer place if all the Jews had been murdered because then Israel wouldn't exist to oppress the Palestinians. I'm amazed this repugnant topic hasn't already been locked. :-\

 

[DiogoJ42]

In our history, that may have been the case. But had things gone differently, I'm pretty sure they would have united against the common enemy.

 

[Meat Pie]

With respect Diogo, much of your post was pure conjecture.

You cannot be sure that all of those wars that the USA have an involvement in would not also have happened if the German rule had taken the same route as the US.

And if not those wars, then many other wars could have developed - dependent on events in this alternate history.

It's sort of a pointless exercise. Weighing up different ideological authorities like top trumps and then making predictions isn't particularly accurate.

 

[Dogmaniac]

As much as i hate Hitler he did many things our goverment cant he provided lots of jobs in manually labour which meant that the economy was improved from the wiemer goverment so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

 

[LiamC]

As much as i hate Hitler he did many things our goverment cant he provided lots of jobs in manually labour which meant that the economy was improved from the wiemer goverment so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

That manual labor was then turned into forced labor...

Either way, the world's economy probably wouldn't be on it's arse...that's all I can think of. That and cheap Golf GTI's for everyone!

 

[Dogmaniac]

That manual labor was then turned into forced labor...

Either way, the world economy probably wouldn't be on it's arse...that's all I can think of. That and cheap Golf GTI's for everyone!
[/quote]

Yep but given the choice do you really want a car that was made for a budget.

 

[LiamC]

That manual labor was then turned into forced labor...

Either way, the world economy probably wouldn't be on it's arse...that's all I can think of. That and cheap Golf GTI's for everyone!

Yep but given the choice do you really want a car that was made for a budget.

I made that comment firmly tongue in cheek, as a joke.

Much like I'm taking this entire topic as quite frankly I see it as a massive joke. Anyone who genuinely thinks the world would be a better place had the Nazis succeeded in victory during WW2 needs section ing. *





*these comments are intended as a joke. But if you do think like that, take a look at yourself

 

[Dogmaniac]

I dont think like that as i belive that Hitler was a muderous tyrant

 

[BigT]

Why are we even debating this topic?! The original post clearly implies the world might be a safer place if all the Jews had been murdered because then Israel wouldn't exist to oppress the Palestinians. I'm amazed this repugnant topic hasn't already been locked. :-\

No it doesn't implie anything, it was a question, and one that although is hypothetical because obviously he didn't win (but came within 7 days some commentators say) deserves thinking about especially at the moment with current conflicts that could get us into a nuclear war.

I'm not sympathising or condoning genocide but simply asking a question about what the world could be like now if he had won the war.

 

[Sam]

so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

Post of the year.

 

[Dogmaniac]

so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

Post of the year.

Thank you for that great compliment.

 

[Islander]

so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

Post of the year.

To be fair, it's easy to see Hitler as a great leader - if he hadn't been, how else could he have led an entire nation to do such wrong? He was certainly an amazing orator, for instance.

Both of those skills are entirely separate from the immorality of the actions he used them for.

 

[Martin]

so ye he was obsessed with mass genocide but he was a good leader

Post of the year.

To be fair, it's easy to see Hitler as a great leader - if he hadn't been, how else could he have led an entire nation to do such wrong? He was certainly an amazing orator, for instance.

Both of those skills are entirely separate from the immorality of the actions he used them for.

Ah, this reminds me of this gem Rowe mentioned last night.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HitlerAteSugar

 

[DiogoJ42]

With respect Diogo, much of your post was pure conjecture.

Of course. That's the whole point of this topic.

I find it amusing, and also quite sad, that some people have the attitude that you can't even mention such an important figgure in world history, never mind debate possible alternative endings to one the most pivotal events in the story of mankind.

If we aren't allowed to have a semi-serious discussion about one udoubtedly evil man, how come it is acceptable to have a topic joking about serial killers on roller coasters? Surely that is more offensive that openly pondering alternative history?

 

[TheMan]

With respect Diogo, much of your post was pure conjecture.

Of course. That's the whole point of this topic.

I find it amusing, and also quite sad, that some people have the attitude that you can't even mention such an important figgure in world history, never mind debate possible alternative endings to one the most pivotal events in the story of mankind.

If we aren't allowed to have a semi-serious discussion about one udoubtedly evil man, how come it is acceptable to have a topic joking about serial killers on roller coasters? Surely that is more offensive that openly pondering alternative history?

Or indeed, "Your Favourite Eastern European Dictator".

It seems, that so long as it is an individuals chosen topic, it is fine, but it is also fine, to come and flame other topics that you find to be distasteful.

This topic has great merit.

We don't need to go around demonising what Hitler did - I think we're all humane enough to take that as a given. The debate is not, was he a good man - it has actually developed into a topic discussing what may have been.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this whatsoever. And with friends whom were massively affected by his atrocities in such a way, HOLLYWOOD made a film with a triple A list headliner playing the lead, based on their story - I think I have a right to discuss this from a Jewish perspective also.

I have discussed the war in great detail with my friend.

The facts also remain, that this man was an incredible leader - there is absolutely no denying this. Just like Coca Cola, BP, etc are phenomenally successful businesses. Does this make them ETHICAL (as modern free western market "civilised" businesses)? Well that is altogether a different question is it not?

Hitler was a master of enterprise, technology and propaganda, the likes of which have not been seen since, and whose influence purveys our society through today.

If you are so against even discussing what may have happened, or dismiss Hitlers still huge influence on the world AND governments incidentally (only cursory research required), then I suggest as mentioned earlier you throw away most of your technology.

I only wish we had a leader, with equal vision, ability to unite a nation, and focus on technological advancement - but without the murderous tyrannical side obviously!

The fact remains, much that we use in public - and much that went "missing" - that we use every single day, is down to the vision Hitler had of honouring the Aryan race, and conquering the world.

An evil, vile, tyrannical, monster he most certainly was - but within that framework, a brilliant propagandist and leader, and creator of technology he also was!

There are also of course, very old publications and newspaper reports about missing U-Boats, rather unusual goings on in the Antarctic, old Russian reports, East German Reports and of course the very divisive and peculiar newspaper reports on Admiral Byrd.

For those wondering, here is a old German map...

Certain generals also "vanished" inexplicably with a couple of boats. The Nazi's were not so stupid as to ALL get captured or killed.

There is a lot of "fringe" rubbish, but there is also some incredibly intriguing information out there.

The Fringe aspect, not without some credibility and evidence I might add, suggest the Nazis managed to escape to other Countries, with their technology, and carried on it's advancement - others were captured, and their offspring continue to this day to be involved in much military technological development.

This is not quite as "past" as some might believe, their influence is around is massively still.

Crazy?

I thought so too...