• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

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

LiamC said:
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.
Click to expand...
No one said a 'better' place. The question is a safer place. Not the same thing by a long shot.

The simple answer is of course for some it would be better and safer, and others would be worse and decidedly more dangerous.

There's nothing wrong with conjecture and speculation. NO ONE is saying Nazi Germany should have won at all, of course not. I'll go burn our copy of Threads on the basis of speculation of it's wrong to explore horrific event 'what if' scenario's.

Also if it's so abhorrent to have this topic on the basis of the Holocaust, will all complainers also be writing to Channel4 insisting that T4 is renamed for example? 'T4' was the name of the Nazi euthanasia programme for the 'incurably sick' pre-dating the Holocaust. I suspect the majority of people don't know that. But we let that slide.
 
I was just pointing out that you were making wild assumptions with little to no evidence at all.

I have no problem discussing horrendous dictators, but what purpose does this topic serve other than to generate a pure fantasy version of history? It's pointless to discuss because the history of the world would be so vastly different that it'd be impossible to accurately describe what the alternate world would look like or how events would unravel.

There's nothing 'serious' about this discussion. It's playing top trumps with different civilisations.
 
Well in that case most computer games should be banned for being a fantasy history.
 
I find this very amusing, it would have changed the world from as we know today
 
Stop being facetious.

You made a lengthy post about how the world would look if Nazi's had won WW2 in all seriousness. Unless you could provide some direct evidence that this would be true, it's pure fantasy and you should indicate that it is a non-serious post.
 
Evidence? O.O I'm not claiming to know something about SW7, I'm pondering one possible scenario of how things might have turned out. Of course it is fantasy, that is the point. But it was a serious post.
 
This is a topic about Hitler winning the war. Evidence and seriousness aren't exactly the point. Lighten up. :)
 
You have put forward a theory to the result of an experiment.

The experiment being: Nazi's won WW2. You are making unsubstantiated claims about the result of the experiment

You need evidence to back up your hypothesis.
 
How can I provide evidence for something that (thankfully) hasn't happened?
My post was based on knowledge of real history, with a large dose of speculation. It was a "thinking out loud" pondering of one possible scenario.
 
Lighten up? Maybe you people should care more about truth rather than settle for conjecture about serious subjects.

The question was seriously asked, and Diogo gave a serious answer, which must be confronted with serious scrutiny.

The problem is with the question. "What would the world look like today had the Nazis won?" is a silly question and therefore to give a serious an answer as Diogo did is to give validity to the question. There is no way we have of being sure or coming to a reasonable conclusion, so the best answer is not to answer, or at the very least answer with caution and don't make massive speculative claims unless you can back them up.
 
How in any way is "What if the Nazis won" serious?

It's such a crazy premise it doesn't matter how you answer it. You either laugh at the idea or laugh with it and entertain it. If everything like this had to be somehow backed up, every piece of fantasy and science fiction would be straight out the window.

Christ.
 
Meat Pie said:
"What would the world look like today had the Nazis won?"
Click to expand...

The question is actually, "Would the world be a safer place today if Hitler had won the war?"
 
Meat Pie said:
The problem is with the question. "What would the world look like today had the Nazis won?" is a silly question and therefore to give a serious an answer as Diogo did is to give validity to the question. There is no way we have of being sure or coming to a reasonable conclusion, so the best answer is not to answer, or at the very least answer with caution and don't make massive speculative claims unless you can back them up.
Click to expand...
What a load of rubbish.

Just because you cannot come to a reasonable conclusion does not in any way mean that the best answer is no answer - that undermines the entire point of debating - a debate where you can easily come to a "reasonable conclusion", or where you can "be sure", is a rather boring and quick debate.
 
Far from it, it is a serious question on a serious subject. We all know that the world would be a much worse place, that goes without saying.
But to say we should not even mention the subject is at best misguided, and at worse dangerous. it worries me that histroy seems to have been watered down to "Bad man! Evil! The devil in human form!". Of course he was an abhorrent excuse for a human being, that much goes without saying. But to simply leave it at that with no further word on the matter dishonours all those involved in the conflict on both sides.
It is only by exploring what could have been, that we can realise how lucky we are.
 
Blaze - It has nothing to do with fantasy or science fiction what-so-ever. The question isn't "Give a cock and bull story about what you think may happen if the Nazis won?" It was clear from the outset of this topic that whilst yes the question is stupid; it was asked with the intention of receiving a serious answer based on a non-fictional alternative history of the planet.



Islander - Ok then...

WHY IS A TREE? - DISCUSS!

IMAGINE IF WE DESCENDED FROM A LIZARD LIFEFORM INSTEAD OF MAMMALS? - DISCUSS!

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF RADIATORS ROSE UP AGAINST THE HUMAN RACE? - DISCUSS!

An unreasonable question can not get a reasonable answer, but that doesn't mean we should revert to giving unreasonable answers.



Diogo - That's perfectly fine. We can look at the behaviours and policies of Nazi ideology and apply that to the global scene as to see how lucky we are to have won the war, but going to the point where you claim that certain wars wouldn't or would have happened based on little knowledge is utterly ridiculous.
 
Well most of the countries involved in those wars would not exist any more / would never have existed. Working on the basis of a near-global German empire, it's a safe bet to say those wars would not have happened. You will notice, I did say that there would have been just as much conflict in different wars.
 
Meat Pie said:
WHY IS A TREE? - DISCUSS!
Click to expand...
This is not a question.

Meat Pie said:
IMAGINE IF WE DESCENDED FROM A LIZARD LIFEFORM INSTEAD OF MAMMALS? - DISCUSS!
Click to expand...
Although a fair whack more unrealistic than the Nazi's winning WW2, this question is indeed something which could be discussed. It's straying right into science fiction territory, but that doesn't mean discussion is impossible.

Meat Pie said:
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF RADIATORS ROSE UP AGAINST THE HUMAN RACE? - DISCUSS!
Click to expand...
This question, however, strays right into the 'impossible' end of the spectrum, and so discussion is near impossible. Though note that I say near - you could potentially discuss it. Radiators are excellently placed to start an uprising against humanity, as they've already infiltrated a large proportion of the population's residences, not to mention most/all places of power.

I could continue, but I'm sure you'd rather I didn't ;).

The more improbable the subject of a question, the harder it is to discuss it seriously. However, the Nazi's winning WW2 is certainly not improbable, and so discussion of what would have happened is entirely reasonable.

Meat Pie said:
An unreasonable question can not get a reasonable answer
Click to expand...
What qualifies a reasonable and unreasonable question, other than your own personal judgement (which, if you've used it here, seems to be at odds with that of most other posters)?
 
I'd like to think that there is hope yet. Pondering how different history could have been had one event had the oposite outcome is an interesting topic. Even Star Trek did episodes on the subject.

Pick any war or revolution you like... how would it affect the course of events had it not happened? The world would be a very different place. Not necessarily better or even worse. One set of conflicts would be avoided, but a whole new set would undoubtably arise. Chances are many of us would not be alive today, as our ancestors may have been killed, or never met their partners.
 
Meat Pie said:
There is no way we have of being sure or coming to a reasonable conclusion, so the best answer is not to answer
Click to expand...

What a very sad outlook to have on life. Can't know the outcome? Then don't even consider the possibilities. Bizarre.

I started reading this topic with an amused bemusement, but it was interesting and made me think. Now it has become a topic about the topic, totally derailed by the fact police. Hardly seems worth having an opinion on it so I won't.

Never have trusted radiators though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top