- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
Just to add to the previous post, I reckon with the Americas being isolated, Canada, USA and Mexico would have formed a confederacy to protect each other.
Had Germany won WWII what would the UK be like?
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
Maybe. If both sides developed nukes, then things might slow down.
Hitler respected the British more than any other race (other than Aryan Germans of course). Hitler's ideology, and hence that of the Nazi party, was of 'taking whatever you could get'. He believed that the strongest individual would always naturally take control, and thus he respected the British for their empire building, although he saw many faults in the way they went about it (many of his speeches spent hours on analysing the failures of the British empire).
After the war, Hitler's plan was for British, French and other "racially pure" peoples to move into Russia, farm the region and reproduce, thus providing the leibensraum (living-space) that he always wanted for the Aryan race. The native Slav population would be exterminated after their use as slaves had expired. Racially pure populations would be spread over all of europe, from the Urals to the Atlantic, and would create a master race subserviant to him and (more importantly) the Nazi ideology. This master race would eventually take over the entire world, creating an empire which would survive for 1000 years (the third Reich).
From this it is fair to extrapolate that British citizens would have (overall) benefited from the slave labour of others, and would be treated, initally at least, as valued citizens. That said, we would have been subject to the same restrictions that were present in Nazi Germany. No freedom of speech or expression. No real freedom of movement. Exposure to constant unwavering propaganda. Penalties of death for non-conformism to Nazi ideologies. Complete subservience to those higher up in the Nazi organisation. Look at occupied Holland as a prime example.
Okay, so we may have developed rapidly at first, in terms of technology, but remember that the Nazi ideaology spread all the way to scientific research. Fields that were considered 'non-Aryan' were not allowed to be investigated. Without this freedom of investigation it is unlikey that we would ever have had the 'silicon revolution' that came about in the 60s, and lead to the development of microprocessors. Certainly nothing so anonymous and potentially destructive as the internet would ever be allowed to flourish.
Anyway, if you ask me, NO benefit will ever be worth giving up freedom of expression, never mind the miriad of other things that Nazis wanted to do away with. Life under Nazi rule would NOT be preferable to life today, in my view. Yes, life today might not be perfect, but at least you have the right to say so, and to put forward your own ideas on ways to improve things. You would have no such right under Nazi rule. Conform or die - this is the message that you would have been brought up with from birth. You would not question it.
After the war, Hitler's plan was for British, French and other "racially pure" peoples to move into Russia, farm the region and reproduce, thus providing the leibensraum (living-space) that he always wanted for the Aryan race. The native Slav population would be exterminated after their use as slaves had expired. Racially pure populations would be spread over all of europe, from the Urals to the Atlantic, and would create a master race subserviant to him and (more importantly) the Nazi ideology. This master race would eventually take over the entire world, creating an empire which would survive for 1000 years (the third Reich).
From this it is fair to extrapolate that British citizens would have (overall) benefited from the slave labour of others, and would be treated, initally at least, as valued citizens. That said, we would have been subject to the same restrictions that were present in Nazi Germany. No freedom of speech or expression. No real freedom of movement. Exposure to constant unwavering propaganda. Penalties of death for non-conformism to Nazi ideologies. Complete subservience to those higher up in the Nazi organisation. Look at occupied Holland as a prime example.
Okay, so we may have developed rapidly at first, in terms of technology, but remember that the Nazi ideaology spread all the way to scientific research. Fields that were considered 'non-Aryan' were not allowed to be investigated. Without this freedom of investigation it is unlikey that we would ever have had the 'silicon revolution' that came about in the 60s, and lead to the development of microprocessors. Certainly nothing so anonymous and potentially destructive as the internet would ever be allowed to flourish.
Anyway, if you ask me, NO benefit will ever be worth giving up freedom of expression, never mind the miriad of other things that Nazis wanted to do away with. Life under Nazi rule would NOT be preferable to life today, in my view. Yes, life today might not be perfect, but at least you have the right to say so, and to put forward your own ideas on ways to improve things. You would have no such right under Nazi rule. Conform or die - this is the message that you would have been brought up with from birth. You would not question it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
Remember, Germany had scientists developing nukes for them toward the end of the Nazi demise.
I think you'd be wrong there.
A quick glance at the statistics indicates that even if Germany had wiped out the Royal Navy and the RAF, they'd have faced an ad hoc army of 1.5million tho the home guard was only equipped with a mixture of weapons, they had good defenses and a constantly growing supply of rifles and ammo from the US... the germans tho they could have put up almost 100,000 well equipped, well drilled soldiers would have had trouble keeping their supply lines intact and vastly out numbered by a semi organised army operating on its own territory.
Why would he be wrong?
Yeh, i've never been intrested in History but last few years i've wondered why i never took it more seriously, its a fascinating subject.
I think parts of europe would be far far better off than they are now. But there would probably be parts still fighting now. Prehaps in the middle east etc. Its hard to tell how far Hitler would have gone in terms of world domination.
Had he captured Russia and the Uk, he might have stopped there and created a super nation of technology, services etc.
Did he not like the UK tho? is that the reason he never made more of an effort with us, i mean he deciced to bomb major cities first instead of targeting airfields did he not? Surely he would have been victorious had he just taken out our defenses first instead of cutting corners so to speak.
I think parts of europe would be far far better off than they are now. But there would probably be parts still fighting now. Prehaps in the middle east etc. Its hard to tell how far Hitler would have gone in terms of world domination.
Had he captured Russia and the Uk, he might have stopped there and created a super nation of technology, services etc.
Did he not like the UK tho? is that the reason he never made more of an effort with us, i mean he deciced to bomb major cities first instead of targeting airfields did he not? Surely he would have been victorious had he just taken out our defenses first instead of cutting corners so to speak.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
It's a scenario I dare not contemplate.
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
He admired the UK Thermaltake. But the main reason why he didn't proceed to make "more of an effort with us" because our Naval power was far formidable than theirs. At least with invading Russia first, Naval power is of little importance.
Read up about Werner Heisenberg.
He was a German scientist, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, and he managed to persuade the Nazi party that creation of an atomic bomb was not feasible.
After the war, he and many other leading scientists were captured by the British (they surrendered to avoid capture by the Russians), and were held at Bletchley park. When the annoucement came of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Heisenberg immediately formulated the equations which govern that type of nuclear fission - something which had taken the Americans months of research with a massive team of scientists. Granted he was as close to a genius as you can get, but the implication is that he had already formulated the problem some time ago, but kept it under wraps because he appreciated the destruction it could cause in Nazi hands.
I thought that was a myth, i thought the german subs and boats were far more capable than the Uk equivilants.
Or did the Uk just totally out number the germans?
Quick all you monobrow chavs shuffle into the gas chambers, I mean walk this way for a free kebab and a £5 PAYG phone voucher.
Your post is touching dangerous territory perhaps.
So we would be better off technologically without all the contributions Eastern European and Jewish scientists / engineers have given us since the 40's?
Sport would certainly be really pushing the boundaries without all those 'inferior' Africans!
Think i'll read up on him now!
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,520
It's a while since i read William Shirer's 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich', but i remember reading a passage concerning Operation Seelion, and, if it had succeeded, the male population of Britain would have been deported to mainland europe as slave labour.
Nice people, the Nazis.
Nice people, the Nazis.