What if the National Socialists had won?

We all, or at least most of us, wish that the National Socialists had won WW2. But why? What would Germany and the world look like if the National Socialists had won WW2? How would things be different?

Attached: Bundesarchiv_Bild_146III-373,_Modell_der_Neugestaltung_Berlins_('Germania').jpg (608x800, 271.51K)

Other urls found in this thread:


It would be like this lovely show m.imdb.com/title/tt1740299/

Attached: IMG_20190722_162514.jpg (998x662, 207.99K)

There's be a hell of a lot less Slavs. Probably less Italians too, once Hitler decided he needed their land for the Master Race.

Things would be different. Fuck off with your zero effort spam. >>>/qtddtot/

Germany would stretch into Eastern Europe, and Norway would become closer and closer to the state. The Slavic peoples would be forced to inhabit Siberia. Persians and Arabs would be bros. Japan would probably, consequently consume much of China and be the thing everyone hates and demonizes if they were to somehow remain un-capitulated, far too proud and brave to let down and becoming a savage monstrosity of all times, the alternate reality of "da nahzees". South Africa would probably become America 2, except better with all the natural resources and become something so large and magnificent that nobody could really accurately predict its legacy.

Attached: musclehitle2.jpg (188x213, 33.96K)

Technically untrue. While Hitler looked at Mussolini as if he were the Homer Simpson of Italy, there is a very clear cut reason as to why he was so fond of the "Romans" reconquering the Mediterranean. With a Euro-centrist focus, and moreso German-centric focus on his peoples, he'd leave the nonsense to the others. Think about it, a buffer like that is far too grandiose to had conceited hostile thoughts over. And anyways, it wouldn't be Hitler at all, he wanted to step down once he ensured himself the status of the world was preserved and propelled upwards for all peoples, and planned for a sort of "Fascist Council" after the second world war.

Buffer against what? German Africa?

Once he cleaned out the Slavs from Europe, why not clean out the Meds as well? They're next on the chopping block. Then there's the French…

Where do you get that Hitler wanted to remove the Slavs? Fake-Generalplan-Ost?

Semitic nonsense. Adolf Hitler was a strong proponent of German-Russian cooperation and to the last moments didn't believed they would turn on them. My great-greatfather was a pure Slav and he was a Reich citizen. Russians, Belorussians, Bulgarians, Czechs, Slovakians, Ukrainians - they all produced number of the SS members. Stop falling for retarded propaganda.

I'm sure he can explain why non-Germans are inferior.

Doesn't matter, he lost and here we all are.

Attached: fckin_dog.png (1018x582, 999.1K)

That manifest destiny would simply be driven by immigration to Rhodesia, much like how the German blood replaced the original American. He was far too nice of a man to have the saber rattling we all know is necessary at this point in time.

Also France would be untouched. They were completely fine with Germany after how well they were treated after the wrongs they've committed on the German people after WW1. They were absolutely ready to let go of the stigmas of the past. Britain, would SEEM autonomous but in reality THEY'D be the one under a puppet state. Still, this does not imply annexation or empirical domination of their island. Germania's expansion would only be eastwards. They thought it necessary that they be "the wall" of Europe.

I think the problem with it is how heavily its propagated, yet true. The instances I can side with you is where he had the POA liberation battalions and such, who betrayed the Wehrmacht at their downstroke after the failure of Stalingrad. On the other hand, it was quite clear that the Russian state would be forced into the frozen wilds of Siberia, probably instead just fleeing to inhabit the steppes and be a modern horde like the Visigoths, landing themselves around Kazakhstan and such regions.

As for all the other tribes of the Slavic peoples? I cannot say, I don't think Hitler was blind enough to throw what ranges from Bohemia to Kiev in the same bucket as the Poles to the Rus (Sorry to say, but I DO think there was a very specific hatred of Poles from their actions and general disposition, plus, they were quite "in the way".)

That's childishly naïve. The French were less amicable than the Germans were in 1945. Literally the entire time they were occupied there was actual, real violent resistance. Germany experienced none of this.
Newsflash! People don't like being invaded and occupied by a foreign power. The French didn't like it in 1871 and they didn't like it in 1941.
The moment that the French felt like they could get their land back, they would take it with the same furocity as they did in 1919.

You will be offended and get all pissy and emotional about what I have said but it is the cold hard truth. You lack the ability to understand the motivations and ideals of people outside of your own head. This is the hallmark of the NPC or lemming. Liberals suffer from this deficiency as well which is why they believe that everyone who isn't a progressive is a Nazi.
However, those of us with this ability understand that no nation on earth likes foreign occupation and land theft. The natural reaction is hatred and revenge. The French would sit and wait for the opportunity to strike back at their oppressors and when the moment came, they would leave no german alive.
And yeah, I know I'm being mean and dismissive but you people all do the same thing over and over again and you're so obviously wrong that I barely even view you as human anymore. If you cannot envision how another nation would react to the humiliation of foreign rule, then you simply have some sort of mental barrier that should disqualify you from participating in politics.
Now go get all emotional and pissy, as you NPCs literally always do.
Here, allow me to help start you off;

Attached: Fake-German LARP jingoism.png (907x932, 421.95K)

I'm not offended and pissy, I do admire your mantra. What I stated is that France WAS occupied, and during that occupation the native Frankish people were torn between two thoughts; Invading retaliatory marauders, giving back what they were given, and Paris occupants, delighted at the veils that have been yanked from their society to reveal what the world could/should be with the eradication of corruption. With that in place, there was no need for occupation to remain after the war, so it wouldn't (If the resistance didn't gain substantial ground). That being said, your whole spew doesn't make any sense since it was clear my understanding is that Germany would back away from France after everything was said and done, returning to the status of "my fellow neighbor".

tl;dr You're sperging out, stop being a boy.

Attached: 131ea1ffce14db2a67678261cc6a03b388c913e6ad545676f0a91817af52a28a.gif (480x352, 2.76M)

Also something you should consider, you project far, far far far much more than what I could have even insinuated with what I said. I suggest you carefully re-read really anything I've said and notice how off the rails you're acting, because most of what you're projecting at me has me shaking my head and manually blinking in a wordlessly astounded reaction, to themes that never even began to form in my mind.

We honestly might be in a similar situation. Possibly even worse off. Absolute power like that unchecked just needs one ruler two swing things in the opposite direction. At least now, democracy can be glacial, making things difficult to do in one fell swoop, giving us time to react.

Alternate future scenarios are always tricky, but one thing can be said with an absolute surety. If Germany would have won, white people would still be sole power of hegemony of this planet. Thus being "even worse off" is physically impossible, since now we are not and we are also dying out and being replaced.

We do know that the ruling cabal of the NASDAP wanted to return Germany to democratic rule once the crisis that brought them into power was over and Germany was secure.
It all comes down to how comfortable they felt in the postwar environment and what form exactly the peace took.
If they felt too threatened by the soviets they may have gone "Crisis is ongoing" until that ruling circle died and were replaced by less noble men.

On the plus side if Germany won and the British government hadn't yet executed Mosley. Then the British Empire would likely still exist in some form and may have even expanded.

Attached: 6f61697a33a1cbd6c42900282f1064af7922ef3265bada57e52e3117e637f3cd.png (1800x1200, 1.15M)

vpn insurance click here sexo porn teen 100 xtube xxxx


communism always strove to move from proletariat dictatorship to 'true communism', but that never happened did it…

History is not kind to those that believe giving up power is easy.

I'm pretty sure the task was well within the abilities of the fuhrer and most of those he opted to surround himself with.

Also the bolsheviks never really gave a shit about true communism. It was always about the power of a group of bourgeoisie intellectuals

I think my point stands for any system. Sadly we will never know in this case.

I just realized I spawned your heavy breathed retort all because I accidentally shoved the word "completely" into it. I do apologize for the added stigma and while this a Chan I suppose it is my duty to return the "mean and dismissive" nature. But your set-off, your use of certain words and many other indicators towards your response speaks more for your NPC memery than I think you'll be comfortable with realizing.

Somehow I doubt that. That's not what happened after the Franco Prussian War. A leader willing to depopulate entire regions to resettle with Germans does not seem like the kind of man willing to respect the integrity of neighbors. Of course, as you know there are two versions of Hitler that people believe in. There is the Hitler that you and I would like him to be. He is simply a man trying to protect his people from the jews and foreign invasion. Then there is the Hitler that believes in. A glorious imperialist who smote the subhuman Slavs and would rule Europe for eternity in the name of God's Chosen People; the Germans.
Given the lack of evidence of Hitlers actual long term goals regarding France and Italy (and I mean ACTUAL evidence, not wartime propaganda) anything we postulate here is mere speculation. My purpose is not actually to shit on Hitler but merely to act as a wakeup call for anyone on the fense who sees all this glorification of the dispossession and humiliation of other Europeans.
Europe is larger than Germany and someday the jews will seek to use White jingoism against each other to their benefits. This anti-Slav shit will lead to another war.

I speak from experience. You may be an exception, but that does not invalidate the rule. I used to be very polite and cordial as I tried to explain to people why Europeans are people too. Instead they became pissy and emotional. I despise such niggerish behavior.

I do apologize for lumping you in with the retards. I was wrong to do so. However I do not believe my instinctive hostility is uncalled for. If you experienced the hysterical freakouts of obsessive German-LARPers (they're usually Americans) at the mere hint that non-Germans are also White, then you would likely be as mean and dismissive as I am.

I'd call myself an American but I don't think there's really been a year in my mutty, Lithuanian/Germano life that ever felt relative to anyone around me other than my own family. In fact even that's not steady, so my political intentions is moreso just the route of "the contrarian" rather than lifting a finger and going "YOU KNOW WHAT I THIIIiiiink?" The example guy you used is still me, and the Hitler you and I would like him to be is still that, but my only contribution to what you saw in my post at is just that it was the ideologue of manifest destiny from Germany at that point in time. I don't think it's out of place at all to understand that Germans felt responsible for the entirety of Europe, especially Hitler with all that he understood himself. I can't propagate that as Germans being "da only 1s! woooo!" and all that shit, but it was certainly what they began to aspire, as if they were treating the rest of Europe as some sort of gigantic reservation. Look no further than today with the disgusting abomination that might as well be "The Socialist Fourth Reich, Except They Really Are Retards This Time™", they are always feeling like they need to dictate Europe's future. From Habsburgs to disgusting Merkelite traitors, they're always trying to grab the reigns.

t. the crazy einstein haired autist that pretends he's a greek philosopher and makes everyone angry by contorting political intrigue in the most confusing ways, until it's not confusing at all.

He would work with Arabs and make them Honorary Aryans and friends instead on the useful mercenaries as Hitler intended and his anti-slav narrative is straight from General Larp Ost. I wouldn't take him seriously. As for the occupation the many generals at the time did note that the populace once "liberated" at the end of the war felt pretty dismal about being returned to (((Capitalist))) hands. Personally though I believe Hitler was mix of the two Hitler's you described akin to what Goebbels described as "The future of the Reich will be somehing like this we may not all be equals but we are brothers" a Pan-European empire built on Brotherhood and duty to the race with German probably given preferential rights as colonists and as they (Would have) created this brotherhood I think they'd have deserved it.

point to that, give evidence.
apart from (((hollywood))).
All I've seen is that Hitler wanted his own people to do well, and as a secondary note had said that he would rather the rest of the world did the same for themselves.
On a daytrip from facebook, or are you just a /tranny/.

The french were generally quite content under german rule, and weren't greatly disturbed.
They were far more resentful against the 'allies' who bombed and raped their way through france on their way to germany. Most of the destruction and rape was by 'allies'. The allied generals etc have quotes floating around saying that they were surprised at the unfriendly welcome they received.

A few years before ww2, hitler had spoken highly of poland and its leader.
When that leader was replaced, and when the new leader refused all talks and kept poking a stick into germany's side is when poland fell out of favour.

They lost

Attached: hitler 3.jpg (802x641, 102.51K)

Attached: 1700 year old synagogue Cologne.jpg (1024x640, 166.21K)

I agree in large part and understand what you're saying. You're right that Lebensraum is, in the morality of the time, unremarkable. Britain had colonies across the world and ruled more people than they could possibly count. So did France. Mere decades before, the German-Hungarian Austro Hungarian Empire ruled over many millions of Serbs, Bosnians, Slovenians, Croats, Czechs, Romanians, Italians, and Slovaks. European imperialism against each other has always been far more brutal than our imperialism towards others. Blacks can claim that we arrived in 1800 and started shooting them. Sure. Yet virtually all European nations can point our fingers at others and describe horrendous things and literal genocides done to each other since the dawn of history.
Thus, if one wishes to judge Lebensraum to be immoral from a modern cuckservative-egalitarian position, then Germany is no less immoral than any of the nations that fought her. And I have pointed this out many times to people IRL. Even WW2 vets.

However, I am a Nationalist through and through. I believe in the innate right of all Europeans to rule over ourselves in our own lands, free from foreign exploitation. Imperialism has only benefitted the jews. Besides, we know now that nationalism is a natural and inevitable ideology for all peoples. So even if we eliminated the jews and made the EU into a German Empire run, the Balts, French, Brits, and Poles would all inevitably desire freedom and sovereignty. Thus the only way to attain peace would either be to exterminate everyone or simply let White people govern ourselves in peace.

Anyway, I apologize again for misjudging you.

Hmm. That must be why they waged a constant insurgency against them whilst welcoming the Americans as liberators. And why the French had no difficulty in reestablishing their republic and experienced zero resistance.

I agree. To me, Hitler is neither God nor Devil. He's a historical character. I think his domestic policies were great. I have some critiques and I wish he had created a German "mossad" to hunt down Rothschilds and their ilk, but I assume it's very tough to create such an organization.

My serious AT analysis of a (realistic) German victory would be a cold war between the Anglosphere and the Germanosphere. There's no way that the Germans would have capitulated America. Thus they would be an antagonist to worry about. Europe would have a lot of rebuilding and I'd assume that Hitler would die in the 50s. It's tough to envision who would fill Hitler's shoes. It could have been Albert Kesselring, sure. But he had less political connections than Himmler or Goering. None of them had Hitler's dynamism. So which direction would the Germanosphere go? How would the economy, nearly destroyed by the war, faire?
Another thing to consider is that this hypothetical world is literally the nightmare scenario for Halford Mackinder. Berlin would control the World Island without any rivals (other than Japan). Thus, I would expect the USA to try to make up with Japan (as they did with China to combat the USSR in our timeline).
Japan, being a tricky, opportunistic nation, would play both sides against each other. An ideological chameleon. Whoever succeeded Hitler would need to play a dangerous game of balance in the central Eurasian puppet states. Already weakened by war, Germany would not be able to afford a 'Vietnam' in the east. Then again, neither would Japan.