Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Much of the general hatred towards the Jews in Germany was routed in the Stab in the Back Legend from WW1. The legend is that the Germans lost WW1 because they were stabbed in the back by Jews, communists, and other undesirables on the homefront.
Well, there was some anti-Semitism in Germany beforehand (after all, I would think that cries of "Jews killed Jesus" and that "Jews control much of our country's finances" would have sometimes been heard in Germany even before World War I), but you might very well be correct that the Stab-in-the-Back myth might have made anti-Semitism in Germany worse.
For the record, though, the Stab-in-the-Back myth appears to be full of BS. The German nationalists said that Germany lost WWI because it was stabbed in the back on the home front. However, Germany was already losing ground on the Western Front since around the summer of 1918, and with the massive reserves of U.S. manpower, weapons, et cetera, Germany would have probably (eventually) lost much more ground on the Western Front during World War I had it not signed an armistice in November 1918. In other words, a later armistice would have only made the situation on the Western Front worse for Germany and still resulted in a WWI defeat and in a harsh (if not harsher in comparison to real life) peace treaty for Germany, as well as in (much) more German dying either in combat/on the front lines or due to malnutrition and/or starvation at home.
1. If that means that he would have been stopped from invading Poland you might have a point.
France, Belgium and Holland account for a mere(sic) 225,000, Poland alone accounts for half of all Holocaust victims. The Soviet Union added another million. Czechoslovakia and Hungry both lost 200,000 plus.
1. Yes and No. Western Poland (home of about 2.0 million Jews) was already successfully conquered by the Nazis in late 1939. However, I don't think that Hitler would have invaded the USSR or conquered eastern Poland (which was a part of the USSR since 1939 and which had about 1.3 million Jews) had he not been able to conquer France in 1940 or later on. Hitler and the Nazis would have probably wanted to invade the USSR to gain their Lebensraum, but they would probably have been unwilling to do this without France being defeated, since they would have been unlikely to desire the creation of a two-front war. Also, if Hitler fails to conquer France in 1940, then many/most French Jews (and possibly some Belgian and/or Dutch Jews as well) would not end up under Nazi control.
In addition, it is worth pointing out that many/most/all of the Nazi extermination camps were built after the Nazi conquest of France. Had the Nazis been stuck in a stalemate in France, I am not sure that the Nazis would have built (many of) these extermination camps due to a lack of resources, et cetera, even if they would have wanted to build them.
Based on this data here (see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust#Jewish), I can try making an educated guesstimate in regards to the number of total Jewish Holocaust victims if Hitler would have failed to successfully conquer/capture France.
-Western Poland: 1939 Jewish pop.: ~2.0 million; 1945-ish Jewish pop. in this scenario: ~1.0-1.5 million (Hitler kills 0.5-1.0 million western Polish Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-Eastern Poland and the Baltic States (both of which were a part of the USSR since 1939/1940): No Holocaust there at all due to no Nazi invasion of the USSR at all
-Germany and Austria: 1939: 240,000; 1945-ish: 90,000-140,000 (Hitler kills 100,000-150,000 German and Austrian Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-Bohemia and Moravia (the Czech Republic): 1939: 90,000; 1945-ish: 40,000-65,000 (Hitler kills 25,000-50,000 Czech Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-Slovakia: 1939: 90,000; 1945-ish: 40,000-65,000 (Hitler kills 25,000-50,000 Slovak Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-Greece: No Holocaust there at all; if the Germans fail to conquer France in 1940, Mussolini probably does not join the Axis side at all, which means that there would be no Nazi intervention in any Italian invasion of Greece, and thus no Holocaust (the Italians themselves did not kill Jews).
-Netherlands: 1939: 140,000; 1945-ish: 70,000-105,000 (Hitler kills 35,000-70,000 Dutch Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-Hungary: No Holocaust there at all; a German invasion of Hungary would probably be unlikely without a German invasion of the USSR.
-Belarus and Ukraine: No Holocaust there at all due to no Nazi German invasion of the USSR.
-Belgium: 1939: 65,000; 1945-ish: 40,000-60,000 (some/many Belgian Jews do not come under Nazi German control; Hitler kills 5,000-25,000 Belgian Jews).
-Yugoslavia: No Holocaust there at all; a German invasion of Yugoslavia would probably be unlikely without a successful German conquest of France.
-Romania: No Holocaust there at all; without a successful German conquest of France and without a German invasion of the USSR, Ion Antonescu (the then-leader of Romania) would probably be unwilling to kill Jews, despite his rabid anti-Semitism.
-Norway: 1939: 2,173; 1945-ish: 1,000-1,600 (Hitler kills 573-1,173 Norwegian Jews, but with no defeat in France and with no/much less extermination camps, the Holocaust is less systematic than in real life).
-France: No Holocaust there at all since the Germans fail to conquer France.
-Bulgaria: No Holocaust there at all, since there would be no Nazi military forces anywhere near Bulgaria without a successful German conquest of France.
-Italy: No Holocaust there at all, since Mussolini remains neutral in World War II without a successful German conquest of France.
-Luxembourg: 1939: 5,000; 1945-ish: 4,000-4,500 (Hitler kills 500-1,000 Luxembourgish Jews).
-Russia: No Holocaust there at all due to no Nazi German invasion of the USSR at all.
-Denmark: No or miniscule Holocaust deaths there, as in real life.
This is just a very rough guesstimate, but it would appear that Hitler and the Nazis would have probably killed between ~500,000 and ~1,500,000 total Jews in the Holocaust without a successful Nazi German conquest of France.
1. Yes and No. Western Poland (home of about 2.0 million Jews) was already successfully conquered by the Nazis in late 1939. However, I don't think that Hitler would have invaded the USSR or conquered eastern Poland (which was a part of the USSR since 1939 and which had about 1.3 million Jews) had he not been able to conquer France in 1940 or later on.
Let me suggest this, let's say that Hitler had only acted defensively against France and England following the collapse of the Saar Offensive but instead had focused all of his energies to the east and the Soviet Union, do you think that France, Great Britain, or the U.S. would have been able to build or maintain public support for the war? I have my doubts. Either way the Saar Offensive had no effect on the German invasion of Poland, Hungary and Austria, already under the sway of fascist governments would still have been active participants in the genocide in realty only the Slavic nations and the Netherlands were resistant, opposed or reluctant to join in the mass persecution and genocide of the Jews, so I think your hypothesis fails on a number of levels.
1. Let me suggest this, let's say that Hitler had only acted defensively against France and England following the collapse of the Saar Offensive but instead had focused all of his energies to the east and the Soviet Union, do you think that France, Great Britain, or the U.S. would have been able to build or maintain public support for the war?
2. I have my doubts. Either way the Saar Offensive had no effect on the German invasion of Poland, Hungary and Austria, already under the sway of fascist governments would still have been active participants in the genocide in realty only the Slavic nations and the Netherlands were resistant, opposed or reluctant to join in the mass persecution and genocide of the Jews, so I think your hypothesis fails on a number of levels.
1. Yes, probably. After all, they already declared war on Hitler, and their military position wasn't bad at all at this point in time.
2. Hungary refused to send the overwhelming majority of its Jews to the death camps in real life until the German Nazis occupied it in 1944. Thus, with no German invasion of Hungary at all in this scenario, there might have not been a Holocaust in Hungary at all, or at least not on a large scale. As I said before, the Nazis would have probably still wanted to exterminate the Jews, but I simply expressed skepticism that they would have been willing to put as much resources into doing this (building the death camps, et cetera) as they did in real life without them capturing France, which results in a much smaller total Jewish death toll in the Holocaust in this scenario as opposed to in real life.
Let me suggest this, let's say that Hitler had only acted defensively against France and England following the collapse of the Saar Offensive but instead had focused all of his energies to the east and the Soviet Union, do you think that France, Great Britain, or the U.S. would have been able to build or maintain public support for the war? I have my doubts. Either way the Saar Offensive had no effect on the German invasion of Poland, Hungary and Austria, already under the sway of fascist governments would still have been active participants in the genocide in realty only the Slavic nations and the Netherlands were resistant, opposed or reluctant to join in the mass persecution and genocide of the Jews, so I think your hypothesis fails on a number of levels.
Hitler had no option of only focusing on the USSR with a threat from the west since the he needed an alliance with the USSR to make the invasion of Poland possible and the access to a supply of raw materials for any sustained long term war. GB and France were courting the Soviets before the Molotov Ribbentrop pact, so they would have gladly helped the Soviets.
Last edited by jobseeker2013; 12-02-2013 at 08:07 PM..
I'm inclined to think the Jews would have been spared extermination in Poland if the western front did not collapse since Hitler would have felt insecure with France in the west and the USSR on the other side.
Hitler would have to get along with others instead of creating a new world order for his regime to survive with the French in the picture.
GB and France were courting the Soviets before the Molotov Ribbentrop pact, so they would have gladly helped the Soviets.
My conjecture is that absent a German offensive against western Europe the ability of Great Britain, or even France to sustain popular support for a war against Germany would have been questionable. There certainly was no shortage of pro-German proto fascist in France or Great Britain, ardent anti-communist who viewed the Soviet Union as far more a threat than Nazi Germany or even socialist who saw the war as just another WWI redeux. Hence the basis of my supposition.
I'm inclined to think the Jews would have been spared extermination in Poland if the western front did not collapse since Hitler would have felt insecure with France in the west and the USSR on the other side.
Hitler would have to get along with others instead of creating a new world order for his regime to survive with the French in the picture.
Agreed, at least for a majority of the Polish Jews (Hitler would have probably still killed some of them due to his craziness).
Well, there was some anti-Semitism in Germany beforehand (after all, I would think that cries of "Jews killed Jesus" and that "Jews control much of our country's finances" would have sometimes been heard in Germany even before World War I), but you might very well be correct that the Stab-in-the-Back myth might have made anti-Semitism in Germany worse.
For the record, though, the Stab-in-the-Back myth appears to be full of BS. The German nationalists said that Germany lost WWI because it was stabbed in the back on the home front. However, Germany was already losing ground on the Western Front since around the summer of 1918, and with the massive reserves of U.S. manpower, weapons, et cetera, Germany would have probably (eventually) lost much more ground on the Western Front during World War I had it not signed an armistice in November 1918. In other words, a later armistice would have only made the situation on the Western Front worse for Germany and still resulted in a WWI defeat and in a harsh (if not harsher in comparison to real life) peace treaty for Germany, as well as in (much) more German dying either in combat/on the front lines or due to malnutrition and/or starvation at home.
I agree that the legend was a myth. Many Jews served on the German side in WW1 at equal rates per capita to their fellow German citizens. Stab-in-the-back was a convenient excuse for why Germany lost the war. Germany was so humiliated by the defeat that they spread this legend that they were not really defeated militarily, but were defeated on the home front. Instead of blaming themselves, they blamed others. Jews were a convenient scapegoat.
I would argue it began in 1939 with Action T4 when they started killing the mentally ill, but there was precursors to it as soon as Hitler was elected in 1933.
People often forget that people with mental disabilities were actually the first people the Nazis killed; the ones they regarded the lowest.
I would argue it started with Kristallacht, November 9-10, 1938. They waited until the ink was barely dry on the Munich Accords and then the Nazis bared their fangs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
