How much more or less successful would a non racist Germany be in ww2

[Jellico]

Isn't stopping at the German communities of Austria or Czechoslovakia basically racist anyway?

Put another way the aim of the game isn't uniting a big happy German family. It is getting enough resources to be able to play with the big boys like the British Empire, US, or USSR. That the Slavs are "Untermensch" is just convenient. You get a narrative to displace them.

 

[wcv215]

Well that's wrong.
Sure their entire list of grievances weren't legitimate, but Austria, danzig proper and the Sudetenland all had absolute German majorities, and by any modern understanding of self determination they were perfectly entitled to do as they wished.

Hmm…let’s see. Nope not a legitimate grievance.

 

[marathag]

Just as a minor comment, I do not see a delivery system on the scale of the Boeing B-29 Stratofortress included here.

The B-29 program was nearly $3B, and that's not including the R-3350 development and the 'just in case' B-32 Dominator

But for a smaller program, the Douglas B-19 was $4M for that single flyable test aircraft

 

[Johnrankins]

Elsewhere in Europe in the post-WW-I period, discontented ethnic minorities gained independence or were shifted from country to country regardless of historic boundaries. In several areas, plebiscites were conducted to determine which areas should be in what country. But the Sudeten Germans were never given any opportunity to decide what country they were to be ruled by. The Czechs declared independence from Austria, and asserted control over the entire "Kingdom of Bohemia". Should that very recent jurisdiction, established by force in a period of chaos, be regarded as permanent? Or sacred because it followed historic boundaries?

One of the problems that Chamberlain and Daladier had at Munich was that Hitler had a serious moral case for his demands. Someone noted recently here that Canada informed the UK that they would not support Britain in a war for Czech control of the Sudetenland against the will of the inhabitants. (I don't suggest that the British and French were right to give in, only that it was more complicated than many people realized.)

The curse of Woodrow Wilson strikes again!

 

[Mikestone8]

Isn't stopping at the German communities of Austria or Czechoslovakia basically racist anyway?

In what way?

If it is "racist" to believe that people who considered themselves to be of a common ethnicity were entitled to combine into a common national state, this would make racists of most people in Europe at that time. After all, Austrians and Germans had at least as much in common as had Czechs with Slovaks or Croats with Serbs, each of whom had been spatchcocked together into "national" states.

 

[kham_coc]

Hmm…let’s see. Nope not a legitimate grievance.

Define a legitimate grievance then.

 

[TDM]

Define a legitimate grievance then.

The problem isn't should majority ethnic groups have some say in where they live in abstract, but even then no "modern self determination" doesn't allow for localised majorities of ethnic groups to force border changes. The problem is ignoring why things were the way they were at that point. Czechoslovakia and Poland didn't magically appear out of thin air one night against the wishes of the German speaking populations they now contained, but as a direct result of some pretty meaningful choices made by Germany (amongst others) earlier on. Choices that had led to some far worse things than the Sudetenland and Danzig.

 

[Mikestone8]

Aren't we drifting a bit off topic?

The OP asked how a less racist Germany would have performed in WW2. So WW2 still happens, and presumably so do all or most of the events leading up mto it, even if possibly in a slightly different order. Some of us seem to be butterflying away their desire to shake off the ToV and acquire territoriea whose inhabitants wished to be so acquired - a desire pretty certain to be shared by virtually *any* German governent whether racist or not.

 

[kham_coc]

Aren't we drifting a bit off topic?

The OP asked how a less racist Germany would have performed in WW2. So WW2 still happens, and presumably so do all or most of the events leading up mto it, even if possibly in a slightly different order. Some of us seem to be butterflying away their desire to shake off the ToV and acquire territoriea whose inhabitants wished to be so acquired - a desire pretty certain to be shared by virtually *any* German governent whether racist or not.

Well no the lebensraum ideas are really predicated on the slavish untermenchen idea, so while this non racist Germany presumably still wants Austria, Sudetenland, 1914 Poland, elsass, and so forth, its very unlikely that they would extend those desires further than maybe all of Poland and the baltics.
So if the war goes as otl, I just dont see how they go for the ussr.

 

[Questerr]

I wonder if a far right German ideology that still hates Jews but consider Slavs and other European peoples as misguided and in need of civilizational help is a possibility.

This way you could still have an ideology that Germany needs to annex Slavic territories to Germanize Slavs and teach them proper civilization.

And when the Slavs refuse to be “Germanized” and instead launch a massive guerrilla war?

 

[Mikestone8]

Well no the lebensraum ideas are really predicated on the slavish untermenchen idea, so while this non racist Germany presumably still wants Austria, Sudetenland, 1914 Poland, elsass, and so forth, its very unlikely that they would extend those desires further than maybe all of Poland and the baltics.
So if the war goes as otl, I just dont see how they go for the ussr.

If OTL is anything to go by, takin Poland and the altis will be enough to make GB and France declare war. And the conquest of Poland gives them a common border with the SU.

Anti-Bolshevism would be a sufficient reason to attack - though it might well take a less genocidal form.

 

[TDM]

Aren't we drifting a bit off topic?

The OP asked how a less racist Germany would have performed in WW2. So WW2 still happens, and presumably so do all or most of the events leading up mto it, even if possibly in a slightly different order. Some of us seem to be butterflying away their desire to shake off the ToV and acquire territoriea whose inhabitants wished to be so acquired - a desire pretty certain to be shared by virtually *any* German governent whether racist or not.

Thing is is can be tough to split abort getting back the 1914 borders and earlier Germanic nationalism/ambition

Well no the lebensraum ideas are really predicated on the slavish untermenchen idea, so while this non racist Germany presumably still wants Austria, Sudetenland, 1914 Poland, elsass, and so forth, its very unlikely that they would extend those desires further than maybe all of Poland and the baltics.
So if the war goes as otl, I just dont see how they go for the ussr.

Yep I agree in general but ending up sharing a border with USSR is a tenuous situation (for both). also those areas are kind of set up as ring of tripwires for war (precisely to discourage Germany from going there)

If OTL is anything to go by, takin Poland and the altis will be enough to make GB and France declare war. And the conquest of Poland gives them a common border with the SU.

Anti-Bolshevism would be a sufficient reason to attack - though it might well take a less genocidal form.

The problem is as was mentioned by other posters earlier the German didn't have the resources to conquer European USSR, it certainly doesn't have the resources to conquer it and reasonably administer the great swathes of it they conquered. Plus while I know there's the idea that certain groups would be glad to be free of the Soviet yoke, and that is true, they might not be that keen on swapping it with a German one because people memories are longer than 1917.

Still I agree less out and out genocide for ideological reasons will likely lead to less death,

 

[Deum de Igne]

Specifically if Germany is going for the same level of militarization (with associated economic problems), I would argue that they would preform far worse as they would not be taking the same gambles that Hitler made that led to their initial successes. I would also suggest that a lot of the general war direction was weighted by the Nazi racial and ideological beliefs. As such any "non racist" administration (likely republican in nature) would strive to avoid any total war scenario. Especially as total wars are prolonged in nature and German military doctrine dictates that that a swift war is necessary to win.

That being said if anything a less racist administration ( I don't believe non racist is possible) while less militarized would still push for the reunification of Austria and would attempt to pull Czechoslovakia into its sphere. And would try to utilise the Polish ultimatum to Lithuania to extract West Prussia and Upper Silesia. As Britain and France would be far less willing to intervene if the German government has not yet broken any agreements with the West and is seen as defending a weak nation against an aggressive neighbor.

With regard to WW2 in this case provided still breaks out in Europe, so long as Germany is fighting a single front war and maintains friendly relations with either its western or eastern neighbor it would likely do far better. (2 fronts was a death sentence)

 

[General Tirpitz]

Not only that, but a lack of Nazi ideology would affect the motivation of German soldiers to fight. Probably not enough to make them not fight, but still enough that they’d be less tenacious in fighting. Even the most militant of non-Nazi Germans were incredibly wary of actually starting a war with the rest of Europe. If you go around invading other people with little to no provocation, you need to give your own people a very good reason as to why your people deserve other people's stuff more than they do themselves, and racism is very good at providing that reason.

This isn't just talk. People need a reason to lay down their lives for their country, and states that are unable to provide sufficient reason often fold under pressure. Fascist Italy is a good example. Although Italy certainly had some of the same racist dogma, it wasn't as pervasive or as popular. Once the going got tough, the Italians asked themselves just what the hell they were dying for, then threw in the towel. A country doesn't fight to the bitter end for nebulous reasons. The Germans fought incredibly hard in WWII because they had a pervasive ideology that made sense to them. That ideology told them they were better than everyone else, deserved to be on top, and were justified in killing anyone else until that became a reality. It was incredibly evil
and racist, but as a motivational tool... it worked.

Without Hitler and his madness - of which racism was a big part - flogging them on, odds are good they pull back from the brink when the Anglo-French finally put their foot down in Poland. If they DO end up in a war they fight it with much less energy, all while looking for an early negotiated exit, allowing them very modest territorial gains... or at least avoiding total losses.

This is a good point and gives also a good comparison to the WW1. One of the reasons why many Germans were able to put up with the WW1 for so long was because Germans, like citizens of most major nations, believed that they weren't participating in the war of conquest but actually defending Germany from a foreign invasion. Many of them probably wouldn't have mined if the war had ended with Germany getting new territories but it was still widely believed that the main reason why Germany had joined the conflict was still a defensive one. If there is some sort of Second Great War with a non-Nazi Germany, the conflict's nature would be entirely different and I think likely a result of more accidental course of events compared to the conflict Hitler started.

 

[kham_coc]

If OTL is anything to go by, takin Poland and the altis will be enough to make GB and France declare war. And the conquest of Poland gives them a common border with the SU.

Anti-Bolshevism would be a sufficient reason to attack - though it might well take a less genocidal form.

I really don't think so. Hitler significantly tarnished German reputation and confidence.
A Germany with better pr, a Germany that didn't go back on its word regarding Bohemia and a Germany with a better cb (required for domestic approval if nothing else) is still likely to attack and get away with it regarding Poland - but that is also likely to preserve Poland even if shorn of most or all of 1914 German territory.

 

[Bellacinos]

So were assuming a far right government takes over that is a fascist dictatorship but just doesn't have the genocidal ideas of the Nazis but has their anti communist views? I guess in this scenario Germany would have to find a way to rearm around the Versailles Treaty and then broker some kind of peace with the other western allies and probably ally with Poland under the guise that the USSR was a bigger threat. Which Poland actually perceived the USSR being the bigger threat until the late 1930s. In order for this to work you would have to have the western powers and the US be cool with Germany showing aggression to the USSR and being able to financially support them.

While the West did not like the USSR I am not sure they would back a Militaristic Germany/Poland that attacks the USSR first without any provacation even if they supported Germany/Poland more as they would be seen as the aggressors, and the only way a Germany/ Poland alliance could defeat the USSR would be with a lend lease type deal that the USSR got IOTL. I could potentially see this scenario playing out but Stalin was pretty pragmatic when it came to military aggression as he didn't start invading other countries until he had the cloak of Germany doing it first or when he was reconquering occupied territory. I can't see them attackign Poland/Germany without provacation and a less radical Germany would be seen as less threatening to the USSR then the Nazis, and they would need the support of the WAllies at least financially to win this.

 

[CommieScum]

To clarify, I was envisioning a Revanchist Germany like pre ww1 France, which is also strongly anti-communist.

 

[kham_coc]

To clarify, I was envisioning a Revanchist Germany like pre ww1 France, which is also strongly anti-communist.

Unless it wishes to annex large parts of the ussr Germany wouldn't want to start that war. For better or worse the nation state concept was the one in vogue at the time. So unless there is ethnic cleansing you can't take the territory, and consequently the ussr is out of bounds. Mere ideological antipathy won't start it and I doubt Stalin would start it either.

 

[fockewulf]

Almost anything is possible and strange things happened troughout history. Let's say Hitler is not racially motivated, he had some jewish fellow soldiers during WW1. Maybe one of them saves his life. So instead of a great jewish conspiracy, he "discovers" a bigger one, an ancient and insidious organisation bent on world domination, "The freemasons". He could focus his attention on them and of course on their offspring, the bloody communists, to rally the people behind him against a common enemy. The freemasons are the ones that orchestrated the American and French revolutions, the great revolutions of 1848, the Great War, the soviet revolution and the defeat of the Central Powers, to replace the old order across Europe with a new one "Novo ordo seclorum".
Infiltrators among the German and Austro-Hungarian politicians and high command stabbed their own people in the back. They would eventually take over the world, as the ultimate puppet masters.
The problem is I don't think there are so many freemasons to loot from.