MOABE: What If Hitler Had Died During World War I?

[jasonsnow]

A feature many people tend to forget about Hitler is that he fought in World War I.

Yes: one of the most evil and wicked men in human history was stuck in the middle of a field were thousands of shots flew past him every second, where explosions could blow him off unexpectedly and where a single gunshot could end his life. Yet the guy managed to escape alive. In fact, the story that Hitler only had one testicle is true; a product from injuries sustained during battle. He was a brave soldier too, receiving the Iron Cross due to his valiant service. In more than one occasion, Hitler was face-to-face with old Death, yet he managed to pull through and create an empire of evil, initiating a war to end the lives of 65 million people.

But what if we exchange those millions of lives... for his own?

Western Front. The sky is darkened by the smoke of battle. The barren, almost surreal, artillery-battered landscape is littered in dismembered corpses. It is raining bullets. A young Austrian man by the name of Adolf Hitler sits in a foxhole, surrounded in fellow combatants. He clenches his teeth after an ear-shattering explosion obliterates the man sitting next to him. Yells fill the air as his fellow soldiers push forward, fighting like wild dogs, dying by the thousands. Hitler looks to his side and sees just as a soldier is pinned down by rifle fire, his agonizing screams almost like a ghostly howl. The hell of war poisons his mind, driving him mad. Everyone he knew... dead. The foxhole slowly emptied as soldiers made their way up the mud, holding their rifles and getting slaughtered. Yet Hitler stays behind.

More explosions. The artillery are shredding their lines.

The trench is doomed.

However, he decides to go on. He amasses his courage, braveness filling his every muscle. With renewed strength, he clenches his way up the ledge and sees hell. He manages to sprint a few feet, feeling more alive than ever, until--

A bullet impacts his frontal cranium. Just like that, young Hitler's life abruptly ends. Poof. Gone.

How would history change without the greatest villain of contemporary times? How would our present differ? And how would Germany be today?

[stevep]

On the plus side you get rid of a very evil man. On the negative side is that, with no other butterflies you still have the conditions that led to the Nazis rise to power. I.e. a resentful Germany that refuses to accept its defeat in WWI with many willing to challenge the result militarily and with the collapse of the Austrian empire and the isolation of communist Russia a serious imbalance of power in Europe allowing a resurgent Germany to challenge this. Coupled with the likelihood of Italy being resentful at high costs and low returns from WWII and the western democracies being extremely opposed to fighting again after such a bloodletting.

I'm not saying that Germany would still come under the power of a Nazi type organisation but I think there is a reasonable probability that you could see a revanchist Germany under some sort of right wing regime and the same lack of willingness to defeat it quickly. Such a regime may well not be so bat-s**t insane as Hitler's which could make it even more dangerous. We could avoid WWII altogether as even OTL the Nazis nearly failed to come to power or we could have something which is more successful, even winning and still distinctly nasty.

PS  I have also heard there was some doubt about the stories told about his WWI career and that some of it was fabricated after the Nazis came to power to make him look more of a war hero. 

[steffen]

First of all, as evil Hitler was, as brutal as he acted and how evil (plain evil) the nazis were, they were not responsible for all of the 65 million casulties of ww2.

there ist Stalin who slaughtered millions - in the time of ww2
there is the japanese empire, that slaughtered around 20-25 million chinese in their war...

this doesn´t mean that 40 million deaths caused by hitler aren´t 40 million to much, but it is wrong to concentrate only on europe and hitlers world war, ignoring the genocidal brutality of the japanese empire that had started allready 6 years earlier (some say japan started their war in 1932/33).

Beside this, a dead Hitler mean that the radical and extremistic Deutsche Arbeiter Partei (he spied for the Reichswehr) will stay an unimportant footnote in history.

We cannot know what will happen, but for sure the weimar germany will still fight to get rid of the versailles dicatate, as OTL every government did.

Basically we have similar events till 1928 (more or less), maybe some "rebellion" or putsch as we germans said, maybe some other ww1-general get shot or not shot for trying to take over weimar government.

in its core the main difference between 1933 OTL and 1933 ITL is that you have no final nail in the weimar coffin, because you still have the communists, but also right wing (splitted) parties and so the democratic parties will still keep weimar intact. 
After 1933 the german economy recovered, brünnings moves combined with the reduced payments AND the recovery of world-wide economy mean that weimar will face recovery, the autobahn-building (or the "get soil out of the ocean-program) is still happening, so lots of unemployed will find jobs.

For sure the german economy need longer time, but it is utterly wrong to think that "the nazis or something similar" would take over with or without hitler. That is - to much anti-german propaganda of the wartime-beliving. Infact it was Hitler, his charismatic "genius" in combination with modern technology (airplane-election shows, Goebbels propaganda, massive support by right wing economics (Hugenberg) who financed ONE benefittting movement (from his POV).
If you remove hitler, the DAP is nothing, no NSDAP... instead you have maybe 2-3 more extremist parties fighting each over and the communists in the time between 1924-1933... 

So you could see a recovering germany, with no brain-loss (by pushed out or fleeing jewish "intelligencia" - that is really bad news for the OTL allies... they basically lack 60-70% of the OTL knowledge about modern physics or chemistry.
Einstein could/would stay in berlin, there is no antisemitism in the OTL kind.
Germany still support china, so no "achse Berlin-Tokyo", in oppostion you see more and more chinese armed forces equipped with german weapons, uniforms, helmets, guns... 

Internal politics will be LESS modern (Hitler was quite innovative, basically he robbed the jews and gave it to the "german blood" - to keep em happy, that swine), but still step by step you see a recovery. with all the problems in the mid- and late30ties you see for sure a strong rearment of germany. That is inevitable, but not in the insane "must start a war"-method of the nazis. Overall german economics is much more powerfull cause you lack the idioticy of the nazi "control". 

external politics will keep its focus on Danzig, propably at some point at austria and the sudetenareas... 

the joint ventures with the russians will go on, so both could benefit. 
the navy see 2 more Deutschlands, a secret airforce is still build (it was OTL), but to a lesser point as OTL.

Spain is in "troubles", cause no nazis no Legion Condor... maybe some small support for Franco, because this weimar germany will still be in opposition to communism. 

I see no real base for working with Mussolini, but i can see this germany demanding stuff that was taken from them 1918/19. Something about the Memelland, similar to 1939 could happen - for a treaty that helps the baltics to defend themself against russia.

Poland - puh, with the military dictatorship in poland, that still dream about "greater poland" in the west (basically taking the areas they got OTL in 1945) i can´t see a real relaxing of the political situation. 
Maybe germany and russia - by working better and better with each other - could plan some secret "what if poland need to get removed"-stuff, but overall this weimar would be VERY cautious, much more as Hitler.

So maybe around 1940 austria joining germany, say france face a serious crisis, italy has burned its bridges because of abessinia or greece and then germany "strikes" to get austria unified. the wish to come "home" was very strong in austria, something that is forgotten from 1945 on.

So you could see in 1940-41 this:
Germany is "full" rearmed, got rid of any versailles conditions, have unified with austria, build up good connections to greece, yugoslavia, hungaria, maybe romania. It is in opposition to poland (tax war, military fortifications along the border, build up of a strong military to crush poland - together with russia in case of war (most reasonable scenario: Poland, chechoslovakia, france vers. germany and russia, started by poland/france, with neutral UK). I doubt this war will happen, just that this is the most realistic scenario.

The baltics - by treaty with germany - could be save from russian occupation, maybe not. Finnland face troubles, maybe similar to OTL.
Italy loose a war with greece, esp. with strong german/austrian forces at the borders force em to move even more to this area.

Internal that germany is quite concervative, the Hugenberg press will try to fuel hate against jews, but overall it is a quite good country to live in.
With still limited economy (propably recovering till 1938-39, from here on they will grow (fast)) the armed forces maybe reach 1939-level in 1941/42, but on a healthy base (in opposition to the "make war or got bankrupted"-scenario hitler faced from 1938 on)


Targets of this weimar state will be:
- get back all of the "mandates" - we forget that the Leage still had the former german colonies under its control. So germany would - even if only for prestige - push for getting back some colonies. The imperialists will be still strong in germany
- get the sudetenareas into germany - because it helps the economy, make the neighbour helpless (no longer a threat to german interests), the austrian part will be very interested in getting back "core areas".
- Danzig - this could lead to a local war, maybe even a world war. All depends on poland. They were quite agressive in that time, with no hitler you could even see them pushing for a war in the timespan 1933-40, but that would benefit germany in this time to get an army back.

Sometimes something will happen - either in france, still instable and quite often loosing its government, or in the pacific.
The OTL problems between Japan and the colonialists and the USA still exist, germany would sell weapons and stuff to china - bringing them either in the boat of the USA or in opposition (economic competitors). Overall japan has harder times against china, maybe china is the new "spain" as a testbed for modern weapons... ironically delivered by communist russia or by sea. 

It will be NOT Nazis without hitler doing the same, as some seem to think here. The military leaders were sane, avoided risks they feared they could not win, so it is still "push to the limit" but the limits are way lower as OTL hitlers Vabanque...

If we avoid a war in europe till 1945 things could get very interesting. Russia has armed to the teeths, maybe they end the joint venture with the germans, maybe not. If they do not, the germans get good insight in superior russian tanks, sometimes they see the T34 and KV1, the russians benefit from modern german weaponary, equal-to-uk-german engines, debugged naval units, etc. Germany still could be leading in chemical weapons, no government was shy about lying as much as possible to the hated entente.

Relationship to france will be open hate - period. there is no love, maybe some joint ventures on a fragile base, overall france will be seen as the bad guy. 
UK could get better PR, but it depends on how they support france.
Russia - it will face more and more purges if they face no war, stalin allways purged people he feared that they could gain to much power, so between some times in that russia has an excellent leadership it also face desruption and loss of knowledge. Overall poland will be VERY frightened, maybe they even accept the return of "german soil", something germany would demand for supporting poland. But i think polish hybris will see em "lets fight the russians and the hun at the same time together with our allies", maybe some (faked) incident in danzig could trigger a german-polish war. In that lithunia could even join the germans, together with the chechoslovaks, to gain ground. France could or could not declare war, depends on whom does what and how good the propaganda works on all sides. Deciding point here is the british empire, do they support france or do they not support them. 
To many butterflies.

You could see a similar war - but with different opponents - between 1940-45 - but you do not see a genocidal mass murderer on minorities and the most brutal war in mankind. 
Heinrich Himmler will be still a chicken farmer, Goebbels will be in the radio or in babelsberg, Hugenberg some day will day, jews will live peacefully in germany, with to many antisemitics hanging around, but compared to OTL it will be 100 times better.

The fallout of the most intelligencia staying in germany for science could be huge, but that depends on many many factors.

[jasonsnow]

Holy mighty duck that's deep. The simple fact that millions of lives could be saved is proof history could be better off without Hitler.

[steffen]

Apr 1, 2018 17:34:48 GMT jasonsnow said:

Holy mighty duck that's deep. The simple fact that millions of lives could be saved is proof history could be better off without Hitler.

Full agree with that.-

Hitler was a unique person, he was the "right man at the right spot in the right time" - if you want to understand his rise to power, his chance to overtake a instable but still working democracy, later as a dictator he had so much luck to get his (needed - internal politics and military opposition without his succsess mean propably his arrest or death by his enemies). Or take his luck in oct. 38, normally his speech is so and so long, this time he shortens it for 20 minutes and escape the bomb that would for sure kill him. 
Or the plane with the bomb in it, the british time clock doesn´t work.
Even the july plot - if Stauffenberg had used both bombs (he couldn´t finish the time clock at the second, so he ONLY used the first one, had he put both in the suitcase Hitler had been also death (silly mistake - but if you under stress mistakes happen).
For germany alone - more people died post july 20th 44 as before. 

Hitler had so much luck it even hurts. It is basically playing 2 times behind Lottery and win both times the jackpot. 
That swine should have died in 1914-18, later he should have been imprisoned and forgotten or killed by the shooting of his "famous" march to munich.

Or he could have been arrested because of his sudetencrisis, the military was deadly against him. But he won, got succsess... all the times. 
If you write a story about a certain Adolf H from austria, who take over germany after a big defeat, get him the chance to rebuild the country, wipe out the most of the european jewish society by stupid racist sterotypes, let him take out all european countries easily, wipe the russian behemont so he need the american and british supplies to hope to come back and basically the rest of the world to beat his dictatorship... you would be called an ASB-writer.


Unfortunatly for the world, it was real.
Very sad.
So yes, the world with a dead hitler (even the "kid accident-fake-Daimler-Benz-Youtube video") would be a much better place.

[Zyobot]

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

[lordroel]

Sept 18, 2018 20:49:54 GMT Zyobot said:

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

I remember Stephen fry book making history where that happens, of course it is done true time travel but still.

[stevep]

Sept 18, 2018 20:49:54 GMT Zyobot said:

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

  The danger might be greater that there will be a demagogue who rises to power intent on establishing German domination of Europe [at the least] but doesn't have most/all of Hitler's racial/religious obsessions, or is at least willing to tempt them until after they have won.  For instance willing to support Russian [and other Soviet subject nations] opposition to communism when a German attack occurs.  Or to avoid conflict with the US as long as possible, at least until the war against the Soviets is won.  This could be far, far more dangerous that Hitler ever was.

[Zyobot]

Sept 19, 2018 14:53:44 GMT stevep said:

Sept 18, 2018 20:49:54 GMT Zyobot said:

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

  The danger might be greater that there will be a demagogue who rises to power intent on establishing German domination of Europe [at the least] but doesn't have most/all of Hitler's racial/religious obsessions, or is at least willing to tempt them until after they have won.  For instance willing to support Russian [and other Soviet subject nations] opposition to communism when a German attack occurs.  Or to avoid conflict with the US as long as possible, at least until the war against the Soviets is won.  This could be far, far more dangerous that Hitler ever was.

Assuming that you're right and a yet-to-be-determined Fuhrer successfully establishes German dominance and eventually dies, is it possible that someone with a more...Hitlerian personality might replace them?

In other words, could the hypothetical Fuhrer's successor have personal views and intentions more in line with OTL Nazism--not to mention the potential means to carry them out to a way worse extent than the real-life Third Reich ever did?

[stevep]

Sept 19, 2018 16:11:12 GMT Zyobot said:

Sept 19, 2018 14:53:44 GMT stevep said:

  The danger might be greater that there will be a demagogue who rises to power intent on establishing German domination of Europe [at the least] but doesn't have most/all of Hitler's racial/religious obsessions, or is at least willing to tempt them until after they have won.  For instance willing to support Russian [and other Soviet subject nations] opposition to communism when a German attack occurs.  Or to avoid conflict with the US as long as possible, at least until the war against the Soviets is won.  This could be far, far more dangerous that Hitler ever was.

Assuming that you're right and a yet-to-be-determined Fuhrer successfully establishes German dominance and eventually dies, is it possible that someone with a more...Hitlerian personality might replace them?

In other words, could the hypothetical Fuhrer's successor have personal views and intentions more in line with OTL Nazism--not to mention the potential means to carry them out to a way worse extent than the real-life Third Reich ever did?

  That would be another danger although a Hitler who wasn't the founder of the Greater German empire might be too unstable to stay in power long.  However the sort of character I was suggesting could be way worse in terms of the end effects than Hitler was OTL.

[perkeo]

Sept 19, 2018 14:53:44 GMT stevep said:

Sept 18, 2018 20:49:54 GMT Zyobot said:

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

  The danger might be greater that there will be a demagogue who rises to power intent on establishing German domination of Europe [at the least] but doesn't have most/all of Hitler's racial/religious obsessions, or is at least willing to tempt them until after they have won.  For instance willing to support Russian [and other Soviet subject nations] opposition to communism when a German attack occurs.  Or to avoid conflict with the US as long as possible, at least until the war against the Soviets is won.  This could be far, far more dangerous that Hitler ever was.

Germany will never, never, never ever accomplish forceful domination of Europe. The closest thing is the stick and carrot approach that was planned for Mitteleuropa - and even then they would have had to be A LOT smarter than they were IOTL.
There simply isn’t enough oil on the European continent so support a 20th century superpower, There simply aren’t enough Germans to hold down the rest of the European population. Germany is simply too exposed to hold her ground against an alliance of all her neighbors.

[stevep]

Oct 7, 2018 12:32:41 GMT perkeo said:

Sept 19, 2018 14:53:44 GMT stevep said:

  The danger might be greater that there will be a demagogue who rises to power intent on establishing German domination of Europe [at the least] but doesn't have most/all of Hitler's racial/religious obsessions, or is at least willing to tempt them until after they have won.  For instance willing to support Russian [and other Soviet subject nations] opposition to communism when a German attack occurs.  Or to avoid conflict with the US as long as possible, at least until the war against the Soviets is won.  This could be far, far more dangerous that Hitler ever was.

Germany will never, never, never ever accomplish forceful domination of Europe. The closest thing is the stick and carrot approach that was planned for Mitteleuropa - and even then they would have had to be A LOT smarter than they were IOTL.
There simply isn’t enough oil on the European continent so support a 20th century superpower, There simply aren’t enough Germans to hold down the rest of the European population. Germany is simply too exposed to hold her ground against an alliance of all her neighbors.

  I would agree that a forceful domination, set up as such, is extremely unlikely.  Possible that Germany, with different leaders, could gain an effective domination using diplomatic as well as other means.  If so there's the danger of this mutating into a forceful dominance without being successfully challenged.  This is possible for other potential hegemonic powers as well but because of the desires for independence by so many states its extremely unlikely. 

[insect]

Sept 19, 2018 14:27:42 GMT lordroel said:

Sept 18, 2018 20:49:54 GMT Zyobot said:

Even though the future Fuhrer himself is dead, how can we be positive that an equally diabolical Hitler equivalent won't take his place and be every bit as bad as the real deal--if not worse?

I remember Stephen fry book making history where that happens, of course it is done true time travel but still.

this a possibility.