The old adage is that “history is written by the victors”. That being the case – what would history as written by the Nazis read like?
I think we can assume that WWII would be seen as a just war against the rapacious reparations demands of the WWI victors and also would be spun as the creation of a European super-state.
Assuming they also beat the Russians that could have been presented as a war to liberate the Russian people from a tyrannical regime (sound familiar?)
For us here in Britain, I can assume that our Anglo-Saxon tradition would be conflated into some pan-Teutonic vision (similar language, Protestantism, royal family etc)
So what would a Nazi history book read like in 2004?
You know what Nazi ideology said…that there was a hierarchy of races, with the Aryan-Caucasian race at the top of the heap, and the Teutonic-German subrace at the top of the Aryans; that there’s a natural social hierarchy, with the head of the state on top, and that it’s important to obey your superiors and the state; that war and domination of inferiors by superiors is the natural order of life. Just start with those biases, and look at history through those lenses instead of our own. If you really want to, you can probably find neo-Nazi websites online and see their take on history.
There would probably also be a lot about how the “Evil Jewish Conspiracy” secretly tried to take over the world, and almost succeeded until the heroic Nazis rose to stop them. (Aryan version of Birth of a Nation.)
Gregory Benford wrote some short stories along these lines. They are contained in a volume titled “Hitler Victorious”. I haven’t read them, so I don’t know how good they are. I have read other things by Benford that I thought were good.
Do you think that the Jewish holocaust would be in a 2004 edition of a Nazi history book? Or would it have been swept under the carpet (I am imagining that 2004 Nazi Europe would be similar to Soviet Eastern Europe - ie information would be tightly controlled and socierty would be heavily policed.)
I imagine a Nazi history book would say that the Jewish people passed away because of their own weakness and corruption, not because of a plan of deliberate extermination.
Fatherland by Robert Harris is a novel set in a world where the Nazis were victorious. You may like to read it, it’s got a lot of historical references in, and the main plot of the story concerns how the Germans deal with the history relating to “the Jewish problem”.
That’s why I am suggesting that 50 years after the last jew had been murdered the Nazi government of 2004 wouldn’t want to publicise this and as such it would be airbrushed out of history - similar to the way the Russians didn’t mention the Kulaks or Pogroms in their history books.
What I am trying to get at is - 50 years on how would a Nazi historian present the history of the war and it’s likely aftermath - bearing in mind that they would have to make the Nazis look positive?
I’ll third +MDI’s and owlstretchingtime’s recommendation of Fatherland. My old college advisor Niall Ferguson liked it too, and he should know.
I think the end of Hermann Goering’s famous quote ("…just tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism…") might give some insight into the possible mindset of potential future Nazi historians. “We were attacked by the Jews/English/French/Russians/Americans. We bravely defended our Fatherland. We were victorious.” As Nonsuch said, the extermination of the Jews could have been covered up, or the blame for it be transferred either to the victims or to other parties.
Well… if the US remained independent… there would naturally be mentioning of how the Germanic and Anglo Saxon purity of the former British Colony was corrupted by Jews and weakened by inferior races like Slavic immigrants (notably I suppose Poles and Russians).
Most certainly the threat from Poland, USSR and Great Britain will be increased as a retroactive means of justifying aggressive moves.
Naturally we could work with other scenarios… some quite likely in which Hitler was going to let the British keep most of their colonies and would worry only about cleaning up communist Soviet Union…
Unless Pearl Harbour didn’t happen… and the Germans got Britain and Russia first… by then in 1945 it wouldn’t be worth bombing far away europe without having a foothold to start from.
Or they could have claimed to have done so, after Hiroshima. Of course, that assumes that the war in Europe would not have been over by August 1945.
It’s quite possible that the Germans could have kept up such a ruse until their scientists were able to really construct an A-bomb. Then the US and Germany would have been locked in a nuclear stalemate akin to the Cold War.
I think they wouldn’t whitewash or censor the extermination of the Jews. It sounds easier to me to continue with the “Jews are subhuman monsters who deserve to die” idea. After a while, there’d be few people left who ever even met a Jew, and nobody to remember they were just people. After a few generations, they’d be remembered like Cro-Magnums, human-like but not human.
The US may have been persuaded to help the Nazis if a suitably anti-Communist government got into power early enough. Recall that we’d had Red Scares in the 1930s and the businessmen of the USA had had to deal with strikes and union organizers throughout the history of our industrialization process. This, of course, assumes that either Pearl Harbor is never bombed, or that if it is the US government goes to war against Japan in the Pacific and the Soviet Union in Europe.
So the Nazis from that era would have spoken of a Pan-Atlantic Anglo-Teutonic Race that purged the world of Slavs and East Asians (Chinese and Japanese), destroying the threat of Jewish Bolshevism and Maoism to create a peaceful world with Africa, South America, and the rest of Asia put into their natural place of servitude to the master race. There wouldn’t be any discussion of the actual methods used to win those wars, or what precisely happened to the inhabitants of the Greater German Empire or America’s Far Eastern Possessions. I don’t think any of the extinct races would be mentioned beyond caricatures and broad generalizations that make them look like animals. There would probably be more discussion of how the various partisans in France and Mexico were exterminated.