Well, if he’d used the Jews as bureaucrats he could’ve killed two birds with one stone. He could’ve had a great organization, and he wouldn’t have diverted so many resources to killing them, and thus would’ve been able to focus more on the war. Also, if he had chosen to consolidate power for another year rather than invade Russia when he did, he would’ve had Europe sewn up.
We still haven’t answered the question: when in the past do you chronoport in with this history book? The timing is essential.
I expect he’d ignore the book as a Zionist/Commie/British/whatever ploy in any event, no matter when it was put in his hands. Any book that showed him losing the war, with him and Eva Braun both killing themselves in a feces-reeking Fuhrerbunker as the Soviets conquered Berlin, would have been dismissed by Hitler as sheer fantasy. He was supremely and destructively self-confident.
[QUOTE=Zebra]
Well a lot would depend on which history book you took.
So many people will say, “If Hitler had done “X”, he could have won the war.” But X changes from historian to historian.
If only he wasn’t fighitng on two fronts.
If only he did put so many resources into exterminating the Jews.
If only had had done more R&D into the V-2 or the Luftwaffa.
If only the US stayed out of the war.
Which of these would Hitler persue? Would eliminating one or two of these handicaps help him?
And of course there’s
If only Hitler was not a total nutter, he may have won the war.
Don’t see how a history book would help there.
[/QUOTE]
The book wouldn’t be for the purpose of advising him how he should do it. It would just tell him what he did do in our timeline and what resulted and let him decide what he should have done. It’s basically just giving him a second chance by artificially giving him memories of the first time.
And yeah, like others said, there has to be limits to how much he changes. His major goals have to remain the same. The question is how much closer to his goals he could have gotten simply by correcting blunders he made like fighting in the wrong place at the wrong time, misjudging the circumstances, etc.
[QUOTE=Fish]
We still haven’t answered the question: when in the past do you chronoport in with this history book? The timing is essential.
[/QUOTE]
Like I said in the original post, some time before he rose to power. Beyond that, I don’t think it matters. Just in case, we’re going to say he can’t use the book to influence the leaders before him.
I doubt he’d accept the book as gospel if the author[s], editor (if it’s a collection of essays), or even the publisher had a “Jewish” or Slavic name. And that rules out a lot of 'em…