What if the November 1939 assassination attempt on Hitler had succeeded?

Great Debates
1

I know we’ve done a lot of these “what if” threads about Hitler. But, as far as I can tell, we’ve never discussed what may be one of the most interesting subjects for speculation - what if Johann Elser had been successful in his assassination attempt on Hitler in November 1939?

With Hitler gone at such an early stage of the War, especially before Barbarosa, and before Pearl Harbor, all types of possibilities arise.

I don’t think there would be debate as to who would have succeeded Hitler - Göring. Indeed, on September 1 of that year, he had been designated as Hitler’s successor in the event of the latter’s death. And, since his appointment in that regard had been announced publicly (in the Reichstag), I don’t see how anyone else could have taken over from AH at that time (although there may have been those who would have been most unhappy with that choice, and who might have eventually conspired to oust him). But, there’s no getting around the fact that Göring would be in charge at least initially.

What we would Göring have done? Would he have had broad support? I suspect (in view of his later behaviour in the real world) that he would have been much less inclined to commit Germany to a “war of destruction” with “the Bolsheviks”. And, since he actually knew the limitations of the Luftwaffe, even if didn’t admit it to Hitler, I doubt he would have seriously contemplated Sea Lion and maybe not even to the air attacks in what would eventually be called The Battle of Britain.

So, IMO, no (planned) invasion of England, no invasion of the USSR. But what about France, Belgium, and Holland? Eventually, he would have to go for those three (you can’t do one without the others) if for no other reason than to use the massive troop and materiel build-up of the last years, and, satisfy all those Generals looking for easy glory. But, he would have delayed the invasion until troop, and more importantly, tank and aircraft levels were brought back back up to pre-September 1 levels (i.e. he would first replace the losses incurred in the invasion of Poland which, as I understand it, were considerable, much more than is commonly appreciated).

In the longer term, Germany under Göring would not undertake a helluva lot more in terns of territorial conquests. He would have been content to enjoy his position and power and not chance losing them by poorly conceived attacks. And then the question becomes: would he have been “removed” by more ideologically committed Nazis, more bent on advancing Hitler’s ideas such as Lebensraum. Who would have led such a coup, or coup-like action? Could Göring have been convinced to voluntarily relinquish his position? I think not given what we now know to be his extreme self-indulgence and over confidence.

As my rather superficial speculations must show, I am not particularly knowledgeable about these things so would love to hear what you think.

2

Maybe Goering would have ended up taking over, but maybe not. Hess was also high up in the Nazi ranks. He was Deputy Fuehrer, he was an old fighter, who had been with the Party since the beginning, he was one of the people who Hitler dictated Mein Kampf to and edited it, he was Hitler’s personal spokeman and physically closest to Hitler, and he was personally popular both with the population and the rest of the party, unlike Goering, who was a controversial figure.

If Hitler had died in 1939, and Hess had wanted, he likely could have outmaneuvered Goering and taken over.

3

Yeah, I wondered about Hess, too. But, at the end of the day, I think he was pretty much considered an intellectual light-weight and definitely not leadership material (and just to be clear, he was viewed that way well before his rather odd peace overture ; the one that had him parachuting into Scotland).

4

I also think it would have been Goering. He had Hitler’s stamp of approval for what that’s worth. And he probably had the right political connections. Hess might have been preferred by the old-time Nazis but his standing within the inner circles would have worked against him overall. Hess would have been seen as too radical - he was an old Friekorps man and true believer. Goering was seen as somebody you could do business with - he was Nazi enough to be acceptable to the hardliners but not so ideological he upset the mainstream.

And there was the Himmler factor. Himmler had built up his own power base with the SS. This worried the military. So they would have backed Goering - who had the closest ties to the military among the top Nazis - as a counterweight to prevent Himmler from taking over.

5

Oooh! Himmler don’ like that!

That would have been quite a contest. Goering was charismatic in his way, and popular, but flamboyantly greedy and corrupt. Not quite the kind of man to lead Germany’s moral renewal as the Nazis saw it, no more so than Roehm the homosexual. Himmler was a dull, tidy, ascetic fellow, but a visionary in his way, a kind of Nordic-pagan mystic, a True Believer in National Socialism no one could doubt, and he had the SS on his side.

6

Off topic but something I’ve always wondered-I see his name either with the two-dot e or with the vowel digraph -oe-. How did he actually spell his own name?

7

That would be umlaut o…there’s no umlaut e. Since English doesn’t use the umlaut, though, it spells letters with an umlault with the diagraph -ae-, -oe-, or -ue-.

8

That being said, Goebbels was Goebbels. the shift from oe to umlaut o was a gradual one, and there were some people whose family names kept the older oe spelling…Goebbels, Goethe, etc.

9

So no one else wants to speculate on what Göring (or Goering) would have done?

Göring, Göring, . . . gone?