Deprecated: Non-static method Comment::form() should not be called statically, assuming $this from incompatible context in /home/pcrozier/public_html/spanner/core/core.template.php on line 2717
Croziervision
18 December 2010
“Germany was never a threat to England.”

This line appeared in a recent round-robin email from Sean Gabb Co-Director of the Libertarian Alliance.

There’s a grain of truth in it.  From what I know Hitler very much wanted to avoid war with Britain.  His aim was to create a German empire in Eastern Europe.  But does anyone seriously think that having achieved his aim he wouldn’t have ended up turning his attentions to Britain?  He was the head of a national socialist regime.  Socialism doesn’t work.  Eventually, this becomes apparent and the regime gets into trouble.  And when regimes get into trouble they start wars.

PermalinkFeedback (4)NazismWarfare

Feedback


 
  1. I don’t share Gabb’s view, but surely he would respond by pointing out that this counterfactual Nazi Empire in central and eastern Europe would have been more likely to pick on a lesser power than Britain?

    Posted by mike on 19 December 2010 at 10:29am

  2. Presumably they would eventually run out of “lesser” powers.

    But I wonder if that is how it works with tyrannies.  As in I really do wonder.  Hitler certainly went after lesser powers.  But Saddam was happy to attack Iran and Mao (effectively in Korea) the US.

    Posted by Patrick Crozier on 20 December 2010 at 06:55am

  3. Sean’s whole foreign policy revisionism re WW2, Churchill and the empire is incoherent. Hitler was a revolutionary, not just a traditional German expansionist who wanted a bit more land to the East.

    There is also no doubt that had Hitler been able to attack Russia without any worry about having to deal with the British and the Empire, then it would have made Russia’s defeat, with all the associated effects, a certainty. A Nazi, Jew murdering empire from Bordeaux to Vladivostok, with no chance of much rollback for decades. I’d like to know Sean’s view on that.

    I read a recent paper by Ralph Raico, another revisionist, and his basic thesis is that WW2 was avoidable as Churchill was a warmonger. For heaven’s sake.

    Posted by Johnathan Pearce on 03 January 2011 at 08:48pm

  4. Indeed.

    Posted by Patrick Crozier on 04 January 2011 at 04:31am

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.