Axis plans for the world

Jeboa Safari

Are there any good resources that show how the Axis planned to divide the world between them if they won ww2? And how they planned to run it? From what I'm aware they divided the world into 3 spheres of influence between them, was this the whole world?

endakenny

Try this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_%28Nazism%29

Morlar

endakenny wrote: »

Try this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_%28Nazism%29

That is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever read. If you look at the top of that article there are 2 tabs - 'Article' and 'Discussion' this part from the Discussion tab sums it up nicely imo. . . .

**** article

Articles like this are the reason I hate wikipedia. "Reliable sources" apparently include just about anything that is printed down and published, at least as long as it is "politically correct" (like "anti-nazi"). Seriously, "Most English men would have been exported as slave labor to the East. About 2,000,000 young Nordic English women would have been forced into stud farms"? What is the ULTIMATE SOURCE for this ****?

PS **** you Keraunos

Agreed, this article needs to be completely rewritten. It's apparently nothing more than a miasma of Allied propaganda and sensationalist pseudo-history. The paragraph about England is obviously ridiculous, but so is most of the rest. For instance I believe the Soviets were well aware of Hitler's long term plans for the East and weren't "lulled into a false sense of security". The fact that something has been printed somewhere does not make it a reliable source. - Drilou

This has got to be the must absured article I have ever read. Its one thing to say that the Soviets were lulled into a false sense of security (at least Stalin did not believe that Hitler would invade the USSR while Britain was still around or until perhaps a few years later). Its another thing to say that the Germans would have exported all the men from England as slave labor which is a complete lie. I can guarantee that Hitler never thought about extermination of the English race; in fact he grealy respected the British. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.61.4 (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That part about Britain is derived from a 1961 book called England under Hitler, written by Comer Clarke. The subtitle alone reads like a sensationalist tabloid for ****'s sake: "Revealed at last: The Secret Nazi Plans for the Rape of England!". I had the distinct displeasure of reading it when I tried to find out more information on the planned Occupation of Britain, and it truly is laughable. It reads like a novel rather than a scholarly analysis, is rife with hyperbole and dramatic phrasing used purely for shock value, and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of even the most basic tenets of Nazi ideology and the character of the Third-Reich-era German government. If that weren't enough it also includes some very blatant myths which even then had already been debunked.--Morgan Hauser (talk) 22:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

On further inspection it also seems there was never any Reichskommissariat planned for Great Britain by the Nazi government. After not being able to find ANY literary reference to such an entity anywhere I realized that the only source for this dubious claim was this wikipedia article itself, which means that somebody just made it up out of thin air. I always thought this was pretty strange, since it is directly contradicted by the well-documented intention of the Nazi leadership to retain the monarchy. The RKs were always created so that they could later be annexed directly into Germany, this being the only reason for their entire existence. Hitler relied on Britain's future use as an ally against America, not as a German province and certainly not as a slave colony. Franz Alfred Six was an Einsatzgruppe leader, not the designated head of a civil administration. Walter von Brauchitsch was supposed to lead a military administration on the island while local government would remain in place. Makes you wonder what else in this article is complete fiction. I'm going to start rewriting it from scratch.--Morgan Hauser (talk) 22:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Question

Aren't SS stud-farms a confirmed myth?
[edit] Neuordnung, not neue Ordnung!

German here. Just thought I'd let you know the original German phrase is a compound noun (Kompositum) in one word (Neuordnung), not neue Ordnung (which would be adjective + noun instead, just as the English grammar form of the phrase at hand).

Also, even though its literal translation "New Order" has become popular in English, what the original Nazi Neuordnung stood for was no political system (such as dictatorship, "people's rule", nazism, etc...), a more precise translation would actually be Re-structurizing or Re-structurization as the term in its original Nazi-era usage mostly referred to drawing new borders on the European map under post-war hegemony of Greater Germany. Hence, the term mostly appeared in full as Neuordnung Europas, for which die Neuordnung was merely a short-hand.

SEANYBOY1

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_Weber.html

endakenny

SEANYBOY1 wrote: »

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_Weber.html

Even though he was untruthful about the destruction of the US destroyers by U-Boats, what Roosevelt did was morally justified because, if it had not been for Pearl Harbour and Hitler's subsequent declaration of war on the US, the Nazis would have been able to continue the Final Solution until they eliminated all the Jews of Europe and Russia and the US would be under Nazi and Japanese occupation.

Mahatma coat

Hindsight is an amazing thing init, we can ascribe all sorts of Lofty Moral values to peoples actions, Does it help people sleep better??

Rosevelt hadnt a Clue what was Happening to the Jews in Europe, OK Maybe they were aware of some Persecutions, but The Jews were being persecuted and discriminated against in America at the time, Hell America was an Apartheid Country at the time, So dont allow revisionists to Colour in the Actions of Rosevelt and Churchill as anything but WarMongers eager to maintain the English Speaking hegmony on the World.

Manach

I disagree, in Roosevelt's case. AFAIR, Roosevelt ran a pre-War campaign to keep the US out of the war. He was engaged in funding Chinese resistant to the imperial Japanese's Prosperity Sphere. During the war, he and his adminisatration were clearly against maintaining old-style French/British empires and supported the independence of countries like India.

Mahatma coat

Ah But that article is highlighting the discrepencies between what Rosevelt said Publicly to the American People and what Rosevelt actually did.

Lend Lease was a Breach of Neutrality, Attacking German Submarines was an open act of Hostility, yet people still precfer to peddle the lies that were sold at the time.

endakenny

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Rosevelt hadnt a Clue what was Happening to the Jews in Europe, OK Maybe they were aware of some Persecutions, but The Jews were being persecuted and discriminated against in America at the time, Hell America was an Apartheid Country at the time, So dont allow revisionists to Colour in the Actions of Rosevelt and Churchill as anything but WarMongers eager to maintain the English Speaking hegmony on the World.

Jews in the US have always had the same constitutional rights as other US citizens e.g. voting, gun ownership. As far as I know, there were no attacks on Jews in the US that were condoned by the US government. There never was a Kristallnacht in the US. There was a lot of discrimination and attacks, i.e. lynching, against blacks in the Deep South but no federal or state government in the US sought to exterminate the blacks. The segregationists were eventually defeated by the Supreme Court and US paratroops at Little Rock, Arkansas. Furthermore, Imperial Germany did not persecute Jews. Therefore, US neutrality in World War One is more understandable.

Jeboa Safari

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Ah But that article is highlighting the discrepencies between what Rosevelt said Publicly to the American People and what Rosevelt actually did.

Lend Lease was a Breach of Neutrality, Attacking German Submarines was an open act of Hostility, yet people still precfer to peddle the lies that were sold at the time.

Do you think its a bad thing the US got involved in ww2?

Mahatma coat

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Do you think its a bad thing the US got involved in ww2?

Well I always found it Odd that they lent their support to Stalinist Russia, Many Americans were supporters of Nazism and Fascism, Much fewer were Fans of Comunism.

And before you start bleating on about the Evils perpetrated under Nazism, The Soviets were every bit as Bad, It was a Six of one Half a dozen of the other

Jeboa Safari

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well I always found it Odd that they lent their support to Stalinist Russia, Many Americans were supporters of Nazism and Fascism, Much fewer were Fans of Comunism.

And before you start bleating on about the Evils perpetrated under Nazism, The Soviets were every bit as Bad, It was a Six of one Half a dozen of the other

Indeed, better get rid of one, than have both though, no? Especially since Germany had attacked Britain, made sense to support a them over Nazi Germany.

Dr Strange

Mahatma coat wrote: »

...And before you start bleating on about the Evils perpetrated under Nazism, ...

For a moment I read Elvis there.

/offtopic

Mahatma coat

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Indeed, better get rid of one, than have both though, no? Especially since Germany had attacked Britain, made sense to support a them over Nazi Germany.

But Why That way round, why not support the Germans in the Quest to destroy Stalinism First, then turn on Germany after the defeat of Russia??

To wander into CT Territory for a sec, I would say it was because the way it was done Maximised the Casualties and Weapons used on all sides, therefore Maximising Profits for a small caball of people ultimatley in charge.

Mike 1972

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Rosevelt hadnt a Clue what was Happening to the Jews in Europe,.

From well before 1939 it was obvious to anyone who was paying attention what was happening to the Jews in Germany.