Ugly Ugly Truths

"History is a set of lies agreed upon." - Napoleon Bonaparte

"I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war. Never mind whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not right that matters but victory."- Adolf Hitler

A lie that is often spoken, is that Germany lost the Second World War rather than the Allies won the Second World War, that Adolf Hitler was a bad general and bad war planner.  I believe Germany did not win the Second World War, and certainly, Hitler was evil, but cast your eyes not upon the past, but upon the present to see how well Hitler's aims came true.

The EU, dominated as it is by the post war German economy can be said to be a structure by which the Europeans solidify their links, follow German leadership on monetary policy, and have a new, collective defense, led by Germany and whoever it deigns to see as equals.  Surely, Hitler pursued a policy of war, and a racial war at that, but, first he reconstructed the German economy, reconstructed the military upon modern lines of thought, and, despite his out of step actions regarding Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, Jehovah Witnesses and wiping out of mentally delayed people, by giving the Germans bread, and ideals for a greater Reich, he made every soldier a willing accomplice to the crimes, in exchange for power, and victory.

Nazi Germany wanted to control Europe, make its populace work for it, and to make Germany a greater "Reich"... Hitler wished to create a nation state where Germany was a homeland and the conquered and allied nations made colonies, where the ideology is Nazi, with uber and unter mensch.  How is that not the EU of the present, with Greece and Spain, Turkey and smaller countries seen as being the weak links of Western Culture.  By minimizing the cultural inheritance received by Northern Europe, from the ancient peoples of Southern Europe, there is an abandonment of respect for the contributions to the EU, both politically, and culturally.  From Marathon, to Plataea, from Carthage, to Alesia, to the Catalaunian Fields to Poitiers, Southern Europe became the most vital, powerful, united region on planet earth.  Only in latter times did the modern EU emerge, but without the inheritance, it would almost never have done so.

Did Hitler create his greater Reich?  Perhaps briefly, but no. However,  he did lead Germany into a place that could be seen to be the preparation of Europe for collective defense, a collective economy, and, a collective cultural perception, even a unified continent.

Am I praising Hitler?  No.  I am saying, we do history and fact an injustice by not acknowledging the child birthed by racial nationalism, realpolitik based political unions, and violence.  German Armies, Air forces, and to some extent naval forces, usually won any battle where numbers were equal, between the combatants.  Nazi armies still, often, defeated the enemy when numbers were in favor slightly of the Allies.  It was only when time, money, and Allied lives were applied in gross mass that the tide turned.

I write this because I think people should be aware, that with but a couple changes in decision making, and strategy, the greater Reich in actual fact would exist, not just a weak sister EU.  Nothing in history is up for change, thank you God, but, any outcome different than we had, might well have changed the present, and I say, for the far worse.  Modernity with futuristic AI, global economies, and collective defense, all could be absent, had the forces that shape human history been one iota in any direction different.

Did Hitler win?  No.  But Germany would never have risen how it did, and be where it is now without his hand.  Sometimes because someone was abused or wounded, they rise to become a champion against it.  Germany may have individuals and small groups of racists, but, it has used its economy to promote a more peaceful and less militaristic world.  Hitler would be both proud of the state of Germany now, and violently ill at how leaders of the present and recent past have made enormous steps to change the path forward.

I have written against the concept of inevitability in history.  It is a result of gross ignorance and complacency.  People desire to think they are modern, cosmopolitan, bright, hopeful, but they can only be such for the enormous sacrifices of the past.  Had the UK not led from a bitter resolve to defeat racial nationalists, had the Soviet Union not occupied and absorbed most of the Nazi attacks and crimes, and had the United States not provided arms to all allies, as well as carried out much of the Pacific actions (with a nod to the amazing Australian jungle fighting forces)  the world we live in would not be bright.

I have often used WW2 as the stage to show the destiny followed, rather than alternative endings.  But any large conflict could have effects upon the forward path of human events.  The Napoleonic war, the American Civil War, or the Russian Civil War would all change what we knew as far as our world had other sides won, or even anything less than full victory as had happened.  I was once harangued by someone for being fascinated more by the alternative endings than the actual events.  This wasn't true, but it does show a refusal on their part to see the cost of war and the cost of victory.  Without victory by the victors the world would not be the same.  At all.