If the Nazis lose the Battle of France in 1940, do they start the Holocaust earlier?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,091
SoCal
#1
If the Nazis lose the Battle of France in 1940, do they start the Holocaust earlier? In real life, the Holocaust began in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa--when rabid anti-Communism and anti-Semitism (Jews were often conflated with Communism during this time) caused Germans and their local collaborators in the USSR to begin slaughtering Jews in huge numbers. It didn't become official German policy until either late 1941 or early 1942, though. This was also likely when Germans began having doubts about their ability to win the war. In turn, this raises the question of whether the Germans would have started the Holocaust earlier had doubts about their ability to win the war began to emerge earlier. I was thinking of a pattern somewhat similar as in real life--as in, first the Germans engage in mass pogroms against the Jews and then it significantly escalates from there onward.

From a demented Nazi POV, if the Germans were at risk of losing the war, then any attempt to solve the "Jewish problem" through deportation might not stick since a lot of the deported Jews could simply return back to their homelands after the Nazis lose the war. Even if post-WWII Germany would have still been too hostile to Jews for them to return to it, Jews could still return to countries such as Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, et cetera after the war if they will still be alive (and especially so if their communities will still remain largely intact, since this would mean that recreating Jewish life in these countries after the war shouldn't be too hard).

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this?
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,576
#2
Nazi Germany had set itself up for expansion eastwards, east of Poland. The Polish Jews certainly would be many enough as it was, but the whole bid for "Lebensraum" in the east is unlikely to materialize of the the Nazis would get stuck already on the French + British. With and active front against both in the west, Hitler is unlikely to go off on a massive war against the USSR anytime soon.

Likely the Nazis would "aryanize" the Poles they felt like, maintain the rest as subservient labour, and keep the Jews packed into the Polish ghettos for some considerable future. The eradication hardliners in the SS might try something like simply cordoning them off and starving them all to death before demolishing the ghettos (that's pretty much what was done anyway, only rather slowly). Otoh the Jews WERE also used as slave labour, i.e. rather useful after all. And if Nazi Germany is stuck in some kind of of grinding war in France, there won't be all that much new slave labour coming in, so on that basis alone the Polish et al. Jews picked up so far could be granted a kind of "extension".

Another weird possibility, but consistent with the weird world-view of the likes of Himmler, is that the Nazis don't try to genocide the Jews, but instead tries to open channels to the "Elder's of Zion", or similar "Jewish world conspiracy" they actually seem to have believed in, to try to use them as a bargaining chip in negotiations?
 
Likes: Futurist
May 2017
1,013
France
#3
The french army,completely submited to the republican government, had only defensive purposes,rechazing the nazis at the fronteers,to permit to negociate the worse peace.In these conditions,even if the nazis would have lost a lot of men and equipments,it was impossible to study the possiblity for the french army,to liberate the germans,and of course the jews who had no state and no very clear nationalities (germans,poles etc...).The french strategy was founded on the d├ęcisions of the Society of the Nations which had left everybody (the Sarre,Spain,Tchecoslovaquia,Poland ....).
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,091
SoCal
#4
The french army,completely submited to the republican government, had only defensive purposes,rechazing the nazis at the fronteers,to permit to negociate the worse peace.In these conditions,even if the nazis would have lost a lot of men and equipments,it was impossible to study the possiblity for the french army,to liberate the germans,and of course the jews who had no state and no very clear nationalities (germans,poles etc...).The french strategy was founded on the d├ęcisions of the Society of the Nations which had left everybody (the Sarre,Spain,Tchecoslovaquia,Poland ....).
If France's military was incapable of ever actually going on the offensive, then why declare war on behalf of Poland in the first place?
 
May 2017
1,013
France
#5
Because they were sure of the help of the British, who didn t accept the liquidation of Poland.The offensive of the Sarre was a little comedy;there was no intention to enter in Germany.France didn t want a new war so bloody as 14-18;our government wanted just a victory on the table of negociation,as if it was possible to negociate with a man like Hitler....
We can call that the paradoxe of the poodle:it barks in all the directions but it is unable to bite.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,091
SoCal
#6
Because they were sure of the help of the British, who didn t accept the liquidation of Poland.The offensive of the Sarre was a little comedy;there was no intention to enter in Germany.France didn t want a new war so bloody as 14-18;our government wanted just a victory on the table of negociation,as if it was possible to negociate with a man like Hitler....
We can call that the paradoxe of the poodle:it barks in all the directions but it is unable to bite.
Were France's military plus Britain's military combined enough to defeat and conquer Germany, though?
 
May 2017
1,013
France
#7
I think it was impossible.In the military center of Bitche (2d office) a cousin of my granfather,the international geofisician Maurice Martin,major of polytecnics in 1926,was captain in the S.R.When we passed the "happy new year" in Versailles,he told to all of us who were quiet behind the Maginot line:"we will be defeated in one or two months.Only USA can save us of a total disaster".
 
Likes: Futurist

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,713
Sydney
#8
no army could prevail with generals like the French had
complete disgrace , the soldiers in the "B" graded divisions did better
since they were older often married and father with family it was considered that they would fight bravely in defense
but would consider charging on open ground with distaste , better keep that for the foolish younger lads
it was a variation of the German WW1 use of storm-troopers , the most aggressive young and fit soldiers used for the offence
 
Likes: Futurist

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,713
Sydney
#9
The holocaust proper seems to have been decided during confidential two days meeting between Hitler and Himmler in late 1941
before that time mass murder was restricted to the East where it could be passed off under the thin excuse of locals taking revenge

the critical element was the bad new on food supply resulting from the failure of Barbarossa and the opening of conflict with the US
one can presume that Hitler didn't want to engage in the final solution as long as the US could be held to a modicum of neutrality
 
Likes: Futurist