Hitler, Famous Painter
Robert W. F. Clark
half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
the rage in Austria.
No Beer Hall putsch, no Chancellorship, he's just
a famous painter. Who, do you suppose, would
instead have started WWII.
Was Goebbel's in a position to do anything without
Hitler? Would he have had a motive?
How about Seyss-Inquart, Heydrich, or any of that
other gang of swine?
--
Robert W. Clark
rcl...@nyx.cs.du.edu PGP signature available by mail or finger
Alan Smith
>Suppose Hitler had actually known how to paint worth
>half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
>the rage in Austria.
>No Beer Hall putsch, no Chancellorship, he's just
>a famous painter. Who, do you suppose, would
>instead have started WWII.
The commies. Or some other splinter group.
Here's a wierd consequence. In response to the communist's oppressive
policies all the scientists and artists flee to the US, including a
painter named Adolf Hitler. He then settles down and gets a job
as an art teacher, bringing up the next generation of artists.
Probably call themselves the "Hitler youth" too.
(I, for one, think that's funny.)
____Reality Check____
what-if A.H. turned out to have some real talent and thus
abstained from politicks:
> [...] In response to the communist's oppressive policies all the
> scientists and artists flee to the US, including a painter named
> Adolf Hitler. He then settles down and gets a job as an art
> teacher, bringing up the next generation of artists.
Strangely enough, there is a book describing a similar scenario:
_The Iron Dream_, by Norman Spinrad: in 1919 A.H. emigrates to
New York and tries to make a living as an illustrator. Some years
later he turns to literature and writes a pulp-SF novel, _The Lord
of the Swastika_ ("a veiled blueprint for _The Mein Kampf_"),
which subsequently receives a Hugo Award. That _Iron Dream_ is in
itself a reprint of the _TLotS_ with a preface by some geeko
professor who analyzes the book's message. At least that what
people tell me; I have yet to get hold of it.
__Ian
Sheryl Katz
>half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
>the rage in Austria.
>
be worth more than a "Van Gogh."
--
Sherry Katz - slk...@netcom.com
Graham & James
Los Angeles, CA
Joseph A. Admire
: Suppose Hitler had actually known how to paint worth
OK, so Hitler doesn't take over the Nazi Party. We should remember
that the building blocks of Nazi ideology were already there before
Hitler came along an d put them together (in fact, AH wasn't even
the first person to join the NSDAP- he got party card #6).
I suspect that fascism would have come to power in Germany anyway
as a reaction to the failures of the Weimar Republic and fear of
the communists, but it would have been a lot more like the Italian
version (and in a world in which Hitler isn't Fuhrer, Mussolini
pretty much takes the position of leader of world fascism by de-
fault). I suspect many of the same gangsters would have acquired
positions of power in this circumstance, but infighting among them
would have been even more vicious than was the historical case,
without Hitler to referee among them. There may have been coups and
counter-coups as Goering, Himmler, Heydrich, etc., fought it out
for the Chancellorship, and Ernst Rohm (who would, in this timeline,
not have been executed along with the rest of the SA leadership in
the "Night of the Long Knives") would have been one of the dominant
players.
So what happens to the Jews? (I know this question has been thrashed
over before, but bear with me...) Without Hitler's demonic influence
as a unifying thread, I somehow doubt that the rest of the German
fascists would have been able to get their act together sufficiently
to pull the Holocaust. Lots of pogroms, of course, lots of Kristall-
nachts, but I don't see a program of organized genocide operating
in this case. Especially since Mussolini wasn't an anti-Semite;
the Italians might have exerted pressue on Germany to lay off the
Jews in return for their support.
And who starts WWII? Stalin. Without a strong Germany, there is
no real obstacle to Soviet expansionism in Eastern and Central
Europe. In that case, Italy might actually have joined the Allies!
(The Stresa Front, in the early 1930's, was an abortive attempt
to pull Italy into just such an anti-Soviet alliance with Britain
and France).
--
Joe Admire jad...@netcom.com
(adm...@vaxa.cna.org)
(josep...@aol.com) Kibo number 512
Stevie Nicks is _still_ the queen of rock and roll.
Captain Button
book, in the same kind of sick way as S. M. Stirling's Draka series.
The divergent history of WWII is refered to only periphally, but
apparently the "Great Soviet Union" conquers all of Europe, and Asia
too, I think. A lengthy Cold War follows, with the American side in a
worse position than in our world.
There is also a suggestion that Hitler suffered from syphillis. Small
radical political groups exist based on his philosophies.
Perhaps the best joke of the book is a passage about how no one
is sure what real-world ethnic group Hitler based his fictional
"Dominators" on. :->
--
- Captain Button but...@io.com
"A Nice man ... A Good man ... A Very, Very, Sick man" - Dennis Hopper
Allen Middlebro
In a previous article, ars...@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Alan Smith) says:
>In article <1994Apr16.0...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rcl...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Robert W. F. Clark) writes:
>>Suppose Hitler had actually known how to paint worth
>>half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
>>the rage in Austria.
>>No Beer Hall putsch, no Chancellorship, he's just
>>a famous painter. Who, do you suppose, would
>>instead have started WWII.
Why is it that so many people think that history is solid like that?
That if there were no Hitler then there would have to still be a WWII?
Unless you believe in predestiny, there is no reason to assume that if
things had changed in the past, there would still have to be a WWII
because, well, thats just the way it is. This is not just in regard to
this post, but many others that have gone before it. Mildly annoying.
That little tyrade being done with...With the possible exception of
Goering, everyone in the Nazi high command were what they were because of
Hitler. Sans him, there really is no Hydrich or Seiss-Inquart (sp?).
Goering was the successor of Richtofen in his WWI Flying Circus, so he
actually had a name for himself, but the others were just minor bigoted
nobodies without Hitler.
If Hitler had become a famous painter, he would not have developed
some of his more radical ideas, in Mein Kampf, he talks about how he
started to hate the Jew after wandering about Vienna, AFTER being
rejected from the art school. He still would have been a racist, but he
could have let some of his frustrations out in art and his other passion,
architecture, as opposed to on a german nation. He probably would have
become one of those artists and entertainers who holds political views
which everyone pretty much ignores. Mind you, if he got really good, maybe
the Louvre would contain paintings signed A Hitler. Theres some heavy
irony for you.
--
Thanks for your time... "Statistics remind me of a man who
Cheers... drowned in a river with an average
Allen Middlebro' depth of only three feet..."
Doug Quarnstrom
: Alan Smith <ars...@lamar.ColoState.EDU> speculates further
: what-if A.H. turned out to have some real talent and thus
: abstained from politicks:
The odd thing is that I draw and paint, and I found it really frustrating
that once I saw some watercolors done by Hitler, and I thought they
were quite good...
doug
Richard Rostrom
battles, monarchical inheritances), and others which are driven by
long-term trends. These latter are potentially variable in detail, but
not in general. For example, the settlement of the New World by
Europeans, the accompanying population decline of the natives by
disease, are hard not to have happen.
In the 1920-1940 era, dictatorship and militarism flourished in Europe.
Spain twice, Portugal, Austria, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Greece,
Germany, Italy, and Russia all had dictatorships. One or two or three of
these might have been aborted by a minor change (Hitler a good painter,
e.g.), but not all of them. A world of dictatorships is a world prone to
wars. If not here, then there.
Change the outcome of WWI (winner, or length, or casualties) and Europe
is a different place. But Hitler by himself didn't cause the war
(IMHO).
Todd Johnston
In case you missed it, the thrust of this 'what if' is that Hitler gets
accepted as student of art, and so stays out of politics.
--
______________________________________________________________________
| Know atheism - know sanity | Todd Johnston |
| No atheism - no sanity | to...@iglou.com |
|__________________________________|___________________________________|
Gary Pickrell
>
>
>In a previous article, ars...@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Alan Smith) says:
>
>>In article <1994Apr16.0...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rcl...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Robert W. F. Clark) writes:
>>>Suppose Hitler had actually known how to paint worth
>>>half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
>>>the rage in Austria.
>>>No Beer Hall putsch, no Chancellorship, he's just
>>>a famous painter. Who, do you suppose, would
>>>instead have started WWII.
>
> Why is it that so many people think that history is solid like that?
>That if there were no Hitler then there would have to still be a WWII?
>Unless you believe in predestiny, there is no reason to assume that if
>things had changed in the past, there would still have to be a WWII
>because, well, thats just the way it is. This is not just in regard to
>this post, but many others that have gone before it. Mildly annoying.
The reason they think this is because there was STRONG internal
resistance to Hitlers foreign policy. The reoccupation of the Rhinelands
probably wouldnt have happen until much much later. The annexation of
the Austria and Czeckaslavikia where also apposed. Sooner or later there
would have been a rearming of Germany, but the ultra agressive foreign
policy that Hitler had was pretty much his alone. Hitler really wanted a
war. Nobody else was that interested in one. Most Germans had been
soured on war by WWI.
-Gary
Erwin Wodarczak
: half a damn, and for some reason his work became all
: the rage in Austria.
Here's my $.02 worth.
The Nazi Prty already existed when Hitler joined (he was working for the
Reichswehr as an undercover agent, actually). Without Hitler, I don't
think the Nazis would have captured as much popular appeal, although they
would have continued. My guess is that they would have been the
far-right equivalent of the Communists in terms of popular support (i.e.
~50 seats in the Reichstag). However, the Communists and the Nazis
together could have caused enough political instability to force the more
moderate parties into a coalition govt., probably with a centre-right
emphasis. As a symbol of national unity, the monarchy would have been
restored, with Hindenberg acting as regent for one of Wilhelm II's grandsons.
Rearmament and expansion go ahead, but at a more cautious pace, and not
before some sort of rapproachement with Britain. Possible restoration of
some colonies (but would this have been allowed under the League of Nations
mandate system?). Anschluss with Austria for sure. Partition of
Czechoslovakia maybe - depends on how hard Germany is willing to push the
issue. Also, backed by Britain, Germany establishes an alliance with the E.
European countries against the threat (real/imagined) of the USSR.
War might start over the Polish Corridor, unless Poland is already in
Germany's European alliance system. In that case, Germany and Poland
reach an agreement: Germany regains its 1914 borders, and compensates
Poland by backing its annexation of Lithuania (I think Ribbentrop
actually proposed this at one point in our time-line).
Here's the twist: the scene shifts to... the South Tyrol. Mussolini
isn't to happy when Germany takes over Austria, which he hoped to bring
into his sphere of influence. When the German-speaking South Tyroleans
begin agitating for autonomy from Italy, or even union with Germany,
tensions rise. A few "incidents", and war breaks out, with France coming
in on Italy's side against the German threat. Germany proceeds to kick
ass and take names through northern Italy. Mussolini is overthrown, and
Italy sues for peace. Germany annexes South Tyrol and continues to occupy
northern Italy. No action along the Rhine - Germany can't crack the
Maginot Line, and can't attack through the Low Countries if it wants
Britain to stay neutral (if France attacks through Belgium, however, all
bets are off). Besides, the bulk of the German and French forces are
still in Italy.
This leaves Germany and France facing each other across the southern
Alps, of all places. Any military buffs care to take this scenario further?
Cheers,
EW
Tony Buckland
>The odd thing is that I draw and paint, and I found it really frustrating
>that once I saw some watercolors done by Hitler, and I thought they
>were quite good...
And some people were quite impressed by Churchill's efforts ...
RIOT AT PARIS GALLERY
A small riot occurred yesterday at a Paris art gallery, where the
rivalry between the German and British Empires' maverick painters,
Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill, erupted into name-calling and
then worse at their deliberately provocative parallel exhibitions.
Irrelevant blustering about Jews from Hitler were met with lengthy
rumblings drawing on England's history from the glowering cigar-
smoking Briton. Hitler then flew into one of his famous rages,
demolished his assemblage of wallpaper hangings, and bombarded
Churchill with paste buckets and brushes. He had evidently
forgotten Churchill's more substantial sculpture, "The bricklayer,"
from the shelter of which his British opponent replied with literal
brickbats.
"Mein Kampf!" muttered Hitler today from his hospital bed. "His
Gotterdammerung!" retorted Churchill from the British Embassy, where
he has retreated until the legal ramifications of the incident are
worked out.
One shudders to think what the Europe we know, peaceful since
the economic disasters of the 20's and early 30's gave way to the
coexistence of the two revived Imperial Powers, might have been like
if these two had pursued their original military careers with
similar belligerence.
Sheryl Katz
I got it Todd I got it. My response was a joke. Actually, someone
emailed me and pointed out that on these facts the museums would be vying
over a "Schicklegruber." Lighten up.