Note: You can change font size, font face, and turn on dark mode by clicking the "A" icon tab in the Story Info Box.
You can temporarily switch back to a Classic Literotica® experience during our ongoing public Beta testing. Please consider leaving feedback on issues you experience or suggest improvements.
Click hereJoan pointed out that there are sufficient records of Hitler's involvement in the T4 mass killings of disabled people to get Hitler hanging from with an executioner's noose around his neck. Her post doctoral research, provisionally entitled "Hitler's Humanists holocausts" will deal with that period as the flowering of humanism and its adoption by Hitler in the form of eugenics and racist humanist assumptions found in Darwin himself.
She speculated on calling it "The Most Scientific Society", since this was the claim that Hitler himself made for the society he created. But she hasn't yet made a full decision. She sees the Holocaust as a process from T4 to total annihilation of the Jews.
As the smoking gun about Hitler's involvement in the Holocaust, she cites his signature authorising the T4 eugenic killing of thousands of "useless feeders". This, she believes, is as near as we can get to Hitler authorising the Holocaust. She asserts that T4 was a small-scale version of the death camps. She has shown that T4 personnel were involved in all stages of the Holocaust.
Evidence Of Hitler's Culpability
Uri still wanted physical evidence of Hitler's knowledge and approval of the Holocaust. Joan countered with Hitler's saying about the massacre of Jews in his Table Talk book.
Uri said that Table Talk, even if it was genuinely what Hitler said, wasn't sufficient evidence. Hitler was only saying that there is no logical alternative to Jewish genocide if they didn't emigrate.
He wanted proof positive of Hitler's complicity and that meant that the document was not capable of any alternative explanation. This would end once and for all the Holocaust deniers saying "Hitler didn't know" or even worse the contradictory "Hitler tried to stop it".
The "Stalin Takes Over 1930s Germany" Paper
After 2 hours of discussion we all reassembled in the lecture room. We each presented our paper to the Professor. The paper the other group submitted was a schematic. They displayed it on the big lecture room screen and on our laptops.
It read "Stalin Taking Over Germany Assertions
(1) German democracy was weak (maybe because of Proportional Representation).
(2) Possible because Communists and Nazis fought openly on the streets with people murdered and combined had more votes than centrists.
(3) Communists wrongly opposed centrists as "social fascists" so inadvertently helped the real fascist Hitler to power.
(4) Communists had taken control of Munich, albeit briefly and comically.
(5) Communist International was strong especially among workers and intellectuals and gay men (Berlin was vice capital of Europe)
(6) Stalin controlled KPD (German communist party) and so de facto would have ruled Germany.
(7) Once KPD was in power they could follow Hitler's path to totalitarian power. (e.g. by burning the Reichstag building and blaming the Right parties and just right of centre parties) and getting "temporary" Emergency Powers.
(8) There was extensive internal repression under Stalin (e.g. the Holomodor as a genocide and gulag camps as a cultureside) similar to Hitler's
(9) Stalin, after WW2, took East German resources to build up his power in Russia. Europe would have been used mainly to supply and aid Stalin's control in Russia
(10) Germany is in position to wage a European war (if political control of other countries is not possible). Britain may surrender politically to communism. Even with Churchill Britain would not be able to respond to a threat of war. (No Poland War, No WW2)
(11) Russia has Einstein and therefore develops nuclear weapons before anyone else. American doesn't want to get involved in Europe (Strong desire for Neutrality in USA)
(12) Stalin able to attack the United States and USA unable to respond. America becomes a puppet state.
(13) In later life Stalin wanted to kill Jews (possible more extensive Holocaust)
Group A's Paper
Our paper was entitled " "What would a modern historian do when living in Hitler's Germany?"
We concentrated on the historian telling us what happened (the whos, whys, whens, whats, wheres and who was affected).
The modern historian in Hitler's time must be in a position to be seen as authoritative. The historian must have (preferably first hand) access to significant people, organisations, events, issues and movements. The historian must also reference photographs, illustrations, cartoons, maps and atlases, news and popular press articles and interviews that we have today.
The historian would enable us to know what Hitler's officials were saying or doing, and how many were involved in significant Holocaust events, movements or issues, specifically reports which Hitler saw and his reactions to them? Ideally the historian could take the actual documents or record any significant conversations.
We ended with a group discussion of both papers. But this planted a seed in Uri's mind. He was determined to explore if he could plant a modern historian in Hitler's time.
In Part 2, Uri explores the many theories of time travel with Massachusetts Institute of Technology experts to find one that has the best chance of success.
- COMMENTS
LovingF5 months agoAuthorThank you for the comment. which I agree.
Einstein was left leaning and (arguably) supportive of the USSR in principle. He was barred from the Manhattan project because of his left leaning views and Manhattan people were forbidden to talk to him.
It is feasible that Einstein would have encouraged Stalin to build a bomb in a Europe v USA war. After all the USA might bomb his (fictitiously Stalin controlled) country.
In 1938, three chemists working in a laboratory in Berlin made a discovery that would alter the course of history: they split the uranium atom. The energy released when this splitting, or fission, occurs is tremendous--enough to power a bomb.
But before such a weapon could be built, numerous technical problems had to be overcome.
When Einstein learned that the Germans might succeed in solving these problems, he wrote to President Franklin Roosevelt with his concerns. Einstein's 1939 letter helped initiate the U.S. effort to build an atomic bomb, but work proceeded slowly at first.
Two other findings in 1940 and 1941 demonstrated conclusively that the bomb was feasible and made building the bomb a top priority for the United States: the determination of the "critical mass" of uranium needed and the confirmation that plutonium could undergo fission and be used in a bomb. In December 1941, the government launched the Manhattan Project, the scientific and military undertaking to develop the bomb.
ReadyOne5 months agoJust for the record, Einstein had nothing technical to do with the bomb. He contributed zip to the technical design, construction, or testing.
.
Several people realized the atomic bomb potential and efforts in Germany. They felt the greatest problem was convincing the allies of the danger and getting Roosevelt to act. They concluded that Einstein's reputation was the best path to Roosevelt's attention.
.
They prevailed on Einstein to write the famous letter that gave the idea of it being possible it's greatest credibility. In short, Einstein's only direct contribution was backing the idea of danger with his reputation as the great scientist of the day.
.
He got Roosevelt to check out the idea with a blue ribbon committee, which persuaded the President action was required. All the ideas and all the work were by other people.
.
Control of Einstein by the Russians would have made no difference (beyond his stopping his missive).
