this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

History

4297 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to History!

This community is dedicated to sharing and discussing fascinating historical facts from all periods and regions.

Rules:

FOLLOW THE CODE OF CONDUCT

NOTE WELL: Personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated. Stick to talking about the historical topic at hand in your comments. Insults and personal attacks will get you an immediate ban for a period of time determined by the moderator who bans you.

  1. Post about history. Ask a question about the past, share a link to an article about something historical, or talk about something related to history that interests you. Please encourage discussion whenever possible.

  2. No memes. No ads. No promos. No spam.

  3. No porn.

  4. We like facts and reliable sources here. Don't spread misinformation or try to change the historical record.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

No. Germany had no direct access to oil, that's what the eastern push was for. Not to mention the fact that Stalin had expansionist plans himself. If Germany didn't invade Russia, Russia would've simply invaded Germany sooner or later.

Sure, there are some things that could've helped Germany hold out longer or given them leverage for peace negotiations, but Germany was doomed the second they became a hostile middle entity in an already divided continent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

100%. Germany's ability to wage blitzkrieg was entirely dependent on oil, which it did not have and could not obtain sufficient amounts from Romania alone. The YouTube channel TikHistory does a great video explaining this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kVo5I0xNRhg&pp=ygUVVGlraGlzdG9yeSBHZXJtYW4gb2ls

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This channel is a major spreader of misinformation. Haven’t watched this video so I can’t comment on its specific content but I would not trust anything produced by them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Tik is a huge source of WWII misinformation? That's funny. I've watched tons of his WWII videos, they are excellent. His day-by-day series on Stalingrad is fantastic. Can you elaborate as to why you believe that? He agrees with the point that oil was a major driver for the invasion of the east. So is that statement misinformation too?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Again, I haven’t watched this video nor done research on its accuracy but I think there is good reason to distrust his analysis.

I did some more research on this channel in response to your comment and it seems the general consensus is that for basic factual events during the war, it’s fairly accurate, but any videos that touch on economics, politics, or religion are wildly off. He believes in a bizarre conspiracy theory that attempts to tie fascism as well as left-wing economic movements into an ancient Christian sect known as Gnosticism. The reasoning and evidence is of a similar quality to those who believe in other secret cabals that influence society, such as the Illuminati, Freemasons, or Jewish conspiracy theories. He’s also made borderline transphobic comments implying that Christian theology is the source of the desire for people to transition their gender presentation which is equally incomprehensible and ahistorical.

For consistently making factually incorrect around these topics despite numerous corrections, he has been listed in the /r/badhistory hall of infamy (yes I know, everyone on Lemmy hates Reddit but it’s the best general overview of his misinformation I could find.) https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/wiki/hall_of_infamy/

If you prefer, here’s also a solid, academically grounded takedown of one of his videos on the religion of fascism, which had many very egregious factual errors. https://youtu.be/XBA6dO6acJc?si=wlbRGamr5QyCCQbX

The response video is in my video a bit too charitable by assuming the mistakes are from ignorance. He’s been corrected numerous times and continues to put out similar videos, and the level of distortion and misinterpretation of his sources seems unlikely to happen by accident.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Thanks for your detailed response. Super weird!! Makes sense that I didn't pick any of that up from his videos on factual events

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Germany was doomed the second they became a hostile middle entity in an already divided continent.

You'd think they would have learned from the last time they tried that...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Agreed. There is no chance they could have won.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

One of my favorite memories from undergrad was when our professor gave us a weekend writing assignment that was something to the effect of "How could the Nazis have won WW2?" Queue 8:45 Monday morning and he spends the whole class period tearing into everyone's paper explaining how bad the ideas were.

Basically, he said that "There's no argument to be made for the Nazis winning WW2 that doesn't rely on changing the meaning of the word(s) 'Nazi,' 'won,' and/or 'WW2.'" Barring a miracle for Hitler & co., the outcome was was decided in 1939.