Suppose in a classic German victory scenario where Hitler dies somewhere in the late 40s or early 50s. Alternate history scenarios usually go along one of the “Big Five” as his successor (Himmler, Göring, Goebbels, Speer, Bormann) as the members of his inner circle. Normally the only other candidate that shows other than them is a surviving Reinhard Heydrich, but if the Inner Circle destroyed itself by infighting then who could’ve risen to take the spot for Führership?
Dark Horses of Führership
- Thread starter Kaiser of Brazil
- Start date
There are no really strong second tier candidates who are sufficiently ruthless and also charismatic enough to keep the band together.
There is a tendency to overlook the actual political acumen of Hitler in the overall revulsion related to him and the discussion about his lunacy. The POS could work a crowd like nobody’s business, he was also, probably due to his concept of destiny, willing to take utterly insane risks.
There is a tendency to overlook the actual political acumen of Hitler in the overall revulsion related to him and the discussion about his lunacy. The POS could work a crowd like nobody’s business, he was also, probably due to his concept of destiny, willing to take utterly insane risks.
I intended to be more like an extra bloody “Death of Stalin” scenario with assassinations, intrigue, and scandals. But a Civil War is also likely in such scenario.
The problem with a "Death of Stalin" scenario is that the eventually leader came out of the top three-four second level players. Here you have knocked of the Beria/Khrushchev/MalenkovMolotov Nazi equivalents. Once that sort of decapitation of the State happens, especially in a dictatorship*. Without the Fuhrer, and without the heads of the major state organs, especially the SS (Himmler) and Wehrmacht (Goring in his role as Reich Marshall) it turns into a Charlie Foxtrot with every head of a smaller department (and in the Reich the Gauletiers and Reich Commissars) all claiming to be first among equals and the "obvious successor".
*It would be a disaster anywhere, but at least liberal democracies would retain functional legislatures with legal steps in place to ensure a reasonably sane transition, not that it would be a walk in the park if, as an example, the POTUS, V-POTUS, Speaker, Senate President Pro Tem were all killed. The Constitution gives a clear set of steps that would be taken. One of the really good things, in this sort of massive disaster, is a written Constitution that can be used as a tentpole (the reverence that most Americans pay to the concept of the Constitution, even if they can't quote it worth a damn is a good example).
Let me put it this way.
Hitler picked Rosenberg to lead the Party while he was in Landsburg... because he knew Rosenberg was as captivating as wet cardboard,
While he was the Party Ideologue, he was anything but an inspiration speaker or leader. Even Hiter doubted Rosenberg's person leaderships skills.
It is like Stalin's (or even Cromwell) set-up. The system was deliberately designed to prevent an obvious runner-up.
I do think Hitler would be more willing to have a clear heir. Remember, he was able to bring himself to name Karl Dönitz as his successor, which strongly suggests that he was well aware that a clearly designated head of state would be needed when he was gone.
I forget the exact wording, but that's the exact thinking why he chosen him to be caretaker leader during Hitler's sentence - he knew he wouldn't be a threat to him once he was out.
He did name an Heir, at the end of June 1942. It was Hermann Goring. After Goring tried, at the end to seize power as Hiter's "deputy" in late April of 1945 (something that, just a few weeks earlier Hitler had seemed to want) The Corporal went apeshit. In his last Testement Goring was tossed out of the Party and Dönitz was named as the new Heir.
That was because Hitler was still alive when Göring wanted to take the reins of power, not because Hitler hated the idea of a successor (which he did not).
Never said he did. In fact I made clear that had named Goring as the Rightful Heir.
Had Rudolf Hess not taken his flight or failed Hitler, would he be the legal heir as Deputy Führer?
Don't forget Bormann twisting the message - and his delivery of the telegram - to make it look more insidious than it really was. IIRC, Goering went over it with Lammers and a few other officials to word it as carefully as possible and the Brown Eminence still got what he wanted out of it.
Per Hitler's Reichstag declaration on 1 September 1939, his heir was Göring. This was affirmed by by a decree in 1941. If something happened to Hitler and Göring, Hess would be the next in line. His Deputy Führer title didn't make him the equivalent of a Vice President, it just referred to Party matters (though his office also had the authority to vet civil service apppointments and government legislation). Worth noting is that the Gauleiters continued to regard themselves as being responsible only to Hitler (even Bormann, a man far cannier and brutal than Hess, wasn't able to get them all to dance to his tune, though he was successful at replacing some who crossed him).
So...if Hess doesn't fly to Britain, Germany wins and then Hitler and Göring die...then theoretically Hess is the heir. However, Hess is a weirdo who's bad at power politics, annoys the Party elite and who has spent his career just acting as a mouthpiece. He could never be Führer (in the sense of being the actual ruler and not just having a title), only a stooge for someone else, unless he just gets shot or locked up.
As for what happened to Göring in 1945, Resurgam is correct. Göring worded his telegram very carefully because he was rightly nervous about Bormann pouncing on it. And that's what happened. Hitler at first reacted with indifference to the telegram, despite Bormann trying to present it in the worst light. But then he learned that Göring had sent telegrams to other Nazi officials, in which he said that Hitler's testament had been invoked. Apparently that's what threw Hitler into the rage we see in Downfall (the movie simplifies things a bit, which is fair), with ample encouragement from Bormann and Goebbels.
Then Hitler sent a telegram to Göring accusing him of treason and demanded that he resign from all his offices. However, then Bormann ordered the SS to arrest Göring. Contrary to Downfall, Hitler didn't order Göring to be shot if he didn't survive the Battle of Berlin.
Rosenberg, as already mentioned by others, is irrelevant. If Hitler and the inner circle all die off, you've...got a bunch of Nazi Gauleiters (e.g. Erich Koch and Arthur Greiser and Karl Kaufmann), Higher SS and Police Leaders (HSSPF - basically Himmler's local deputies, very underexplored figures in fiction and AH even though many of them played a pivotal role in Nazi atrocities. Examples would be Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski and Friedrich Jeckeln), Wehrmacht officers, Reichsleiters (well, the main ones are dead, but yeah) etc. Things get...bloody and chaotic.
Nazi Germany has no mechanisms to enact a peaceful transfer of power in such a situation (hell, I doubt you'd even get one if the inner circle hasn't died. Hitler was what kept this highly toxic, murderous gang together). The Nazi Party doesn't even have a Politburo or Central Committee equivalent. Hell, the OTL Reich Cabinet under Hitler had its last meeting in 1938. Yes, Hitler never convened the cabinet during the war.
Last edited:
I wonder what Goering would have done in the final month of the war if Hitler was never convinced by Bormann that Goering was engaging in treason and he actually became the official leader of Nazi Germany after Hitler’s suicide.
Last edited:
Heinrich Müller has the gestapo. In case of such crisis where Hitler is dead and so is the top 5 candidates he is in prime position to act quickly and assume power if he so wishes. He seems to have been the same or similar breed of a man to Heydrich who didn’t give a damn about ideology but executed the tasks set before him with fanatical vigor. He became an anti communist because he witnessed executions of hostages by communists in Bavaria but did not have a problem executing people or hostages or sending them to concentration camps. He also seemed to have hated Hitler, describing him as a failed painter, draft dodger and illegal immigrant. Yet he followed all orders blindly and was instrumental in the Holocaust.
Which may also motivate him to seize power, I doubt he’d want the truth coming out Nazi victory or not.
Keitel is also there but his power depends on how long the war went on. There’s of course be the Prussian clique in the military, the “Vons” who hate Nazis because they’re not Prussian who may act to seize power.
Decapitation of leadership in such a fashion would probably be a planed act by an opposition group which would lead to civil war. In a Nazi victory scenario it is highly unlikely that general populace opposes Nazis or ignores the murders of political leadership that brought them victory in a global war.
Which may also motivate him to seize power, I doubt he’d want the truth coming out Nazi victory or not.
Keitel is also there but his power depends on how long the war went on. There’s of course be the Prussian clique in the military, the “Vons” who hate Nazis because they’re not Prussian who may act to seize power.
Decapitation of leadership in such a fashion would probably be a planed act by an opposition group which would lead to civil war. In a Nazi victory scenario it is highly unlikely that general populace opposes Nazis or ignores the murders of political leadership that brought them victory in a global war.