The Wages of Destruction (Adam Tooze) - The Nazi Economy

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
  • The Wages of Destruction (Adam Tooze) - The Nazi Economy
    Part of Reanalysed Week on WW2TV
    More Third Reich content on WW2TV
    • Third Reich and German...
    If you liked this video please consider leaving us a thank you donation. To the right of the up and down thumbs and share button is the heart shaped Thanks button - it helps us to keep on producing content.
    Professor Adam Tooze is a British historian who is a Professor at Columbia University and Director of the European Institute. From a start in modern German history with a special focus on the history of economics and economic history his interests have widened to take in a range of themes in political, intellectual and military history, across a canvas stretching from Europe across the Atlantic.
    adamtooze.com/
    In today's show we look at Germany's wartime economy as explored by Adam's in his award winning book The Wages of Destruction. Our talking points will include the fact that after the Germans had failed to defeat Great Britain in 1940, the economic logic of the war drove them to an invasion of the Soviet Union. Hitler was constrained do so in 1941 to obtain the natural resources necessary to challenge two economic superpowers: the United States and the British Empire. That sealed the fate of the Third Reich because it was resource constraints that made victory against the Soviet Union impossible, especially when it received supplies from the Americans and the British to supplement the resources that remained under Soviet control. We will also talk about Strategic bombing, Albert Speer and also German's pre-WWII rearmament.
    The Rise of the Third Reich - Katja Hoyer • The Rise of the Third ...
    Buy the book:
    USA bookshop.org/a...
    UK uk.bookshop.or...
    Other WW2TV Shows that you may enjoy:
    SS Leadership in Hitler's War - Dr Philip Blood • SS Leadership in Hitle...
    The Third Reich 's Elite Schools - The Nazi Napolas • The Third Reich 's Eli...
    Drunk on Genocide: Alcohol and Mass Murder in Nazi Germany • Drunk on Genocide: Alc...
    Burying the Dead from the Battle of the Bulge • Burying the Dead from ...
    You can become a UA-cam Member and support us here / @ww2tv
    You can become a Patron here / ww2tv
    Please click subscribe for updates
    Social Media links -
    / ww2tv
    / ww2tv
    / ww2tv
    WW2TV Bookshop - where you can purchase copies of books featured in my UA-cam shows. Any book listed here comes with the personal recommendation of Paul Woodadge, the host of WW2TV. For full disclosure, if you do buy a book through a link from this page WW2TV will earn a commission.
    UK - uk.bookshop.or...
    USA - bookshop.org/s...

КОМЕНТАРІ • 172

  • @davidlavigne207
    @davidlavigne207 2 роки тому +66

    I never would have imagined that a discussion of economics lasting an hour and a half would have been so captivating. So many don't even think about it as being such an essential part of understanding war on a national level. Professor Tooze is a fine example of what the English educational system can produce. I noticed that he is a good listener as well. Thank you both for a great sort of lecture.

    • @romanpendzich1781
      @romanpendzich1781 5 місяців тому +1

      That’s a direct result of American doctrine, which was to use materiel to save lives.

    • @davidlavigne207
      @davidlavigne207 5 місяців тому

      @@romanpendzich1781 Very true Sir. I think the British held similar views, both doctrines having come from the revulsion over the casualties suffered in the Great War. Why send a man when you can send a bomb or a bullet and all that. Thanks for the kind reply.

    • @JHimminy
      @JHimminy 8 годин тому

      @@romanpendzich1781you mean substituting civilian lives for military ones. The allies deliberately targeted civilians, en mass. No one cared then, no one cares now. Your moral lessons are dubious.

  • @Ebergerud
    @Ebergerud 2 роки тому +22

    I'm impressed. Adam Tooze is about as good as it gets. His books on the German War Economy of WWII and the Euro-American economy of WWI-Post WWI is dynamite. He's written about the 2008 Meltdown - very well no doubt. Hats off.

  • @jimmylemessurier332
    @jimmylemessurier332 Рік тому +26

    Adam Tooze is a brilliant guest. I recommend his book ‘The Deluge’ which looks into the economic scene among the great powers following WW1. In many ways it sets the scene for the conditions that WW2 came out of, but looked at with special emphasis on economics, debt and funding. Truly fascinating book, and I’m not normally that interested in economics as a subject.

  • @lllordllloyd
    @lllordllloyd Рік тому +15

    Tooze's book is a must-read, even if you prefer military history, Wages illuminates so many events that occurred at the front lines. Tooze explodes many enduring myths about Hitler's "economic miracle", the impact of bombing, and the death camps.

    • @moosesandmeese969
      @moosesandmeese969 Місяць тому +1

      Military history is always limited in what it can really explain. Books like Wages focusing on the economic conditions before and during the Nazi reign do much more to explain the rationale behind their actions.

  • @kevingetz9262
    @kevingetz9262 Рік тому +16

    I think what's most interesting about the intro regarding Germany and its agriculture is that you see the transition in the States during the 1920s and 30s from horse drawn implements to tractor drawn. One of the biggest reasons I loved the series All Creatures Great and Small - Britain is in that transition period. Most have marveled at blitzkrieg and how mobile the Germany army was, and yet their society and agriculture wasn't necessarily that mobile.

    • @keithplymale2374
      @keithplymale2374 7 місяців тому +1

      The perception of mobility comes from the propaganda films the German agency responsible for that make of the Panzer and Motorized formations while not filming the mass of the army that walked to war just like there forebears did in 1914. In most infantry divisions the artillery and engineers might be motorized but the majority were horse drawn again just like in 1914.

    • @KissatenYoba
      @KissatenYoba 4 місяці тому

      @@keithplymale2374 German army mobility has pretty much died with their 2 million horses in 1942

  • @metalboostable
    @metalboostable 5 місяців тому +3

    The Assessment depends on your focus. Chamberlain rearmed the navy and air defence but the Army was not developped in Britain since it is an island. France and Germany relied on armies.

  • @lewistrott417
    @lewistrott417 Рік тому +7

    Glad to hear Gettysburg mentioned on WW2TV!!! The actual ground of all these battles, regardless of war, are classrooms in themselves. Brilliant episode. I did not know about his book previously, but I do now and will be buying it.

  • @stevenkane6496
    @stevenkane6496 3 роки тому +16

    ‘Freedoms Forge: How American Business Produced Victory in WW2’ by Arthur Herman is an excellent read on the other side of the economic coin.

  • @morganhale3434
    @morganhale3434 2 роки тому +8

    My mother was born in West Texas in 1940 and they had only got electricity, the railroad, and indoor plumbing in the 1920's because of the Permian Basin oil fields, and they considered themselves behind the times in America. Wow! Another great show.

  • @Bochi42
    @Bochi42 Рік тому +7

    I went back and watched this one again after some others on the 8th Air Force amd Bomber Command. And It's helping me piece everything together to form a more holistic understanding of WW2. This is a good one to return to periodically I think. I've got it saved on my list of best WW2 videos.

  • @dougnockles29
    @dougnockles29 11 місяців тому +11

    Tooze has written one of the best works on WWII I've ever read. Thank you sir!

  • @Historianphil
    @Historianphil 3 роки тому +29

    This was a superb talk, perfect for anyone wishing to understand the economics underpinning Hitler’s war.

  • @basslaats8889
    @basslaats8889 3 роки тому +12

    I need to listen it a second time, because there was too much info to hear for one go. Thanks to this very fascinating talk.

    • @jboudon11
      @jboudon11 2 роки тому

      tooze is always dense enough to merit multiple reads/listens. the goat.

  • @Emchisti
    @Emchisti 3 роки тому +8

    This is easily the best one yet. Engaging, informative and bloody fascinating. Really enjoyed this.

  • @deanmurphy5735
    @deanmurphy5735 3 роки тому +11

    Excellent episode Paul. This is a must read book of any student of WW2.

  • @scottgrimwood8868
    @scottgrimwood8868 3 роки тому +11

    An excellent presentation on the Nazi Germany economy. This really gives a great insight into the economic realities facing the Nazis.

    • @robertmatch6550
      @robertmatch6550 7 місяців тому

      Let's not forget all the free labor the Nazi economy got out of their minorities and all the gold they got out of their teeth.

  • @morganhale3434
    @morganhale3434 2 роки тому +6

    The main German complaint about the unprofessionalism of the US Army in WWII and to a lesser extent the British Commonwealth forces was their profligate and wasteful use of artillery!

  • @martinjohnson5498
    @martinjohnson5498 10 місяців тому +4

    I have long thought that notwithstanding Stalin’s understandable impatience, the Combined Bomber Offensive, the Battle of the Atlantic, and the building threat of an invasion of France constituted a real “Second Front” in terms of diversion of German resources of all kinds.

  • @KG-1
    @KG-1 3 роки тому +13

    Very good.
    Had the book on my list, now I'm buying it. The clear picture of Germany's mixed nature was very interesting - can't help making comparisons to Imperial Japan. Had read in Snow and Steel on the Bulge how few Germans could drive which mixed with low training from no fuel did not mix well with driving some of the more unreliable late war tanks - especially the Panther.
    I'm left with the take away what if for 1943: Americans and British BOTH focus on the Ruhr hitting over and over round the clock, would have to eventually exhaust the Flak and fighter effort, not to mention giving Germans no time to clean-up or do repairs.
    Had read somewhere that after the war it was found that what would have really shut the Germans down cold would have been targeting and destroying their electrical power generation.
    Hats off to getting such a great set of authors in the space of a week.

    • @uic505050
      @uic505050 2 роки тому +2

      The problem with the Ruhr option was the casualties. It was known as 'the happy valley', as sarcastic phrase due to all the FLAK and fighters concentrated to defend it. It cost the RAF more bomber losses than going after Berlin, which forced them to abandon it as the main target in early 1943.

  • @wp6900
    @wp6900 2 роки тому +5

    Absolutely amazing, bought the book immediately after

  • @MrGrinch23
    @MrGrinch23 2 роки тому +5

    Gonna be reading this for my first grad school class. So grateful for this episode. I’m now subscribed!

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +1

      Thank you for subscribing

  • @danielryan9126
    @danielryan9126 2 роки тому +5

    Terrific episode. Love Adan Tooze insight

  • @black__bread
    @black__bread 2 роки тому +5

    Fantastic presentation and discussion, because of course it is it's Adam Tooze. It also exemplifies the fantastic range of presenters this channel gets. Bravo!

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +2

      Yep, I was a bit star struck talking to Adam

  • @Leningrad_Underground
    @Leningrad_Underground 8 місяців тому +4

    I remember reading some time ago. 30 odd years. That "Sickle Stroke" the invasion of France and the low countries. Would not have been feasible without the aquisition of the Chez tanks seized in the occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939..

    • @johnweerasinghe4139
      @johnweerasinghe4139 4 місяці тому

      Why? It wasn't the tanks that enabled the cut through the Ardennes.
      It was the daring and the French inability to fight.
      You switch the French with the Soviets and the Nazis even though they might have won given the relative small size of their country would have bled so bad they would have been too weak to do anymore campaigns.

  • @leesander1802
    @leesander1802 3 роки тому +5

    The audio book is now available on Audible and it is great

  • @TrzeciaWspolnota
    @TrzeciaWspolnota Місяць тому

    Great discussion. Thank you Woody for what you are doing for us.

  • @michaelcoe9824
    @michaelcoe9824 Рік тому +2

    Some of the clearest research and explanation in many a year.

  • @jrdj87
    @jrdj87 3 роки тому +4

    Superb talk - completely agree with insights on strategic bombing.

  • @markaxworthy2508
    @markaxworthy2508 8 місяців тому +2

    The Speer "economic miracle" in 1944 just brought Germany up to British levels of production, even though the German Reich had nearly twice the population of the metropolitan UK. For example, the UK and Germany produced almost the same weight of airframes and number of aeroengines in1944.

    • @chrisanderson5317
      @chrisanderson5317 2 місяці тому

      Britain produced over 160,000 aircraft whereas Germany produce less than 140,000.

  • @joesmith323
    @joesmith323 3 роки тому +11

    Around January 1942 Roosevelt said America would build 60,000 airplanes that year. A reporter asked Bill Knudsen if he could build 60,000 airplanes. Knudsen's reply was: "I can't but the American people can."

    • @johnburns4017
      @johnburns4017 2 роки тому

      Roosevelt said that he would make 50,000 planes per year in May 1940. This prompted Hitler to invade the USSR to gain resources to built planes for the coming air war.

  • @katiecannon8186
    @katiecannon8186 8 місяців тому +1

    You might be interested in getting someone on who has researched how America managed its WWII economy.
    I’d suggest Rohan Grey or Nathan Tankus.
    Keep in mind, that Keynes wasn’t known in the U.S. yet.
    So, it was American “institutionalists” (broadly defined) that figured out how to “pay for the war”.

  • @ZebMan-vo5wi
    @ZebMan-vo5wi 2 роки тому +2

    Very insightful conversation.... Tooze is brilliant to read and listen to. Thanks for uploading 👍🏻

  • @timbrown1481
    @timbrown1481 16 днів тому

    Bringing on Adam to discuss the economics of war or Dr. Blood to talk about organizational management in terms of the SS leadership for me, is a facet of the war I had never given thought too until know. Thanks Adam, great presentation. Thank you Woody for putting on guests to talk about really interesting obscure topics and again for me, these important topics & discussions help me better understand the depth and breadth of the war.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  16 днів тому

      You're welcome Tim

  • @gagamba9198
    @gagamba9198 Рік тому +2

    Terrific conversation. Economics, production, and logistics are my favourite subjects. Tooze delivers. Another very good book is _The Vampire Economy_ by Gunter Reimann.
    Re UK and US bombing discussed from about @49:50, here's a quote about how German women comforted each other with gallows humour from Marta Hillers's diary _A Woman in Berlin: Eight Weeks in the Conquered City_ : 'Lieber ein Russki aufm Bauch als ein Ami aufm Kopp.' ( _'Better to have a Russian on your belly than an American on your head.'_ )
    The American on one's head is the bomber. If one grasps the horror of what the Russian was doing, the author's experience is bombers were even more horrifying.

  • @Nitroaereus
    @Nitroaereus 2 роки тому +3

    Great show! Next time you have Prof. Tooze on, you should ask him about his maternal grandfather. Seems that he was doing a lot interesting stuff around the time of the war.

  • @2frogland
    @2frogland 8 місяців тому +1

    shorts may be vital for growth and for a quick treat but the longer more in depth discussions are certainly the main course

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  8 місяців тому +1

      Of course

  • @alanbrener2718
    @alanbrener2718 2 роки тому +2

    Another superb presentation. Adam Tooze is excellent!

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +1

      Thank you kindly!

  • @KPW2137
    @KPW2137 8 місяців тому +1

    It's too bad I've discovered this channel two years after this stream as I would have a lot of questions that were not mentioned in this video.
    Don't get me wrong, it's great - but there's so much more one can discuss!
    One of such topics would be how the German economy was organized.
    You see, I've seen people claiming it was all privatised, as well as people calling it socialist. Then, there were private companies but also four year plans - so it would be great to see it sorted out for good.

  • @julianshepherd2038
    @julianshepherd2038 8 місяців тому +1

    The Blitz started in 1916 with the Zeppelin raids.
    People were sick of it and ran out of empathy.

  • @asafb1984
    @asafb1984 Рік тому +3

    Great video. Regarding data driven research, i think that this is the right way to better understand any long war. I hope that raw data will be available to the public. Maybe we need international project for the gathering of data.

  • @willarth9186
    @willarth9186 Рік тому +1

    Fantastic guest and subject

  • @michaelmoran3946
    @michaelmoran3946 Рік тому +1

    I read this book last year. A little heavy going, but worth the effort. The only quibble would be that his view of US economic policies is too mechanistic. The US economy and economic policy was always fragmented and chaotic with only minimal central direction until WW2.

  • @genekelly8467
    @genekelly8467 2 роки тому +1

    Interesting that German war production didn't move to round the clock plant operation until1943. Tooze also mentions the destructive nature of the Luftwaffe aircraft procurement program (too many types, emphasis on dive bombing capability. The main weakness was fuel-the synthetic fuel program was extremely expensive, and did not yield good fuel (it separated into two immiscible compounds in the cold of the Russian winters.

  • @ForelliBoy
    @ForelliBoy 2 роки тому +1

    A War of Washers and Rivets is a perfect book title

  • @CalmNDN
    @CalmNDN Рік тому +1

    im a student, and currently writing a paper on the third reich & how they prepared economically for war. I still find it odd how Hermann Goring & albert speer were given crucial roles in helping the wehrwitschaft

  • @mitchrichards1532
    @mitchrichards1532 Рік тому +2

    Around 22:45 about "blitzkrieg" is particularly interesting and Dr. Tooze misses the point of departure between the French Army and German Army to a very large extent. The term in Military and Military History vernacular is "Revolution in Military Affairs". The German military had undergone a true revolution and the cutting edge of their tactical application of their forces embodied it. The British and French forces were too far behind in their own evolution to have an answer for it. Technologically speaking the two sides were much closer to equal, but on the topics of tactical doctrine, leadership doctrine, formations/TOE, and having trained to proficiency in them, the Germans were on a much higher level, and this is where the mismatch was created and exploited. 80% of the German Army was legacy forces (Infantry, horse drawn equipment) but still trained in the same tactical doctrine, leadership doctrine, same standards, and able contribute to the success of the armored and mobile formations efforts. Those forces matched with hard hitting, semi-autonomous, mobile formations that were integrated into a tactical radio net that linked them in real time with close air support and artillery was something the French were completely unprepared for. It was like 2 boxers of roughly equal size and strength, but one thinks and moves twice as fast as the other.

    • @neilritson7445
      @neilritson7445 Рік тому

      A paper produced in the British Academy of Mgt conference in Birmingham in c 1996 about the spread of Business Schools and MBAs commented on their lack in Germany and then went on to show that the military training of WW2 officers included two years as 'grunts' in the line. These nascent officers then knew what the men could do and the men knew that they knew. Often they led from the front. So, there is a rather hidden element to the efficacy - esprit de corps.

    • @davidpryle3935
      @davidpryle3935 11 місяців тому

      A good supply of Amphetamine helped as well, I believe.

  • @lynndonharnell422
    @lynndonharnell422 2 роки тому +2

    The BIS (Bank of International Settlements) was set up post WW1 in order to manage German reparations. The machinations of this bank in the interwar (and WW2) period is perhaps worth delving into. BTW, it still exists today for some inexplicable reasons.

  • @GeorgiosMichalopoulos
    @GeorgiosMichalopoulos 2 роки тому +1

    Absolutely amazing, thank you both for this!

  • @walterm140
    @walterm140 2 роки тому

    Brilliant discussion. Great point by Paul to ask about Hitler and the USA.

  • @KieranGarland
    @KieranGarland 3 роки тому +3

    Do you have a video giving an overview of WWII? It's been a long while since I studied it and I was wondering if you had a kind of re-entry level vid covering the major events/progression. Great talk btw, thanks.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  3 роки тому +3

      No I've not really thought about doing that, and I'm not sure how I would even set about that. What to include, what not to include?

  • @terminusest5902
    @terminusest5902 2 роки тому +5

    Japan and Germany both made the major mistake of failing to train pilots and aircrew. Possibly because they were overconfident with early victories. While the allies developed massive training programs to supply more pilots than they would be loosing. By late 1944 Germany and Japan also had fuel shortages needed to train new pilots. Fuel finally became the main target for allied bombing. By late 1944 the Japanese Navy was using carriers to draw the US fleet away from the Philippines. Where they carriers were destroyed. The Navy no longer had pilots to man their carriers. They were able to provide very basic flying skills for Kamikaze attacks. US submarines were sinking the ships taking oil to Japan. Capturing Luzon, Iwo Jima and Okinawa cut Japan of from oil supplies as US aircraft isolated 944.Japan itself. The Germans were still building more aircraft than they had pilots in 18. New pilots had to go strait into heavy combat against US bombers. It was even getting difficult to find safe places to train pilots in late 1944 due to the widespread use of allied fighters over Europe. Finally the allies found the centre of balance for Germany. That was the oil production industry. Including the Romanian oilfield's and synthetic oil production. That bombing greatly restricted German military operations. A major part of Germanies fuel was wasted in the Battle for the Bulge. Many of Germanies best tanks had to be abandoned when they ran out of fuel. The ball baring plant attacks came very close to being a disaster for Germany. But the allies stopped bombing just short of destroying Germanies ball bearing production. And Sweden was also able to provide extra ball bearings. The bomber campaign destroyed the German air force. And Germany failed to train enough replacements. Allowing relative air dominance for the allies over Europe. Further making German fuel supplies more vulnerable. Allied pilots were free to attack the Germanys trains in daylight hours. Fuel was Germanies vulnerable oil industry. And failing to train enough pilots early in the war when fuel was available, led to the later disaster in the air. During the Cold War the US realized that Soviet oil supply lines in Eastern Europe were extremely vulnerable and could be stopped by bombing just a few locations.

    • @asafb1984
      @asafb1984 Рік тому +1

      Both Japan and Germany gambled on short war, so no need to plan for long war. Didn't work very well for them.

  • @Piper44LMF
    @Piper44LMF 2 роки тому +1

    I enjoyed this presentation a great deal when of the many layers to consider. Yet another book to read

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому

      Glad you enjoyed it!

  • @jimplummer4879
    @jimplummer4879 9 місяців тому

    My grandfather was a pharmacist during the day and a night watchman at night at a shipyard. You were either all in or not.

  • @katiecannon8186
    @katiecannon8186 8 місяців тому

    Understanding how America spent like crazy while managing inflation during WWII is a lesson on what inflation is & the need to use a wide variety of inflation management tools.
    Really suggest getting either Rohan Grey or Nathan Tankus on to talk more about this.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  8 місяців тому

      Did you watch our show Mark R Wilson? ua-cam.com/users/livegdbjVMxdnpQ?si=4pRq3qdEYk_58kRL

  • @andrewsoboeiro6979
    @andrewsoboeiro6979 Рік тому +2

    I'd be interested to know what Tooze thinks of the work of Anand Toprani, who documents Germany's chronic oil crises in World War II. Toprani argues that Germany effectively lost the war in July 1940, because their military was wholly dependent on oil and they had no way of producing, purchasing, &/or stealing anywhere near as much oil as they'd need over the long run. Conquering Poland, Norway, France, & the Low Countries had only made the problem worse, as those territories consumed lots of oil but consumed little. As a result, Germany had no way of winning a long war of attrition, so once it became clear in July of 1940 that Britain and the other allies would fight on, German defeat was ensured.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      He's referenced in the bibliography of Tooze's book I seem to recall

    • @andrewsoboeiro6979
      @andrewsoboeiro6979 Рік тому

      @@WW2TV in Wages of Destruction?

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      I think so

  • @johnsowerby7182
    @johnsowerby7182 7 місяців тому

    Truly excellent presentation!

  • @BV-fr8bf
    @BV-fr8bf 2 роки тому +3

    "There was no shift in American consumption." Not correct. Neither was there an increase in civilian output either with a significant increase in working population. Gasoline & Tires were absolutely ration card items, civilian car manufacturing dropped literally zero, synthetic bike tires for bikes were garbage. My father was 11 when the war broke out.

    • @BV-fr8bf
      @BV-fr8bf 2 роки тому

      Enjoying the ETO machine gun discussion at this moment! Tremendous discussions!

  • @anthonysmith4784
    @anthonysmith4784 7 місяців тому

    Brilliant video learned so much

  • @philipinchina
    @philipinchina 8 місяців тому

    I might recommend this to my economics students.

  • @johnburns4017
    @johnburns4017 2 роки тому +3

    The Germans were short of some vital resources because of the Royal Navy blockade, oil being one. The question was put to Adam Tooze of how did the Germans with nothing going for them manage to last so long. Adam mentions the curve of production. The more you make something the better and quicker you do it.
    Germany ran on coal. They had coal, they had iron ore, they grew their own food. The factories ran on coal, trains ran on steel wheels, on steel rails and powered by coal. Cities had electric trams on steel wheels and rails, powered by electricity generated by coal. Gas was made from coal, the resulting coke was good for steel making. It was difficult to bomb coal mines. There were few oil propelled vehicles.
    Germany plus Austria and Sudetenland had a population of 80 million. More than enough to man their large land armies and work the factories and fields.

    • @asafb1984
      @asafb1984 Рік тому

      It's not just germany. It's also Japan, Italy, Romania, Hungary, Finland and more troops from other countries.

    • @johnburns4017
      @johnburns4017 Рік тому

      @@asafb1984
      Germany and its allies in Europe amounted to 120 million in total

    • @asafb1984
      @asafb1984 Рік тому +1

      @@johnburns4017 Your data or math is not correct. Germany, Austria and Italy combined had population of more than 120 million. With other axis members axis population in europe was around 160 million, and i'm not counting vichy france.

  • @markfrumkin3230
    @markfrumkin3230 8 місяців тому

    Wow, thanks once again!

  • @dawnsmith2389
    @dawnsmith2389 2 роки тому +1

    I got part way’s through and had to buy the book fascinating subject

  • @AgendaFiles
    @AgendaFiles 2 роки тому +1

    Be great if you could feature Adam again, as he rarely does interviews on this topic, which he is most known for. Perhaps Roger Moorehouse could be another guest to include in your series.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +1

      Yes indeed. For the right show, perhaps a panel discussion I will invite him back

    • @AgendaFiles
      @AgendaFiles 2 роки тому

      @@WW2TV Thanks Paul. I have noticed that your channel also covers topics like the Holocaust, Tooze once gave a lecture in 2008 related to the economics and food resources into the Hunger Plan, if another interview was featured could be a subject to highlight upon. If you are ever looking for new guests, Wendy Z. Goldman author of "Hunger and War; Food Provisioning in the Soviet Union During World War II" (2015) has recently published a new book, "Fortress Dark and Stern: The Soviet Home Front During World War II" (2021) maybe of interest to you. Not to take any more of your time. Thanks again.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +1

      @@AgendaFiles Thanks for the suggestions, I will try and contact Wendy Goldman

  • @simonargall5508
    @simonargall5508 9 місяців тому

    Thank you

  • @user-fl9nt2ph8b
    @user-fl9nt2ph8b 7 місяців тому

    Tak!

  • @JFB-Haninge
    @JFB-Haninge 2 роки тому +1

    Excellent stuff...

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +1

      Many thanks!

  • @mjinnh2112
    @mjinnh2112 3 роки тому +4

    Speer said (either in his autobiography or in an interview, I can't remember) that if the bombing raids had concentrated on ball bearing factories rather than civilian targets (Berlin), the war would have been over in two weeks.

    • @michaeldunne338
      @michaeldunne338 2 роки тому

      I thought he said if they focused on the reservoirs and dams supporting the steel industry? But could see the ball baring plants being top of mind for Speer.
      But the Americans at least made a show of trying to attack economic targets in daylight vs just carpet bombing cities. Like Schweinfurt was attacked, as well as Ploesti in Romania, and the oil industry within Germany.
      First daylight raid by the US was in January 1943; and the Air Force likes to quote this bit from Speer: "Nazi Armaments Minister Albert Speer said that the bombing created a “third front” and that “without this great drain on our manpower, logistics, and weapons, we might well have knocked Russia out of the war before your invasion of France.”"

    • @lllordllloyd
      @lllordllloyd Рік тому

      @@michaeldunne338 But the alleged carpet bombing of the RAF caused the components shortage Tooze talks about.
      While the YSAAF tried unsuccessfully to wipe out one component, the RAF bombed Ruhr cities and, without trying specifically, wiped out (say) carburettors, or magnetos, or optical sights. They have themselves the chance to hit several bottlenecks, and did.
      Speer's postwar comments, like those of most Nazis, are not to be entirely trusted.

  • @garyaugust1953
    @garyaugust1953 Рік тому

    Culmination of a fantastic series of programming. The economics of any war is a fascinating subject. The spread of cost, manufacturing capability, raw material acquirement, and diversifying all have a huge impact on a war effort.
    I believe my question on why the German nation accepted the Nazi idealism has been answered. Economics!
    The promise of greater advancement, manufacturing output, individual growth, and prosperity seen in the USA but with a German physce "we will be better." From the small farm steaders to the ordinary 'working class' population thru to the 'elite' who would provide the funding. A promise of a better future, made (in envy and dispisity of the so-called funding) by politicians, backed up with skilled manufacturing, it all is dependent on the economic capability.
    Projections, output, and disruption to the economic capabilities are paramount to its success. Obviously, as Adam states, the 'space' gained has to be utilised and maintained, equally as that 'space' is lost, the 'balance sheet' has to be adjusted and prioritised. Consequently, this has a detrimental effect on the economics of the project as a whole.
    Brilliant, brilliant work again. Sorry for gushing, but it's true

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      Thanks for the nice words Gary

  • @djghoul6782
    @djghoul6782 2 роки тому

    Great interviewer & questions

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому

      Thank you

  • @lmorandini
    @lmorandini Рік тому

    43:21 IMHO, the Bomber Command hit Berlin for the morale value of it. The focus was more on shattering enemy’s morale, rather than reducing industrial output.

  • @alexkalish8288
    @alexkalish8288 Рік тому

    Nobody in the US goes to Europe or Japan for technology in my humble opinion. The most precise engineering is done here. I am an engineer who spent many years working in Asia and Europe. Pre-1920 you could make a good case for Sweden. Now all the very high tech firms are US or NL based.

  • @keithplymale2374
    @keithplymale2374 7 місяців тому

    What do either of you think of the book "The Vampire Economy." about the Nazi economy in the 1930's?

  • @walterm140
    @walterm140 2 роки тому +2

    Dr. Overy in "The Bombers And The Bombed" Notes that Arthur Harris was not allowed to participate in writing the history of Bomber Command. His stewardship of Bomber Command was that bad.

  • @roy3442
    @roy3442 15 днів тому

    Before Barbarossa Herman Gohring asked Hitler why invade Russia he was the master of Europe Hitler replied "I have always been a gambler"

  • @shoofly529
    @shoofly529 4 місяці тому

    Imagine when thet turn AI loose on all the topics mentioned!! It's going to be revolutionary

  • @ClevelandFerguson
    @ClevelandFerguson 15 днів тому

    It's a sad thing that when you think about the end of the Native American Indian Wars add Friday the United States in the Indian Wars if they were employed in the Eastern Front would have been ultimately devastated to the Germans

  • @ronaldfinkelstein6335
    @ronaldfinkelstein6335 Рік тому +1

    I would have liked to ask Tooze a question, relating to The Holocaust. In the book, "War and Remembrance", the fictional German General Armin von Roon, in an essay, posits that the Holocaust damaged the German war effort, in several respects [wasting a valuable labor pool, psychological damage to troops, wasting logistics]. On the other hand, I have read elsewhere, that despoiling/looting the victims of the Holocaust helped finance the war. Hence my question, as to whether the "Final Solution" helped or hindered the war effort.

    • @robertmatch6550
      @robertmatch6550 7 місяців тому

      I'll bet there have been multiple studies on the subject. I think that depending on your definition of 'helped' and how far you want to cover all the ramifications of the Holocaust you can arrive at a range of conclusions. But remember that the Nazis almost defined themselves by Antisemitism hence it may be artificial effort to even try this topic.

  • @quikstrike9899
    @quikstrike9899 Рік тому +1

    His book was fantastic. Great to see this video.

  • @jimplummer4879
    @jimplummer4879 9 місяців тому

    My parents grew up in the 30s and 40s here in America and they either walked, took a bus or trolley.

  • @Fulcrum205
    @Fulcrum205 7 місяців тому

    I know historians hate counterfactuals but I would be interested to hear if Adam thought there was better way to rebuild the Germany economy to be better prepared for war by the end of 1939.
    Do you mechanize farming to lower food costs to free up workers for other industries for example. Im pretty sure they should have forced their industries to optimize their equipment for mass production like the soviets and Americans did.
    Would the Wehrmacht have fared better if they had de-mechanized somewhat to reduce the need for petroleum products.
    Should they have farmed sugar beets on a larger scale to refine into ethanol for fuel?

  • @kenwaltson7113
    @kenwaltson7113 9 місяців тому

    Speer said if all the bombing was considered on the ball bearing factories the war would have been over in less than a year

  • @jimplummer4879
    @jimplummer4879 9 місяців тому

    Like Robin Prior stated Blitzkrieg only worked once.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  9 місяців тому +1

      Well it also worked quite well in the Balkans, but for the point Robin was making about man for man comparisons - yes

  • @markaxworthy2508
    @markaxworthy2508 8 місяців тому +1

    Surely the effectiveness of Allied bombing has to be measured by how much Germany fell below its own production targets, which assumed optimal circumstances without Allied interference? Not only did Germany fall well below targets, but it even had to abandon the production of whole classes of weaponry, such as piston-engined bombers.

  • @jasonsmith5226
    @jasonsmith5226 2 роки тому +1

    Im far from an economist,or production expert. But i do think ya gotta give Speer credit though. Your guest said the German production curve was about as youd expect...& compared it to the Allies. But by that point, Germany is getting bombed night,& day...by gigantic raids,& production still went up...the Allies didn't have to worry bout that. I don't think the British were even getting bombed by them... certainly not anywhere close to scale of the bombings in Germany.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  2 роки тому +2

      Very true I think. The German curve did not increase, but that they were able to continue making stuff for so long is probably due to Speer

    • @jasonsmith5226
      @jasonsmith5226 2 роки тому

      @@WW2TV The guy wasn't perfect,but I do think he was the rare NAZI that would stand up to Hitler. And maybe he had alterior motives...like realizing the war was lost,& someday they would probably have to answer for everything. But he did defy Hitler's order,to basically scorch earth all of Germany,as punishment "for letting Hitler down," according to the malignant narcissist himself.
      I've even heard Speer tried to assassinate Hitler by introducing gas into the vents of his forest bunker,but found that they had refitted the vents,to where this couldn't be done,after 1 other assassination attempt. I'm not saying Speer didn't do some bad things,but had he went along with Hitler's order,a lot more Germans would have died,& would've been much tougher,& longer to rebuild. It's also probably a good thing he failed in assassinating Hitler. You would know better on all this than me...but my understanding is early in the war,the British explored assassinating Hitler...but later on,they dropped the idea altogether. Why assassinate Hitler,when he was making all kinds of dumb decisions,& micromanaging everything...As his narcism,& drug fueled paranoia got worse. Had they got rid of him in 1944,maybe Normandy is a much tougher fight,& as bad as the Battle of the Bulge was...it did eventually eliminate a lot of German tanks,planes,guns,troops,etc...that could've been better utilized to defend Germany. Maybe somebody just as ruthless,but more with it mentally,would have taken over.
      And whether he meant it,or was just an opportunist...at least Speer basically said he was sorry for his role,& didn't try to defend their policies. So many NAZIs just used the old "following orders" excuse,but I think Speer,& Hanz Frank are the only ones I know of,who actually showed remorse,& didn't try to defend their actions,or make excuses.

    • @richardvernon317
      @richardvernon317 2 роки тому

      German Production peaked in 1944 because Harris and the 8th Air Force Bomber Command were bombing French Railways and supporting the Invision between the middle of April and mid September when they were put under direct command of SHAEF. The only targets in Germany that they were allowed to hit were Transport and Oil during that period.

  • @Ebergerud
    @Ebergerud 2 роки тому +1

    Albert Speer wrote a rarely read third book called "Infiltration" - a history of the attempt of the SS to take over the German economy and society. One of the most interesting chapters is a speech given by a SS bigwig (later hung by the allies) about the importance of maintaining small scale craftsmanship as a base in the German state to bring fulfillment and strike against alienation among the German population - very utopian, Marxist at the utmost. Hitler often talked about the nobility of the German farmer and hoped to people his eastern conquests - Lebensraum - with hearty German farmers with hearty families with a plow in one hand and a rifle in the other - Hitler hoped to keep enemies along the frontiers to keep his people strong. Utopian Social Darwinism I guess. The Reich was wicked no doubt, but also very strange on the edges.

  • @wordofswords5386
    @wordofswords5386 Рік тому +1

    Incredible. I am buying the book for sure.

  • @user-rg9yz5ou4y
    @user-rg9yz5ou4y Місяць тому

    Yeah, but the majority of Germans were not peasant farmers. They lived in cities and towns. What was their standard of living? I have read elsewhere that it had been pretty decent since the late nineteenth century during Bismarck's regime.

  • @joeblow9657
    @joeblow9657 8 місяців тому

    54:04 so ordinary German townspeople decided to commit a war crime.

  • @inspiredsoul1
    @inspiredsoul1 Рік тому +1

    Don’t think it was appropriate for him to put down Ian Kershaw’s biography of Hitler. Kershaw’s work on Hitler is absolutely fascinating and quite contrary Tooze’s assertion, Kershaw has actually portrayed Hitler as someone who had a multidimensional personality.

  • @shoofly529
    @shoofly529 4 місяці тому

    Germans had to use horsepower; they never had the oil to have totla mecanizated units.

  • @fredbays
    @fredbays Рік тому

    In 1935 USA rural ppl had no electric so no plumbing
    I guess u guys never heard of the Rural Electrification Project part of the New Deal where gov gave bosses a lot of moneys to electrify the nation. Will they did and bought enough replacement parts with this moneys to last over100yr. This is why in rural USA we have substation built in late 30's still doing their very poor thing. Example the one that serves me. About three times a week for what ever reason it goes off live. Sometimes only for a second or 2 but at least one out of 10 requires a person to go to it and physically throw backer to on again. This can happen in a few minutes or it can take a few hrs depending on how close a worker is. I know this b/c a few yr ago I talked with the guy doing it once for a good 1/2 hr on the subject.

  • @PMMagro
    @PMMagro Рік тому

    If you have a massive economical advantage strategic bombing makes sense. Especially for the Western Allies being strong on big bombers (and in the air generally).
    Sure if you believe bombing alone will cause the war to be won by Christmas you will be dissapointed. But that kind off "just one big push is needed" idea seems to always be floating around there?

  • @johanneduardschnorr3733
    @johanneduardschnorr3733 2 роки тому

    French tanks had 1 man turrets and no radio!

  • @timbrown1481
    @timbrown1481 16 днів тому

    He who defends everything, defends nothing. Once again the inability to grasp the criticality of…wait for it- LOGISTICS. Germany had to “Rob Peter to pay Paul”.

  • @dancahill9585
    @dancahill9585 7 місяців тому

    Comparing Germany to a modern economy is an absurd comparison. There have been massive productivity gains due to technology over the last almost century. Any sane comparison would be Germany to Germany's Contemporary countries around the world.
    I heard a similar comparison of Rome to modern economies the other day, and the people making these comparisons across centuries and even millennia are clearly economic ignoramuses.

  • @AdurianJ
    @AdurianJ Рік тому

    My major gripe with Adam Tooze is that he's a Keynesian which means his economic analysis is not to be fuilly trusted.
    Other than that his books are very good.

  • @edwardhartman5568
    @edwardhartman5568 11 місяців тому

    Synopsis: German inferiority and insecurity has existed for centuries. Start with Rome. Recent UK. Fast forward to last 100 years: US. You now understand everything that has happened in Europe for last 2,000 years

  • @johnweerasinghe4139
    @johnweerasinghe4139 4 місяці тому

    I bought Mr. Tooze's book years ago, and then immediately put it down. It started with a false premise!
    THE PROBLEM WITH TOOZE'S ASSUMPTION:
    Tooze confuses the " awesome economic power " i.e. the economic Potential of the US with the actual impact of this potential with the operational events that directly affected Hitler's military success.
    The US may have had awesome economic power but in Dec 1941 it was just a potential.
    1. THERE IS NO ACCOUNT OF HITLER BEING AFRAID OF THE US:
    He knew the US would take a while to be an impact. He also did not believe the US militarily capable at all. To Hitler, the US was just a " mongerel " culture and would be tied down by the Japanese.
    2. BREAKING THE BLOCKADE:
    Hitler was in a hurry to break the blockade. There was also the fear that the USSR would be much stronger in 1942.
    3. HITLERS MAIN FOCUS WAS BARBAROSSA:
    His one big gamble.
    Imagine if Hitler had won Barbarossa?
    He would have had the coal and industry in the Donbass , about 10 million Slavic labor , the Soviet industry , the breadbasket of Europe, and the oilfields of Baku?
    He had the Jet engine , rocket engine , V1 and V2.
    The economies of both , western Europe AND the Soviet Union ( european).
    Nazi Germany would have been an Ultra Superpower!
    D Day in 1944+ ? I don't think so. The US would have cut a deal until July 1945.
    The Luftwaffe would have had 4 full strength. air fleets defending their skies. Enola Gay would have never made it to Berlin.
    4. TOTAL WAR: The reason for the resurgence of armamant production in 1944 is because they finally shifted to total war production.
    Yet......
    5. WAS THE ALLIED BOMBING IN '43 EFFECTIVE:
    The Nazis were able to mobilize for Operation Citadel with an army (almost as well armed ) manned by a million Germans as strong as any army group in 1941.
    Stalin asked Churchill. Where did the Germans get all this equipment ? How ? If the bombing campaign had been effective?
    Belton Cooper ( Death Traps) wondered After D Day, as he passed intact electrical power Grids , an untouched Autobahn and rows and rows of freshly produced aircraft, how had the Allied bombers missed these targets?
    6. THE US WASN'T STRONG IN 1942:
    To the credit of the US, George C Marshall visited Churchill & Alanbrooke in 1942 spring. He wanted to immediately launch an invasion in France. Churchill refused.
    The mighty US could only provide 6 divisions in 1942. The British? 3 divisions.
    Maybe.Alanbrooke' s diary may have the clue. When Marshall wanted to attack in 1943 Alanbrooke said " unless the German army. suffers more losses in Russia we cannot invade".
    All arguments about American power , second front , allied aid made me puke after that admission.
    7. US ARMAMENTS COULD NOT AFFECT THE SCALE OF THE EASTERN FRONT:
    American armament production peaked in 1944.
    a. Between 1941 thru 1943, the Nazis lost Barbarossa when Zhukov defeated Hitler outside Moscow and pushed them back 200 miles that was the end of the Nazis ability to economically support their war.
    This same Fritz Todt that Adam claims was afraid of a distant " american potential " went to Hitler's office on December 7th and told Hitler the war was lost. Todt died in his He 111 that exploded that week.
    Strategically the Germans could never again use all 3 Army Groups. That was huge!
    b. In 1942 till Stalingrad the Nazis lost millions in the Rhezhev salient.
    c. In fall 1942 Churchill suspended aid to the USSR but despite that the Soviets went on to destroy 6th army. Some 40 generals were taken prisoner.
    d. At Kursk the Nazis lost their entire tank park. Reserves. After that the Red Army headed for Berlin never losing a battle.
    The Allied aid amounted to 5% of Soviet production. If Allied aid had been significant the Soviets should have lost in 1942 when the Convoys were suspended.
    8. THE ECONOMIC EVENT THAT DESTROYED THE WERMACHT.
    The Soviet ability to engage the might of the Wermacht while outproducing the Nazis is the greatest story of WW2.
    They moved 2000 heavy industries on railcars to the Urals while fighting the Wermacht!!!.
    How the USSR maintained its armament potetial should have been the subject of serious study and celebration.
    9. THE WEAPONS THAT DESTROYED THE WERMACHT:
    From the time Guderian examined the T34 in July ,1941 to the Nazi surrender all Nazi accounts laud the impact of the T34 (shock & awe), KV1, KV2, IL2 armoured bomber , YAK3, MIG 3, Katyusha , High Velocity 76 mm artillery, maskirovka, 203 mm tracked artillery in the defeat of their vaunted Bewegunskrieg. Oh! And the bravery of the Soviet soldiers.
    CONCLUSION:.
    Mr. Tooze as is normal for western accounts ( except prof. Robert Citino, Col. David Glantz, Prof. Bryan Fugate etc.) Completely underestimates the scale of a conflict involving 300 German & 500 Soviet Divisions , 4 Nazi and 7 Soviet tank armies , 10 million German and 15 million Soviets , fighting tooth and nail one motivated by racism and the necessity to exterminate and steal. The other fighting to save his country and his existence on a Front 2500 miles long for 4 years everyday,.
    He thinks it was possible for the US to have an impact from 8000 miles away? While simultaneously arming itself to fight Japan & Germany.
    No way!!!
    The first encounter with the Germans at Kasserien Pass must have been humbling.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  4 місяці тому +1

      Rather than write a long comment no-one will read, put this on a blog or something

    • @johnweerasinghe4139
      @johnweerasinghe4139 4 місяці тому

      @@WW2TV
      Thank you for the feedback. That's why I had an introduction, some points and a summary.....hard not to address the issue without context and comprehensive overview ....
      Oh well.....I don't blog

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  4 місяці тому

      My point was, except for me, basically no-one reads the comments. They help with the algorithm for WW2TV, but if you have history to share, this is not the place to do it, well not if you want people to read what you have to say

    • @johnweerasinghe4139
      @johnweerasinghe4139 4 місяці тому

      @@WW2TV
      Understood. Thank you.
      At least I got to see what Mr. Tooze looks like.
      Are u the gentlemen that interviewed him?

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  4 місяці тому +1

      Yes, it is my channel, there are over 1000 similar presentations on WW2TV

  • @yp77738yp77739
    @yp77738yp77739 Рік тому +2

    When I look at Britain of 2023 and the mess it is. I often wonder if we’d have been better of under Germanic rule and if all those that died, did so in contradiction of our best interests. Those Germans at least knew how to organise and administer affairs efficiently.
    In reality, we did little to defeat the Germans, it was the Russians.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +9

      And there it is, the worst and most offensive comment for a long time. The ideology the Third Reich murdered and destroyed for was abhorrent and the World would have been a profoundly worse place if they had won

    • @d.k8746
      @d.k8746 Місяць тому +1

      ignoramus childish nonsense

    • @yp77738yp77739
      @yp77738yp77739 Місяць тому

      @@d.k8746 At the very least, we wouldn’t be seeing the terrible death and destruction in the Middle East if the Zionists hadn’t prevented the Germans sending them to Madagascar, as they had intended. The world would be a more peaceful and harmonious place with them on an island, far away from socialised peoples.