[lsc]

>The Nazi regime could have been prevented if the victors of the first World War hadn't imposed harsh punitive measures to destroy the German economy.

I think you could make just as strong an argument that the Nazi regime would not have lasted long if those harsh punitive measures were actually enforced. I mean, if you have a strongman leader, the best thing for him is an enemy who snarls real good, but who backs down immediately upon confrontation.

I think the truth of the matter is that after world war one, the allies didn't have the political will to properly enforce the sanctions or to expend the money and effort for a marshal plan type response. I think that's why we got what we did, harsh punitive measures that were ignored whenever Germany pushed on them. - but I think that's also the best case for an expanding fascistic government... It sure looked, to the non-jewish german people, that every time Hitler "stood up for them" hitler got what they wanted. It was like the allies set up a paper tiger for Hitler to look strong against.

I'm not saying that's what should have been done, just that the "the Nazis would have not risen if there weren't punitive measures" and "The Nazis would not have held on to power if those punitive measures were actually enforced" are counterfactuals; theories about what could have been. I argue that there is just as much evidence for my theory as yours.

[loggedinmyphone]

I think there were multiple ways Nazism could have been prevented or dealt with. It's just regrettable that it ended in so much violence. Probably what happened was neither the best nor the worst conceivable outcome.