Quote:
Originally Posted by Juha
It was understandable to think that under dictatorship Germany could mobilize its resources more totally to military production than a democracy, even during the war.
Juha
|
Hello Juha,
I sympathise with your view, the point that I would emphasise is that
during the war, democracies can and should mobilise their populations more effectively than dictatorships, by achieving the active consent of the voters. The main problem for Britain was precisely this, that the population was often skeptical about the chances of victory and sometimes distrusted the motives of the government. The fact that Churchill lost the general election immediately after the war shows that political unity was very difficult to maintain.
Nick correctly points out that Germany's industry suffered from severe weaknesses. A few of these were common knowledge, including its dependence on raw material imports. Had Britain mobilised her own resources and those of the Empire with anything like the intensity that Speer later achieved in Germany, Britain's armed forces would have had a decisive material superiority over not only Germany, but Italy too.
On the subject of the optimal subject for research, I would strongly argue in favour of a new general history of the Second World War, based on the archival material which has become available worldwide. It is very important that it becomes commonly understood just how the Western democracies won the war and the mistakes that they made in the process. To put it succinctly, this is of the greatest importance for current policy.
Regards,
Paul