3 ms·
Given the dual use of fossil fuels between military and civilian purposes, I wonder whether any state that deliberately handicapped car/aero/petrochemicals woul
by spacebanana7 3y ago
Given the dual use of fossil fuels between military and civilian purposes, I wonder whether any state that deliberately handicapped car/aero/petrochemicals would’ve been able to survive the early twentieth century.
Both the USA and Nazi Germany benefited massively from have a civilian industrial base that was complementary to military production.
- oceanplexian 3y agoThere's a book called Freedom's Forge that I'm a fan of, it makes the argument that the Auto Industry (And assembly lines, mechanization in general) were the single most important reason the Allies won WWII. In fact all the big auto manufacturers of the time retooled their assembly lines to build tanks and airplanes. It's conceivable that if we never mass produced cars, the US wouldn't have had the capability to win the war.
- fulafel 3y agoOf course you could also argue that Germany wouldn't have had the early successes in war, (if they had even started it). Or at a third juncture, would have fared worse against USSR.