Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
The world generally doesn't, actually.
|
On the other hand….
When the fascist Ustase regime in Croatia fell following the Axis defeat, the Croat fascists fled Yugoslavia to surrender to the British in Austria. The British sent them back, where they were subjected to death marches and mass executions.
The western allies were much softer on the Nazis than Stalin was. The fascist military and civilian leadership in places like Romania and Hungary, which were not occupied countries but self governing Nazi satellites for most of the war, were not given the slap on the wrist the Germans were under the shared occupied zone. A lot of them, were they allowed to live, spent a decade in the gulag, along with thousands and thousands of Axis POWs on the Soviet side of the line. Stalin reopened Auschwitz for use as POW camp, and it housed prisoners until 1953.
FDR and Churchill were a lot more squeamish on what probably should have been done than Uncle Joe was, and he made good on it in a lot of cases.
Violent purges also followed the ouster of Juan Peron in Argentina to accompany cultural de-Peronification, a campaign that looked a lot like De-Nazification but seemed to have some teeth to it, for a time anyway.
The violent dismantling of the Shah’s regime following the Iranian revolution also didn’t see many people just shuffled off into new lives like you saw with the Nazis. Those not lucky enough to get out were subjected to mass incarceration and execution.
So it’s really more of a mixed bag. All depends on circumstance and the goals of whoever comes next.