He started both world wars: the story of the first dollar billionaire.

On the Internet you can often find the statement “America has become richer because of WWII.” In the recent past, the same thesis was often given on the pages of books by apologists of Marxism-Leninism.

The average change in the economic well-being of the United States in the second decade of the 20th century was much better than that in the countries that were the main combatants of WWII - France, England, Germany, Russia, etc. This is quite logical, taking into account the enormous financial and human losses that the listed countries suffered in during the global conflict.

Of course, no one holds the United States responsible for the outbreak of World War I (at least so Somehow I haven’t come across any stubborn conspiracy theorists). Essentially, the “accusation” boils down to the fact that even though the Europeans carried out a terrible massacre, the United States had the audacity to make money from that massacre. To be honest, I don’t even understand this claim - perhaps the United States should not trade with warring countries and with neutrals who can sell something to warring countries (and the reader is aware that refusal to trade in international law has been considered an incident belli for several years now centuries?) Or even drown in an ocean of goods worth tens of billions of dollars, and a couple of million Americans to the heap, in order to show solidarity with the warlike countries “across the pond”? But the point here is something else, namely that the original thesis, “The United States rose in war,” is incorrect.

The source for most of the figures is an excellent article by Rockoff: U.S. Economy in World War I. The source for figures for pre-war spending on the Army and Navy (and many other figures if desired) is Census Bureau’s Historical Statistics of the United States: From Colonial Times to 1970. Source of GDP graph -- Oliver Branchald, Macroeconomics, 3rd ed. The source of the debt table is Thomas Bailey, Diplomatic History of the American People.

US military spending

According to the calculations of economist John Clark, WWII cost the United States 32 billion then dollars. The figure was arrived at by adding together federal spending on the Army and Navy, foreign obligations, and the difference between public and private sector salaries; The figure does not include interest payments on the federal debt and subsidies from the US railroad administration. To understand the scale, 32 billion is more than half of the GNP of the entire country in 1917, and specifically 58%.

Unfortunately, I don’t have Clark’s calculations themselves, only Rockoff’s mention of them. Let's assume that Clark did not take into account the supposed "peace" spending on the navy and army (which seems to me an amateur error that a professional economist and historian should not make). In 1910-1916. the average annual expenditure on the army was 195 million per year; for the fleet - 135 million per year. If we extrapolate this figure for three years, we get around a billion “peaceful” expenses - which does not change the final balance much. Today I ordered Clark's book "Costs of the World War to the American People (Reprints of Economic Classics)", they say that it will arrive in two weeks. Then I’ll write in more detail about what and how.

Well, about the dead and wounded. 48,909 Americans died in battle, 63,523 military personnel died from disease, and another 230,074 were wounded. It should be noted that 40 thousand deaths from disease are influenza, and of course some of these people would die from it in civilian life - but a smaller part; the army and the trenches are very conducive to the spread of disease.

These figures, of course, are much less than the losses of other major combatants of the Entente and the Central Powers; however, the United States still suffered significant financial damage in the form of lost productivity of killed and wounded, payments of pensions/allowances, etc. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the exact figure; take it for scrap yourself. Just don’t forget that it also exists.

Military supplies/loans to the Entente countries

Part of the “war profiteering” myth grows from US European export figures during the war. American exports to Europe rose from $1.479 billion in 1913. to $4.062 billion in 1917 However, in light of the previous paragraph, everything becomes much less cloudy. Let's imagine the worst scenario for trade - the United States is not participating in the war and flatly refuses to trade with countries at war in Europe. Suppose that as a result European trade disappears as a class. Further, let us assume that by redirecting the resources that went into goods for Europe to the domestic and non-European markets, we were able to obtain only 50% of the “European” cost. Loss of production in 1917 in this case would be about two billion dollars, or 6.3% of the cost of the war for the United States.

Well, some more numbers. Before WWII, investments of foreigners (read Europeans) in the USA were $7.2 billion; Americans to foreign countries - $5 billion. Total minus $2.2 billion. The reason for this was a chronic trade deficit with the United States: foreigners had to bring capital into the United States in order to somehow mitigate it; well, plus the general underdevelopment of the American financial system (for example, the majority of US foreign trade was conducted in pounds sterling). After WWII, $9.7 billion and $3.3 billion, respectively; total plus $6.4 yards - the Europeans had to look for any way to pay for American supplies.

Since 1917, the United States has provided approximately $10 billion in loans to various countries for military purchases and post-war reconstruction.

Naturally, 10.3 billion cannot be written down in the “military profit” column (although even in this case it will be less than a third of the cost of the US war); Profit in giving a loan can only be obtained from interest when paying off the debt. In this case, some countries completely refused to pay their debts (Russia, for example), others paid somehow, and all the time tried to convince the United States to write off the debts. Moreover, due to very high inflation, the dollar lost half its value in the period 1913-1920. I don’t have exact figures on the payment of these debts, but I would be very surprised if there was any profit at all. Today I ordered Bailey's book "A Diplomatic History of the American People", they say it will arrive in two weeks. If there is data on the payment of debts, I will write down what and how.

Dynamics of GDP and stock market

First, let's look at the graph of US GDP (in 1992 dollars)

As we see, at the beginning of the war, the US GDP declines slightly, due to the naval blockade of the Central Powers and the neighboring European neutrals from England and France and, consequently, a drop in exports. After the hole, growth begins again, partly due to the export of military products to the Entente countries, but this growth looks quite ordinary against the backdrop of 1890-1910. Then a sharp jump in 1917-1918, due to the US entry into the war and a significant increase in military orders. Then an equally sharp post-war decline, due, among other things, to the repurposing/cutting of military capabilities. In 1921 The country's GDP was almost at the level of 1911. -- an unheard of low level of economic growth for the United States of that era.

Now let's take a look at the behavior of the stock market during the war. If the "US profited greatly from the war" thesis is correct, then we should see continued growth during the war years.

You need to look at the dotted curve (real prices). The stock market grew during the first year of the war. Then - stagnation for another year, and then an almost continuous decline, stopping only six months after the US entered the military conflict. In the subsequent period, of course, there is no question - just a plateau. A slight increase appeared only after the conclusion of peace, but it did not last long and then a new period of decline began - until the early twenties.

Great power and all that

We seem to have figured out that there was no direct financial benefit to the United States from WWI. However, skeptics may ask the question: what about the country’s influence on the world stage, since it grew significantly in the United States after WWII? Unfortunately, it will not be possible to give a specific answer here, because the “impact” is extremely difficult to measure, express in monetary terms and compare with the costs of war. I'll just give a few thoughts on the topic:

1) The United States would have had influence sooner or later even without the world war. This is simply a law of life - countries with powerful economies sooner or later begin to influence world politics, such as China now. This influence can be exerted by economic measures, because such countries have very large exports and imports, a strong influence on world finances, and so on; and maybe through military measures - because a strong economy allows, if desired, to create a strong army.

In Russia, they often do not fully realize what an economic giant the United States was already at the beginning of the 20th century. Here are some facts about the size of the American economy in 1913:
- The relative share of world industrial production is 32% (more than Germany and England combined)
- Steel production - 31.8 million tons (more than Germany, England and Russia combined)
- Electricity consumption -- 541 metric tons of coal equivalent (almost the same as Germany, England, Russia, France and Austria-Hungary combined)

It is obvious that the country already existed by 1913. a great power, even if it was not yet formally part of the world balance of power.

2) In response to one of the comments. Even considerable investments in the fleet during WWII essentially did not lead to any significant long-term outcome, in comparison with the “alternative” world where there was no war. In that world, the acts of Congress of 1914 and 1915 on the construction of “two first-class battleships” would have been certain, because see point one about the economy. That is, even if suddenly the Americans after 1915 completely stopped ordering large ships until the thirties, then by the beginning of World War II we would be missing three LCs (BB-45, BB-46, BB-48), and aircraft carriers Sarah + Lex. Sparsely, sparsely. The Washington agreement would have been in one form or another, the Europeans were too devastated by the war.

3) What is partly funny here is that in the short term, WWI led to exactly the opposite effect from the one attributed to it by the “skeptics”: after participating in the war, American society decided that the price of participation in European squabbles was too high; that tens of thousands of American lives were lost due to goals completely alien to the country; that American industrialists dragged the country into war only for the sake of profits - yes, yes, the legs of any decent conspiracy theory grow in the West; and that the United States needs to do everything to exclude the possibility of participation in major overseas wars in the future.

So in fact, WWII led to increase the degree of American isolationism: the country refused to become a member of the League of Nations; costs for the army and navy first returned to the relative level at which they were before WWII, and then fell below it. That is, WWII essentially slowed down the US entry onto the world stage for another 20 years - until WWII. Only after it did the Americans realize that isolationism will not protect the United States from participating in major world wars, because it is simply not possible to sit safely overseas in the modern world.

VKontakte Facebook Odnoklassniki

The main interest in war today is the same as it was a hundred years ago.

“Look for who benefits.” So, let me remind you, Roman lawyers advised identifying the perpetrators of crimes when there was a shortage of direct evidence. Even more than in jurisprudence, this approach is applicable to the sphere of politics, in which the decisions made, as well as the factors for their adoption, are not of a public nature.

Crimes in politics have a disproportionately larger number of victims than crime. Such obvious crimes - against humanity - include starting a war, especially if we are talking about a war on a global scale. But an organized crime must obviously have a customer. Hence the question: who ordered the First World War? Look for who benefits...

The fact that the war was not a weave of random circumstances is evidenced by its foresight with an accurate description of the implemented scenario even before the Sarajevo incident. Such a foresight, down to the details, was a note addressed to the Tsar back in February 1914 by the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Pyotr Durnovo. A book was even recently published in which he is referred to as “Russian Nostradamus.”

Durnovo assigned the initiating role in unleashing the coming world conflict to Great Britain, which was losing economic and military hegemony in the world and was trying to prevent this. The main theses of the note boiled down to the following provisions: “Even victory over Germany promises extremely unfavorable prospects for Russia... This war will require such huge expenses that will many times exceed the more than dubious benefits... We will fall into financial economic bondage to our creditors... Russia, will undoubtedly be plunged into the anarchy it experienced during the ever-memorable period of unrest of 1905-1906... In case of failure, the possibility of which in the fight against such an enemy as Germany cannot but be foreseen, social revolution in its most extreme manifestations is inevitable in our country... Germany in In case of defeat, it will have to endure no less social upheavals than Russia...”

Of course, if the consequences in the form of geopolitical and economic losses, anarchy and social revolution for Russia in the event of war were obvious to the former Russian minister, then they were also obvious to Russia’s counterpart. From this evidence it follows that the directors of the war were counting on a corresponding catastrophic outcome for both Germany and Russia. Accordingly, Russia was by no means an interested party in the global military conflict.

The main stratagem of the United States (as before the British Empire) was to prevent the very possibility of anyone being able to pose a geostrategic challenge to American world hegemony. Such a challenge was articulated by Germany and Russia (USSR) in the twentieth century. Economically, this was expressed in their reaching second position in the share of world GDP and reducing the gap with the United States. After this, a geopolitical blow was dealt to competing countries. The results of the First World War, the Second World War and the Cold War were the overthrow of the American enemy. Actually, this is what they apparently started for.

Now a new challenge to American hegemony is being articulated by China. Considering China as the main rival of the United States in the struggle for hegemony in the world is today a commonplace in futurological discourse. According to polls, the majority of the population of a number of Western countries believes that China will win the global competition. Up to a third of Americans themselves believe that it is not the United States, but China that will play the role of world hegemon in the future.

How will the United States respond to this challenge? There is no doubt that they will not allow China to get ahead. The severity of the challenge implies the severity of the response. Based on historical experience, the method of counteraction is obvious - a large-scale war.

The contradictions associated with the German challenge were complemented by internal contradictions within the Anglo-Saxon world. Today the USA and Great Britain are considered in world politics almost as a single whole, but this was not always the case.

The American-British alliance that still exists today was formed at the final stage of the First World War. Before the war, relations between the United States and Great Britain were confrontational. Anti-British sentiment in the United States in 1914 was even stronger than anti-German sentiment. There was a change in the world economic and financial leader. Great Britain was losing its leadership position. The United States has taken first place in the world economy. The clash of the former leader - Great Britain - with another potential competitor in the struggle for leadership - Germany - and a third contender in the more distant future - Russia - was, of course, beneficial to American capital. The First World War summed up the global inversion that had taken place.

Both world wars were associated with the process of changing the mechanisms of the global financial system. The US Federal Reserve System, as we know, was established just six months before the Sarajevo murder. After the victory of the Entente in the First World War, instead of the previous gold parity, a regime of floating managed exchange rates was established. The dollar and pound sterling became the universal reserve currencies. The de facto financial hegemony of the Anglo-Saxon world was established. However, the global crisis and the emergence of geopolitical factors challenging Anglo-Saxon hegemony led in the 1930s to the collapse of the established system. And then - the Second World War, Bretton Woods and the establishment of the “dollar-gold” principle as the basis of international monetary circulation.

Will the new financial transition be associated with comparable geopolitical turmoil? The likelihood of such a scenario, as current events show, is increasing.

The Jamaican financial system is bursting at the seams. Challenges are articulated in relation to the global hegemony of the dollar. For the United States, such a revision would obviously have the character of a systemic collapse, so they will do everything possible to prevent it. And the arsenal of these possibilities is well known.

The First World War led to the collapse of the previous polycentric world system, based on the balance of power of a number of Western colonial powers competing with each other. It clearly set the logic for the transition to a unipolar world. After the war, the United States becomes the No. 1 economic and financial power. But the revolution that occurred in the final stage of the war in Russia creates the prospect of putting forward an alternative world-building paradigm.

The next step in this logical chain is associated with the Second World War. Its result was the establishment of a model of a bipolar world.

The defeat of the USSR in the Cold War leads to the actual establishment of a unipolar American-centric system. For its final establishment, with appropriate institutionalization (“world government”), a request for a new global military conflict may arise. The main interest in the war turns out to be, in fact, the same as a hundred years ago.

In 1913, the United States had a negative foreign trade balance, and the North American state's investments in the economies of other countries, mainly Latin American countries, were less than the external public debt. At the end of 1913, North American capital worth $2.065 billion was placed abroad, and the States themselves owed $5 billion. It must be said that the dollars of that time - the 1873 model - were a real monetary unit, each dollar was equal to 1.50463 grams. pure gold. But with the outbreak of the First World War the picture changed radically. The United States has gone from being a debtor state to becoming a creditor to the world's leading powers.

The First World War claimed millions of lives, swept through the territories of France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia like a destructive tornado, and became a real manna from heaven for the American government. From August 1, 1914 to January 1, 1917, the United States provided $1.9 billion in loans to the warring powers. Already in April 1915, one of the owners of the Morgan financial empire, Thomas Lamont, speaking to representatives of the press, noted that the United States needed to help its European allies as much as possible, since this would lead to the Americans buying out their debt obligations to Great Britain and France. Loans to European countries came in an even greater flow when the United States itself entered the war. Until the end of the First World War, the total volume of loans amounted to more than $10 billion. Approximately 7 billion dollars went to purchase ammunition, ammunition, and various military materials. Moreover, all this was bought in the USA itself. The money stayed in the States and stimulated its economy. It is clear that huge profits were made by financial tycoons and industrialists. One of the results of the First World War was the transformation of the United States from the world's largest debtor to the largest creditor. France and Great Britain, on the contrary, have turned from the world's largest creditors into debtors.

In the case of France, the transformation of this country into a large debtor was facilitated by the fact that protracted military operations were taking place on its territory, millions of workers were cut off from the national economy, and the northeastern regions, where a significant part of the heavy industry was concentrated, were under German occupation. French gold reserves at the beginning of the war were estimated at 845 million dollars and they were spent already in the first months of the First World War.

An interesting fact is that in informal conversations with their British partners, American statesmen assured throughout the war and the first time after it that after the end of the war the United States would write off some of the debts and transfer some to the defeated countries. It was proposed to link the payment schedule of debtor countries with the schedule of their receipt of reparation payments from the defeated powers. The situation for the debtor countries became clear only in March 1920, when the American financial department, in response to a message from the British Secretary of the Treasury, said that the United States did not care about the delay in payments from Germany, England must pay the United States on time. In a letter dated November 3, 1920, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George asked American President Woodrow Wilson to reconsider the terms of the payments. However, the response of the American president was in approximately the same spirit as the message from the financial department. As a result, the issue of war debts was brought to the Genoa Conference. It was decided that the 4 billion 600 million dollars that Great Britain owed the United States would be paid over 62 years. Moreover, until 1932, the British had to pay 3% per annum, and from 1933 until the end of payments - 3.5%. As a result, the amount of interest became higher than the amount of debt itself. England had to pay 11 billion 105 million dollars. This is despite the fact that France received most of the German reparations - 54.4%, and England received 23%.

Berlin was obliged to pay the winning teams 650 million dollars annually, of which 149 million 760 thousand dollars were due to England. Until 1933, London had to transfer $138 million annually to the Americans. Thus, almost all of Germany's reparations, which were due to England, were absorbed by the United States. However, already in 1923 Germany was unable to pay a single mark. France responded by occupying the Ruhr. The British convened the London Conference, at which a new reparations plan for Germany was approved in August 1924. It was developed by an international committee of experts led by the American banker Charles Gate Dawes.

The plan was adopted under US pressure. To start the mechanism of the German economy, according to the Dawes Plan, Berlin not only paid reparations, but at the same time received an international loan. Initially, Germany was given a loan of 200 million dollars (110 million were provided by American banks) to stabilize the mark. Until 1929, Germany received loans in the amount of 21 billion marks, mainly from the United States. Therefore, in the first year of implementation of the Dawes Plan, Berlin had to independently pay only 200 million gold marks. The Dawes Plan established that in 1924 the Germans would pay reparations in the amount of 1 billion gold marks (which was then approximately $238 million), in the first few years the amount grew to 1.75 billion gold marks and in 1928 it was due increase to 2.5 billion marks. Thus, the annual payments to Germany were significantly reduced, and now the British had to pay most of the annual payment to the United States out of their own pockets. In addition, Berlin paid these amounts irregularly, and from the beginning of the 1930s it stopped paying altogether.

At the Hague Reparations Conference 1929-1930. Germany's second reparations plan (the Young Plan) was adopted. The United States did not officially take part in the conference, but in fact became the initiator of the Young Plan. The plan was prepared by a group of financial experts led by the American Owen Jung and reflected the interests of private, primarily American, creditors of Germany. The US put pressure on the conference participants to ensure that the plan was adopted. Young's plan provided for a slight reduction in the size of annual payments - to an average of 2 billion marks, abolished the reparation tax on industry and a reduction in transport taxes, and the destruction of foreign control bodies. It also provided for a reduction in the total amount of German payments to 113.9 billion gold marks with a maturity of 37 years (possibly revised in the future). However, this plan lasted only one year. In 1931, Reich Chancellor Heinrich Brüning was able to impose a moratorium on reparation payments and the Germans paid nothing more. Another blow to Great Britain’s finances was dealt by the USSR, which refused to recognize the debts of the tsarist and provisional governments - 13.2 billion gold rubles (and taking into account the debts of the governments of Kolchak, Wrangel, Miller and other “governments” of Russia - 18.5 billion gold rubles ). As a result of the First World War, the leading world powers - England, France, Germany and Italy - became debtors to the United States.

The United States earned even more money from World War II. On September 1, 1939, Germany attacked Poland; on September 16, the Polish government and high command fled the country to Romania. Together with them, the country's gold reserves were also taken out of Poland. Soon he came from Romania to France. France also found gold from defeated Belgium. After France was defeated, Polish, Belgian, part of the gold of the Netherlands, and most importantly, the gold reserves of the French National Bank, which at the end of May 1940 amounted to 2 billion 477 million dollars, were exported to French Africa. In November 1942, the Americans landed in Dakar; in 1943, the gold was transported to the United States and moved to the vaults of Fort Knox. Even earlier, the Americans exported Norwegian gold. True, there was not so much of it; before the German occupation, the country had gold worth 84 million dollars.

In addition, it should be noted that gold, silver and various jewelry from Europe seemed to flock to the United States. Their owners, individuals, companies, transferred their savings to a safe place - the USA, because war was raging in Europe. So, if in October 1939 the US Federal Reserve System stored gold worth 17 billion dollars, then by February 1940 this amount had already increased by a whole billion (the then dollar was worth approximately 25-26 modern ones). With the outbreak of active hostilities in Europe, the influx of gold into the United States increased even more. Thus, during May 10–14, 1940 alone, the United States received gold worth $46 million. When it became obvious that France was doomed, the flow increased even more - on June 3–4, gold worth $500 million arrived in the United States.

It is also necessary that American firms profited from financing the Third Reich. During the war, the United States enriched itself by supplying weapons and war materials to the Allies. When the war ended, the United States gave loans to European countries devastated by the war. Europeans used loans to buy American goods. The US economy grew, the money was returned and again given in growth to the junior partners. So, on December 6, 1945, a loan agreement was signed between the United States and England, which came into force on July 15, 1946. According to it, the British received 3 billion 750 million dollars. Article 6 of this agreement prohibited England, until 1951, from taking loans from other countries and using the money to repay other loans. Article 9 prohibited the use of this loan for the purchase of non-American goods. The United States immediately after the entry into force of this treaty raised prices for its goods. England lost up to 28% of the loan amount due to rising commodity prices. Part of the amount was lost due to the exchange of dollars for pounds (more than 6% of the amount).

In 1947, the American Secretary of State George C. Marshall put forward the “European Recovery Program” (Marshall Plan). The plan came into force in 1948 and covered 17 European states. In fact, the United States put them under its financial and economic control.

Thus, the United States became the richest country in the world after World War II, having previously robbed, robbed and enslaved a significant part of the world. It is also necessary to take into account the fact that for this, American financial and industrial groups took an active part in preparing and kindling the fires of the First and Second World Wars. Two world wars allowed the United States to establish financial control over the planet.

As a result of the Second World War, many states, including the victorious countries, suffered serious losses. The only winners were financial and industrial corporations, for which the most destructive war in history turned out to be a real goldmine.

"Friedrich Krupp"

The German Krupp dynasty has always played a vital role in the economy of German militarism. Therefore, the Treaty of Versailles, concluded following the First World War, became a real tragedy for Gustav Krupp. The Nazis' rise to power not only restored Krupp's lost opportunities, but also revived hopes for the establishment of unlimited monopoly power.
During the formative years of the German military machine, the income of the Friedrich Krupp company grew by leaps and bounds. The acceleration of the military industry during the Third Reich gave Germany a powerful impetus, thanks to which it today ranks second in the world after the United States in steel production.
The son of the aging Gustav Krupp, Alfred, having learned in the late 1930s about Himmler’s plans to create concentration camps, invested huge amounts of money in this project. For him, the camps were not primarily death factories, but sources of profit, which ended up in his pockets through the use of prison labor. Alfred Krupp was the owner of 10 concentration camps, and it was in Krupp’s cash office that camp guards and guards received their salaries.
By the time of Germany's surrender, Alfred Krupp came up fully armed: huge sums of money in foreign currency rested securely in Swiss banks, documents incriminating him of connections with the Nazis were destroyed, and the factories were transferred to the protection of the American military police.

Siemens

The military-industrial boom did not bypass the House of Siemens, at the helm of which was the third son of the founder of the famous company. Factories that produced electrical equipment, including scanning radar systems, supplied the German army, navy and merchant fleet with their products. In addition to hired workers, concentration camp prisoners, prisoners of war and ostarbeiters worked at Siemens factories, making the family business as profitable as possible.

Standard Oil

One of the largest concerns in Germany, IG Farbenindustrie, which was the main sponsor of Hitler's election campaign, was controlled by the American oil company Standard Oil, owned by the Rockefellers. Even when the United States entered World War II, Standard Oil continued to cooperate with the Nazis, regularly supplying them with fuel and continuing to receive dividends. Investments alone amounted to $120 million in the German economy.

General Electric

Another American company that managed to profit from the war, managed by the Morgan clan, was fined by the US government in 1946 for improper behavior. Together with the Krupp Corporation, General Electric deliberately inflated the price of tungsten carbide, which was a vital material for the mechanical processing of metals necessary for the needs of the front. The $36,000 fine was insignificant compared to the $1.5 million received as a result of the fraud.

American banks

In the 1990s, a French government commission investigating the seizure of Jewish valuables and accounts during World War II said that five American banks were involved in the theft: Chase Manhattan, J.P. Morgan, Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, Bank of the City of New York and American Express.
Chase bank was especially active, which significantly improved its affairs after Kristallnacht, the pogrom of the Jews of Austria and Germany that occurred in 1938. The bank later froze the accounts of French Jews in occupied France.
One of the main shareholders of Chase Bank, John Rockefeller, directly financed the Nazi eugenics experiments. Between 1936 and 1941, Chase, together with other American banks, helped the Germans obtain over 20 million in dollar terms. The banks made more than $1.2 million on the deal, half a million of which Chase pocketed.

Swiss banks

Hitler's ambitious plans were generously financed by American and British bankers, and Swiss banks acted as intermediaries in this. It was this circumstance that allowed little Switzerland to stay away from the drama that was playing out on the European fronts.
During the Second World War, the leaders of the Reich invested 15 billion Reichsmarks in gold in Swiss banks - more than $40 billion at today's exchange rate. These were, first of all, the gold reserves of the occupied countries, as well as confiscated property. A separate source of gold was the concentration camps, from where hundreds of kilograms of gold crowns were supplied.
Also, the Nazis sold paintings to Switzerland that were not interesting to the Reich from an artistic point of view. To the Swiss dealer Hans Wendland, for example, they sold 28 Impressionist paintings, in return receiving one Rembrandt painting and two 16th-century tapestries. The Swiss sold the paintings received from the German authorities, including works by Van Gogh, Renoir, and Corot, very profitably.

Nestle

In 2000, the Swiss company Nestle was ordered to pay almost $15 million in compensation to Jewish organizations. This is a pittance compared to the capital that the company amassed during the war years. Nestle profitably sold tons of instant coffee to the American army, due to overproduction of which Brazil suffered.
This popular company recently admitted that in 1947 it acquired a company that used forced labor during the war. “There is no doubt, or it can be assumed, that some corporations from the Nestle group, operating in countries controlled by the National Socialist regime, exploited forced laborers,” the company said.
It is known that in 1939, in Switzerland, Nestlé provided financial assistance to the Nazi Party, as a result of which it won a lucrative contract to supply chocolate to the needs of the entire German army during World War II.

Fanta

The world-famous Fanta brand owes its birth to Nazi Germany. When problems arose with the import of cola ingredients into Europe after the outbreak of war, Coca-Cola's manager in Germany, Max Keit, was able to quickly reorient himself. Its technologists managed to create a formula for a tasty chemical drink that could be produced for the Germans based on available materials.
1941 marked the debut of Fanta on the German market. Kite's efforts to keep the Coca-Cola division running smoothly throughout the war allowed the company to generate significant profits, and after the war ended, the German subsidiary of the American company returned to distributing Coca-Cola to American soldiers stationed in Europe.

USA

According to many experts, despite the enormous costs incurred during the war, the United States benefited greatly from it. Thus, the profits of American corporations increased from $6.4 billion in 1940 to $10.8 billion in 1944. General Motors Corporation President Charles Wilson once said, “What is good for General Motors is good for the United States, and vice versa.”
Thanks to the income of military-industrial corporations, the American post-war economy experienced a real boom.
But the United States enriched itself in another way. Thus, after the defeat of Poland by Germany, the government of the country exported gold and foreign exchange reserves, which ultimately ended up in France. From France, Polish gold, together with Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian and French gold reserves, migrated to Dakar, where it was expropriated by the Americans who landed there.
It is known that the gold reserves of the French National Bank amounted to 2 billion 477 million dollars, Norwegian reserves were estimated at 84 million dollars.
In addition, European company owners and individuals preferred to transfer their savings to American banks, as the safest place. If in October 1939 the US Federal Reserve System stored gold worth 17 billion dollars, then by February 1940 this amount had increased by a full billion (1 dollar in 1940 is equal to about 25 modern dollars).
With the beginning of the active phase of the war in Europe, the influx of gold increased noticeably. From May 10 to 14, 1940 alone, $46 million worth of gold arrived in the United States, and after France was doomed, another $500 million arrived in US banks.

Sweden

During the war years, Sweden was able to increase its gold reserves through iron trade with Germany. For example, in 1939, 70 percent of Swedish iron and 50 percent of iron ore went to Germany. With the outbreak of the war, Sweden's share of German imports only increased.
In addition, Germany could not do without the products of the Swedish concern SKF, which produced bearings for military equipment.
The total value of Sweden's benefits from trade with the Reich can be estimated at 10 billion modern dollars. Subsequently, these capitals became the material basis for the reforms that led to the building of Swedish socialism.

Portugal

This Pyrenean state occupied a very advantageous geographical position, which allowed it to contact both Great Britain and the countries of continental Europe. By providing trade services to both the allies of the anti-Hitler coalition and the Axis countries, Portugal managed to increase its gold reserves from $63 million in 1938 to $438 million in 1946.
The republic possessed huge reserves of tungsten, without which the production of high-quality steel was unthinkable. It is not surprising that both the Germans and the British tried to buy up as much of it as possible, as a result of which the price of the metal was constantly rising.

Economically developed Western Europe, which respects freedom and democracy. France, with its famous auto giants Renault and Peugeot. Switzerland with the best banking system and expensive watches. Sweden has a standard of living that is the envy of all of us and half the world. Spain, even crippled by the crisis, is still strong and economically developed. What can we say about the USA... And we are Russia, and formerly the Soviet Union? Why is it not like this with us? Why, after the end of the Great Patriotic War, unlike them, all we do is survive and catch up? Why was it warm and satisfying for them, while ours was either average or not at all good? Are they smarter than us, more hardworking, more talented? No. We have approximately the same talent, intelligence and hard work.

It’s hard to believe, but the main reason for the high economic development and standard of living of Western Europe and the United States after the war lies in the colossal, unimaginable, seemingly incredible earnings of these countries. And they earned their present wealth during the war - the most terrible, monstrous and destructive. At a time when hundreds of thousands died near Moscow and Kursk, near Kiev and Stalingrad. When they were dying of hunger in besieged Leningrad. When thousands and thousands of defenseless people were led into gas chambers in concentration camps.

It was at this very time that America and Western Europe, in words neutral, anti-fascist and even occupied, were earning huge money. How? Very simple. She gave loans to Nazi Germany at huge interest rates, she produced equipment and ammunition for her at fabulous prices. She pumped gas for her and cut out beautiful SS uniforms, and the scale of this bloody business was colossal.

How Spain earned money

“I will be your ally in the war, but for this you will give me several French colonies.” This bargaining took place between the Spanish head of state Franco and Hitler. This is how countries that were not initially part of any of the coalitions decided whether they would be on someone else’s side in World War II or choose a position of neutrality. Although their neutrality will also ultimately turn out to be a complete fiction.

For his participation in the war against the Soviet Union, Franco asked Hitler for French Cameroon, part of Algeria, Morocco and a huge amount of raw materials. Plus 200 tanks - but this is already a trifle in comparison with territorial claims.

Hitler refused the enterprising Spanish dictator. Then Spain declares itself a neutral country. That is, not participating in the war on any side. True, its neutrality appeared only on paper. Spain began an incredibly profitable business with Nazi Germany. The time has come for big earnings.

War is not only a great feat, not only blood, disasters, global catastrophes, sacrifice... It is also a lot of money.

As a result of the bargaining, Spain becomes a financial intermediary for Nazi Germany in the supply of oil, which is necessary for fighting in Russia. You can only buy oil profitably from the United States. It is impossible to do this directly - the Americans are officially opponents of Germany.

Then a cunning supply chain is invented. Oil from the “seemingly anti-fascist” America is purchased by the “seemingly neutral” Spain, and then, having increased its interest, resells it to fascist Germany. Germany fuels its tanks, which storm Soviet cities, with gasoline produced from this oil.

Economist Andrey Podoynitsyn comments:

“The Germans were paying for supplies of American oil that went through Spain. Formally, it looked like they were paying the Spaniards; in fact, the Spaniards played the role of a transit link here, and everyone understood perfectly well what they were talking about.”

American companies had a good idea of ​​where this oil was going – for the Wehrmacht’s military equipment. This didn’t bother anyone in the USA, but it made it possible to double the price. It was obvious to them that the German army could not do without oil, and the Spaniards were earning a lot through mediation - and this chain would not be interrupted, buyers would not go anywhere and would purchase at any cost.

The war in Europe was beneficial to American big business, capital, which, first of all, expected to receive huge profits not only as a result of the war, but also directly during the war itself in Europe. It was possible to profit from it by supplying the warring parties with raw materials, equipment and weapons, materials, and by giving loans. So, in fact, it happened. The Americans themselves or American historians are happy to say that it was a good war for America, because the standard of living in the USA has increased.

How America made money

Interesting fact. World War II marked the peak of jewelry and fur purchases in the United States.

At the same time, America, a participant in the anti-Hitler coalition and, accordingly, an ally of the USSR, explained its long non-entry into the war by the fact that the country was in decline after the Great Depression - the economic crisis of the 30s. It was said that they produced only a dozen tanks in the entire decade. They also referred to the difficulties of delivery to the territory of the Soviet Union. At the same time, Germany and even Japan - immediately before the start of the war and at the beginning of it - tirelessly unloaded products, including military equipment, coming from the USA!

Mikhail Myagkov, scientific director of the Russian Military Historical Society, argues:

“There is already a world war going on, the United States is not participating in it yet, but approximately 20% of German engines are manufactured using licenses, technologies and equipment supplied from the United States of America. That is, the United States of America, the leader of the anti-Hitler coalition, supplied Japan with oil until 1941, and Germany with these aircraft engines and other materials.”

For example, the American automobile concern General Motors successfully churned out tanks, armored vehicles and engines for bombers throughout the war for Hitler.

The United States is an indispensable participant in many schemes to provide direct or indirect assistance to Nazi Germany. Since the beginning of the war, huge amounts of money have been moving around the world. American banks operate through the intermediary of neutral European countries. Thanks to this status, they have the opportunity to receive loans from the United States.

There are studies that show that American banks were involved in these large financial flows to supply the warring armies. It was a huge network, financial traffic of gold and currency, through which colossal purchases took place and capital was increased.

So-called pure commercial accounts were created, and banks provided large sums against collateral - and this was German gold. What did this money go to? Everything that Germany needed for the war was purchased! That is, it was the financial support of the Third Reich and its army, which by the time of the peak of all these financial transactions in 1943 had destroyed almost all of Europe. This money also went to those Nazi soldiers who killed about 500 thousand people at Stalingrad alone.

According to Olga Pavlenko, associate professor of the Department of World Politics and International Relations at the Russian State University for the Humanities:

“This is a completely different story of the war, where colossal money is involved. This is the culmination of battles on all fronts of World War II. 609 million Swiss francs of Nazi gold were transferred to Swiss banks for various financial transactions.”

How Switzerland made money

Swiss banks become the main collection point for Nazi gold. What was this gold? These are not only ordinary bars from state reserves, these are jewelry - any small chains and rings taken by the Nazis from victims of the Holocaust, this is gold from plundered territories. Everything flowed into Swiss banks. Of course, in an already melted form.

Using German gold, Swiss banks acted as intermediaries and sold it on foreign markets, then purchased equipment, industrial goods, high technologies, and so on. Particularly important were, for example, the purchase of tungsten. It was mined in the Portuguese colonies, and transported through Portugal to Spain and further to Berlin.

The scale of Swiss assistance to the Fuhrer’s army is difficult to overestimate, and there is still no information about all the cash flows. What has recently become known is absolutely sensational information released by the Swiss National Bank. But private banks, which were also, and perhaps even more, involved in providing financial assistance to Hitler’s army, still carefully store this information, maintaining the secrecy of the client, in this case, Nazi Germany.

It was then, during the Second World War, that Switzerland, thanks to its special position, became in fact the global regulator of the banking system. This other side of the war is especially interesting.

Jean Marais (center) on Manezhnaya Square

Surprisingly, even France took advantage of the results of the war. It included the German lands of Alsace and Lorraine, which it still owns to this day. And this despite the fact that France worked for almost the entire Second World War for Hitler’s army, but was officially at war with Germany since 1939 and was part of the anti-Hitler coalition! True, she did not wage any war. Back in 1940, France asked the Germans to accept surrender. And it was under their occupation until 1944, until Soviet troops arrived.

Few people talk about this today and even know that cafes operated in France, businesses operated in Paris, films were made - 240 feature films alone were shot in France during the occupation. Jean Marais and Gerard Philippe also began their careers under the Nazi occupation regime. The brothels worked quite well, even better than in the pre-war period.

How did France earn money?

From history it is well known about Normandy-Niemen - a French squadron that fought alongside Soviet pilots. But at the same time, France was the main supplier of engines, spare parts, and electronics for the German aviation industry, and the Nazis drove around all conquered territories in French cars. Tens of thousands of vehicles from French factories were transferred to front-line zones, they delivered German soldiers to Moscow, to Stalingrad... Could Germany have waged a war against the Soviet Union if not for such help?!

Destroyed monument to children playing on the station square in Stalingrad

Much is said about Lend-Lease, about the significance it had for the Soviet Union, but it is completely silent about the role that other countries played for the economic power of Germany. Under Lend-Lease, the Soviet Union received 900 steam locomotives from the USA and England, but in France alone the Fuhrer received 5 thousand steam locomotives for his armed forces and hundreds of thousands of cars.

In 1944, Renault Louis, a famous automobile manufacturer, was arrested in France and accused of aiding fascism. Its factories produced equipment for the German troops, including tanks. Then many company executives who worked for Germany were brought to trial, but were eventually released with approximately the following wording: “Guilty has not been proven. He collaborated on an involuntary basis.”

Now in Europe they say: “They knew virtually nothing about these death camps.” They knew. Members of the Resistance put up leaflets, and rumors were heard about what Auschwitz and Buchenwald were. Maybe they didn’t know the scale, but the fact that Jews around them were herded into ghettos and then exterminated was known to most people at that time.

France was also used as a territory for the repair of military equipment of German troops. Units defeated on the Eastern Front were withdrawn here for restoration. Here the famous Sixth Tank Division was repaired and prepared for battle, which then, in December 1942, tried to break through the encirclement ring near Stalingrad and killed many thousands of Soviet soldiers.

It is known that several units in Hitler's army consisted directly of the French.

Grigory Popov, candidate of economic sciences, thinks this: “As for the French, there was a call for volunteers on French territory to serve in the Wehrmacht, and then the CSU troops, about two thousand French volunteers, even took part in the battle for Moscow.”

How Europe fought as part of the Wehrmacht

Many residents of neutral and occupied countries marched under the German banner. According to researchers, about a million soldiers from countries that were not part of the Nazi bloc fought against the Soviet Union.

Norway, according to various sources - from six to eight thousand in the Norwegian Legion. France - 10 thousand. Netherlands – 40 thousand. The Baltic countries formed not only legions, but also then SS divisions. There were two Nazi divisions in Latvia that fought on the Soviet-German front and took part in the siege of Leningrad.

In one cemetery near Leningrad, 900 people from the 14 thousand Scandinavian volunteers who fought on the Eastern Front are buried. And in total, several times more of them died, because one of the military units of Hitler’s army, staffed by Norwegians and Danes, the Norland division, was defeated already near Berlin.

Dmitry Surzhik, candidate of historical sciences, testifies:

“A significant part of Europeans joined the ranks of the Wehrmacht and SS divisions, driven by an elementary sense of profit - to profit from something in the eastern lands.”

One of the most fiercely fighting on Hitler's side was the SS assault brigade "Wallonia", which later received the status of a full-fledged division. And it was formed on the territory of Belgium, which was not an official ally of Germany! Moreover, it was this division, under the command of the Belgian nationalist Leon Degrelle, that provided serious assistance to the German army in southern Russia and near Kursk. For such merits, Hitler called Degrelle his brother and, of course, bestowed him with orders. Moreover, Degrel lived happily until 1994 in Spain. The Nazi criminal led a fairly active life, even writing letters to the Pope.

This was already in the 1960s, when Degrel felt quite confident. No requests for his extradition to Spain were granted, and he set about justifying Nazism. There was no reaction then, and this letter remained just an appeal; there was no official response to it.

In addition to such divisions as “Wallonia”, which fought directly at the front, police services were recruited from Europeans. For example, in Denmark, more than 10 thousand policemen and gendarmes helped the Germans, in Holland the police numbered 19 thousand people, and in France there were over 60 thousand people in the Gestapo and volunteer police!

But still, mostly Europeans were taken into the SS - the most merciless unit of Hitler’s army, which also included death camps.

By the way, the military uniform for the SS men was created by the now world-famous men's clothing designer Hugo Boss. He made his first money by dressing elite Nazi troops. For a more successful business, he also joined Hitler’s National Socialist Party. And then there was a lot of work for the designer: including creating uniforms for assault troops and the Hitler Youth. But it was clearly not because of the designer uniform that the SS troops were massively replenished by residents of neutral and occupied countries. The Germans specially created SS formations so that people would have nowhere to go.

And of course, significant military assistance was provided to Germany by its official European allies: Hungary, Finland, Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Croatia. And this is several million more soldiers on the side of Hitler’s army!

They seemed to unite a united Europe under the Nazi swastika. Germany could not have continued the war if it had not united all of Europe under its leadership. Today we talk about a united Europe, the European Union, but in fact the first European Union under the Nazi sign appeared in 1940-1941.

From the Reich to the European Union

It seems incredible, but today’s European Union, consisting of 28 countries led by modern Germany, is geographically and economically almost an exact copy of the very Europe that, as part of the troops of Nazi Germany in 1941, decided to divide the living space of the Soviet Union. The only difference is that today both Europe and Germany - the economic and political leader of Europe - actually represent another US state, dependent both financially and militarily on Washington.

Alexey Kochetkov, political scientist, president of the Foundation for the Development of Civil Society Institutions "People's Democracy" reflects:

“Europe in the post-war world has ceased to be a subject. She has lost her sovereignty and is completely subject to someone else's will. There are foreign troops in Europe. Europeans are being imposed an information policy through media control.”

The American president, as can be easily seen from the news stories, is the most frequent company of German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In a photo from the recent G7 summit in Bavaria, Merkel extended her arms in front of Barack Obama sitting on a bench. The photo caused a strong reaction in society, especially on social networks. Merkel was called "dancing in front of the US President." Of course, the German Chancellor does not dance, but only expressively tells Obama something. Nevertheless, this photograph contains the whole meaning of today's world politics.

And this would be of little interest, and a photograph of Merkel dancing would only seem funny if it did not directly concern our country.

The close relationship between the American President and the German Chancellor is very similar to the relationship between people in the position of superior and subordinate. And in fact it is so! Germany has no right to make any external military-political decisions without consultation with the Americans and NATO bodies. Few people know that starting from the first post-war Chancellor of Germany, Konrad Adenauer, each of them signed a secret document called the Chancellor Act. This is nothing more than a statement by the German government of its obligations towards its allies - in particular towards the United States. In other words, in accordance with this Chancellor Act, German policy must never contradict US policy. Therefore, until now, Germany is legally a country with limited sovereignty, occupied by foreign troops, that is, controlled by the United States. As is known, the military-political bloc, which now includes about 30 countries of the world, was founded in the United States in order, as it literally sounded, “to protect Europe from Soviet influence.” Now, it turns out, from the Russian...

The Americans, immediately after the Second World War, one after another began to develop plans to destroy our country, starting from the doctrine of the head of the CIA Allen Dulles to today's events, including isolation. And it was the United States that had a hand in the collapse of the USSR. It all started with the fact that in 1982, President Ronald Reagan signed a national security directive, which set the task of damaging the Soviet economy. They were not at all happy with the fact that the USSR's income from oil exports has been constantly increasing in recent years. The American government is urgently beginning to look for means to turn the situation around.

Already at that moment, the Americans made significant efforts to dismantle Soviet industry and economy in order to turn Russia simply into a raw material appendage.

The United States manages, through long negotiations, to convince the Arab sheikhs to put oil on the market at low prices. Accordingly, Soviet raw materials cannot withstand competition; their prices drop threefold. In just a few months, the USSR loses 13 billion dollars - a disaster for the country and its budget! It was 1986, when real devastation began in our country, which in a few difficult years would lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

We have never been considered full partners; we have always been viewed either as a serious adversary who is capable of resisting, or as a food source. The enemy needs to be smashed, destroyed, broken and turned simply into food - gobble up resources, seize the economy, industry and use essentially unlimited natural resources as you want.

Now compare these Western goals with Hitler's goals. The fascist master plan Ost, developed on the eve of World War II, provided for the complete colonization of the Soviet Union and other countries of Eastern Europe. Confiscation and export of food to Germany, use of all resources of the occupied territories, eviction of people from cities to villages to work for the Nazis.

Yuri Nikiforov, professor, senior researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, shares his thoughts:

“For the Germans, undermining the biological strength of the Russian people was one of the goals of their policy in the East, and, of course, this undermining could be achieved, among other things, by exterminating millions of people. In addition, the Germans understood perfectly well that this was an economic robbery and would lead to starvation for many millions more people. Goering, for example, in one of the documents of his economic headquarters wrote directly that if they take out a certain amount of food from Russia, then at least 30 million people there will apparently die of starvation.”

And here are the words of a modern politician, US Secretary of State until 2009 Condoleezza Rice: "Siberia is too big to be governed by one country." Moreover, in her opinion, the Russians unlawfully possess such resources, and they need to be transferred to the management of some kind of world community. In other words, it would be nice to take possession of this territory of Russia and everything that is located and mined there.

In this case, Russian citizens are turning into superfluous people, for whom there is no longer enough gas, oil, or agricultural products, who simply must leave and give way to the strong. In this sense, there is no difference between the Ost plan and what many representatives of the Western elite would now generally like to do with Russia.