Right
Partly right for FranceHowever to further touch on what the author said, the vast majority didn't resist and the resistance in countries like France didn't gain widespread support despite this. Because the population and societies of the occupied countries largely accepted that new European and International order that the Nazi Regime was attempting to establish through aggression, had legitimacy and deserved a try since as we know the previous democratic governments weren't as a whole viewed as very successful.
Some part of France did liberate them selves and several "insurgent"/resistant were hardly crushed. Which brings the question of who is an insurent and who is a resistant (freedom fighter). (No doubts on my side about resistance against Nazi regime but still, the question remains).
Wrong. The STO Service de Travail Obligatoire (mandatory work service) in germany was one of the trigger of the rally to the resistance cause.The Nazi Regime further played on this by putting policies in place that attempted to create a less harsher and more benevolent occupation in countries like France, Denmark, the Netherlands and the remaining WWII occupied nations in Western Europe.
But it is true that the problematic of the democratic regime was not the one coming first.
Also, you have to consider that many of the resistant were communist.As long as the Nazi regime did not attack USSR, they did not move. The day Hitler launched Barbarossa, it was another story.
What about Yougoslavia?The German occupation and administration in occupied Western Europe was more successful in preventing upsprings and guerrilla war, then the stark strategy practiced on the Eastern Front in the occupied Soviet Republics, like Belarus , the Ukraine, or parts of Russia it's self.
It is true that French resistance was not that powerfull but the actions taken at the end of the war to prepare Operation Overlord were of some importance. As example, the resistance destroyed almost all bridges between Paris and Normandie.
Bookmarks