Discussion Main / TheQuisling

An interesting question that Alternate History writers maybe sometimes need to contend with is who would have been this in Britain if it had fallen during the Blitz. And the lazy poorly researched answer would be to just have it be the most well known British Fascist Oswald Mosley. The truth is the Nazis would have unlikely to trust him since like Georges Valois in France he was more of a Mussolini style Fascist and too much of a Patriot.

The Nazis would have probably put the Duke of Windsor back on the throne and then worked with Arnold Leese, Hamilton Beamish, William Joyce and various people linked to the Nordic League and the Right Club like Archibald Ramsay and the 5th Duke of Wellington.

I was hoping to ask, would it be fine to edit part of the starting paragraph describing the trope? To recap...

"Named after Vidkun Quisling, who assisted the Nazis in their conquest and rule of Norway during World War II. Heck, prior to this, he was known for helping explorer Fritjof Nansen in humanitarian work during the Armenian Genocide and Russian famine. So not only was he a traitor to his nation, he became a traitor to humanity."

The way it's phrased makes it sound like his actions as a humanitarian were also bad actions. Maybe it would be better to rephrase it to...

"Named after Vidkun Quisling, who assisted the Nazis in their conquest and rule of Norway during World War II. Ironically, he was once known for helping explorer Fritjof Nansen in humanitarian work during the Armenian Genocide and Russian famine. So not only was he a traitor to his nation, he became a traitor to humanity."

Would that be fine?

I am seeing a lot of traitors in the list that I don't think really qualify as Quislings. Wormtongue didn't rule as a puppet of a conqueror, but was a spy and agent instead. There are several others in there, like Benedict Arnold. Unless I am missing an aspect of the definition that includes regular treasonous behaviour.

What is the difference between The Quisling and Les Collaborateurs?

Removed:

• One could argue the Liberation Theology movement was a group of people doing this for the Communists.
  • Or not.
    • They were that or Well Intentioned Extremists. Either way, the Liberation Theology movement's willingness to work with despotic regimes cost many people their lives.
    • Ironic considering that many well known Liberation Theologists were inspired to stand up for the poor and opressed of the despotic regimes like Salvador, Chile, Colombia, and many others. Some, like Oscar Romero, lost their lives on the hands of dictators
      • They also tended to stick up for the Communists, who, if anything, tended to be even worse.
        • Above is the example of did not do research - The Liberation Theology is not a Communist movement. It is Christian theology that incorporates Marxist theory of Class struggle into the whole deal. Besides, the communism movement grew from a Christian Communism / Primitivism club, not the other way round.