I think I get the point they're trying to make, democracy had become complacent and Hitler gave it a common threat and enemy, but in retrospect... Didn't work out that great now, did it

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

It's difficult to quantify, but I think there is a compelling argument to be made - just off of my head, WW2 led to:

the fall of German autocracy/restoration of German democracy (though Hitler did kinda break that one in the first place)
Italian and Japanese democracy
redistribution of wealth/power in Britain
the 4th french republic
alignment of the European democracies
establishment of the UN

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 5 months ago

end of the British empire
eventual formation of the EU to replace the League of Nations

But also

invention of the nuclear bomb
by extension, escalation of the cold war
numerous coups against democratic leaders and proxy wars due to it

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 20 points 5 months ago

Italian and Japanese democracy

And, albeit on a longer timeframe, Taiwanese and South Korean democracy.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 6 points 5 months ago

It worked fine at the time, the problem is that all of that motivation to defend democracy was artificial, and slowly faded from the public as the war faded into the past.