Turn on thread page Beta

Adolf Hitler - The Greatest Statesman who ever lived watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Now, when I say Adolf Hitler - The Greatest Statesman who ever lived I am counterbalancing all the negative press about him and opening up a space to ask the question of "Is everything we are told about Hitler truthful, fair and balanced?"

    Mark Weber argues that what we are told is not truthful, fair and balanced. President J. F. Kenned said that in a number of years the world would view Hitler in a neutral light, but this never happened.

    Mr. Weber argued that this did not happen naturally, as is usually the case in history because vested interest and the media are intentionally causing a biased viewpoint because of a number of ends that this can control.

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Adolf Hitler was one of the major butchers and abusers of human rights of the 20th century. He was very good at what he did, but what he did was evil beyond words. His ideas of course are what deserve the most repudiation, because his ideas have the power to live on, if humanity lets them.

    More useful than thinking about how bad Hitler was though, is dealing with the current evil in the world. Fascism had its heydey in the 1930s, Communism in the latter half of the 20th century. Today the world needs to confront Islamism, which continues to oppress and murder people to a similar extent to the previous two.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by felamaslen)
    Adolf Hitler was one of the major butchers and abusers of human rights of the 20th century. He was very good at what he did, but what he did was evil beyond words. His ideas of course are what deserve the most repudiation, because his ideas have the power to live on, if humanity lets them.

    More useful than thinking about how bad Hitler was though, is dealing with the current evil in the world. Fascism had its heydey in the 1930s, Communism in the latter half of the 20th century. Today the world needs to confront Islamism, which continues to oppress and murder people to a similar extent to the previous two.
    But you have just responded with what you think, without responding to this man who says that popular so called facts about Hitler and the Third Reich are often wrong, even when checked against easily verifiable sources of which he gives a large number.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    This is a perfect example of a phenomenon I've noticed amongst young people studying history. I've noticed that a lot of people in my classes proudly say things like "Hitler was a brilliant leader", because they think they have some kind of a 'superior knowledge' over the common preconceptions that he was objectively the most evil thing that has ever lived. This really irritates me because, whilst one could argue that he did things which benefited some people, the fact remains that he was a complete maniac who directly or indirectly resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of people across the world. The attraction of claiming things like "Hitler was a good leader" is similar to the attraction of believing conspiracy theories. People like the idea that they know some kind of a secret truth that the public doesn't know. Unfortunately, whilst the issue isn't black and white, there really isn't a secret truth in this case.

    There is absolutely no way you can justify the statement that Hitler was "The greatest statesman who ever lived" nor any other kind of statement implying that Hitler was a good leader. Good leaders lead in the interest of humanity, and Hitler did the polar opposite of that.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    How about we play a game? You say something Hitler did that was 'good'; and i'll give you two things that Hitler did that were tyrannical, genocidal, vicious, inept or idiotic. Let's see who runs out first.

    Nothing Hitler ever did demonstrated flair or genius. This is pseudo-history for idiots. He was a mass murderer, he was a pathetic military commander; the judgement that he was in fact a great statesman and military leader really makes my blood boil, he was not, he completely was not. His 'Thousand Year Reich' lasted less than a decade!

    This is a prime example as to why history should be compulsory right through to GCSE level. We cannot lose sight of the fact that Hitler was an appalling human being, just like we seem to be losing sight of our own countries contribution to the war - everyone underplays the role of Britain, we lost 400,000, about 1% of our entire population.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jjj90)
    How about we play a game? You say something Hitler did that was 'good'; and i'll give you two things that Hitler did that were tyrannical, genocidal, vicious, inept or idiotic. Let's see who runs out first.

    Nothing Hitler ever did demonstrated flair or genius. This is pseudo-history for idiots. He was a mass murderer, he was a pathetic military commander; the judgement that he was in fact a great statesman and military leader really makes my blood boil, he was not, he completely was not. His 'Thousand Year Reich' lasted less than a decade!

    This is a prime example as to why history should be compulsory right through to GCSE level. We cannot lose sight of the fact that Hitler was an appalling human being, just like we seem to be losing sight of our own countries contribution to the war - everyone underplays the role of Britain, we lost 400,000, about 1% of our entire population.
    Presumably if you had studied your GCSE history you would know that Britain, France and the United States declared war on Germany. Do you attack someone then blame then for your own injury if they defend themselves against YOUR attack? I wish Hitler, Saddam Hussein & Colonel Gadaffi had been able to defeat these attacks that a corrupt power is causing in your name and unfortunately with innocent people's blood.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theotherside_)
    Presumably if you had studied your GCSE history you would know that Britain, France and the United States declared war on Germany. Do you attack someone then blame then for your own injury if they defend themselves against YOUR attack?
    Oh dear, oh dear.

    I think we've just hit the crux of the matter. The reason that you think Hitler was 'the greatest statesman who ever lived!" is in actual fact because you know nothing, at all, about the war. Not even the basics, not even how the war came about...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Putting aside the vast body count he was responsible for, Hitler made some incredibly poor political and military decisions (attacking the USSR being the obvious massive one) and left Germany in ruins. I don't think many people would consider him the greatest statesman who ever lived.

    I hear he was kind to his dogs though.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theotherside_)
    But you have just responded with what you think, without responding to this man who says that popular so called facts about Hitler and the Third Reich are often wrong, even when checked against easily verifiable sources of which he gives a large number.
    Here are the core facts:

    Hitler destroyed the emerging liberal democracy that was the Weimar republic. He turned it into a totalitarian police state, denying basic human rights such as freedom of speech, and freedom to vote, to all of its citizens and denying specific human rights to certain groups for absolutely no reason. He waged war on multiple democracies including the US and UK, in order to advance his ideology of Fascist oppression. He and those under his command murdered (literally) millions of innocent people in democide. He caused the most deadly conflict in human history, and let Europe go to ruin (thankfully the US saved it with its Marshall plan, and the phoenix of democracy rose from the ashes in the parts not administered by the evil USSR).

    None of these facts are disputed by anybody with more than one brain cell, and all of them combine to make it quite obvious to me that Hitler was evil on a level similar to Stalin and Pol Pot.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jjj90)
    Oh dear, oh dear.

    I think we've just hit the crux of the matter. The reason that you think Hitler was 'the greatest statesman who ever lived!" is in actual fact because you know nothing, at all, about the war. Not even the basics, not even how the war came about...
    Please highlight any inaccuracies in my statement as opposed to saying I know nothing. How do you know how much about how the war came about? And how do you know how much you know in relation to how much I know. One can look at this on many levels but I think the sequence of events you refer to start with the Dansig Corridor, but this does back to the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. But its far too much to put in a paragraph and as I said, it depends on what level you look at it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by felamaslen)
    Here are the core facts:

    Hitler destroyed the emerging liberal democracy that was the Weimar republic. He turned it into a totalitarian police state, denying basic human rights such as freedom of speech, and freedom to vote, to all of its citizens and denying specific human rights to certain groups for absolutely no reason. He waged war on multiple democracies including the US and UK, in order to advance his ideology of Fascist oppression. He and those under his command murdered (literally) millions of innocent people in democide. He caused the most deadly conflict in human history, and let Europe go to ruin (thankfully the US saved it with its Marshall plan, and the phoenix of democracy rose from the ashes in the parts not administered by the evil USSR).

    None of these facts are disputed by anybody with more than one brain cell, and all of them combine to make it quite obvious to me that Hitler was evil on a level similar to Stalin and Pol Pot.
    And how would you handle a country in such conflict between itself with 2 groups blowing each other up. You would need to implement some type of emergency policy. At least he had the courage to do it and bring order to Germany. Its similar to Saddam Hussein. He was the best thing for Iraq, it was stable and people were much happier than today.

    There is an obsession with democracy. America would do well to have a military coup and take over the mass media who control everything and expel the occupation government.

    How many people do you think have been murdered with allied carpet bombing indiscriminently in German, atom bombs in Japan, Iraqi over a million children killed.

    What criterion decides who is righteous and who is a murderer. Surely the only criterion are a. who wins and b. who writes the history.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theotherside_)
    Please highlight any inaccuracies in my statement as opposed to saying I know nothing. How do you know how much about how the war came about? And how do you know how much you know in relation to how much I know. One can look at this on many levels but I think the sequence of events you refer to start with the Dansig Corridor, but this does back to the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. But its far too much to put in a paragraph and as I said, it depends on what level you look at it.
    Okay... Britain and France declared war on Germany. The USA did not, Hitler declared war on the US, just like he idiotically declared war on the Soviet Union. You also seem to think that Britain and France were the aggressors... well this is total nonsense. Britain tried to appease Germany (Neville Chaimberlain's piece of paper etc.) and ceded the Sudetenland to Hitler on the understanding that he would leave the rest of Czechoslovakia alone, he reneged on this promise (because he was an underhanded liar) so Britain and France threatened that if he invaded Poland they would declare war... he did invade Poland (murdering thousands upon thousands by the way). How can you possibly suggest that Hitler was 'defending' anything here? By this very early point he had illegally invaded two sovereign states and, unless i'm mistaken, the Rhineland too.

    Or did Mark Weber omit all of these niggling details?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Hitler was a poor statesmen. He had no real vision for Germany other than some kind of Mitteleuropa/Lebensraum. His policy ideas were often contradictory and determined by pragmatism - (to what extent was he an ideologue?) for example his views on women. His plans for militarization required autarky which came close to ruining Germany's economy. Germany was dangerously low on gold reserves.He dismissed Schacht who was a formidable German economic policy maker.Civil service was inefficient - polychratic rule, agencies and departments rivaling each other. He probably set West Germany back 15 years and East Germany back 35 years.

    However, he was a captivating orator, remilitarised Germany, made significant gains in terms of Versailles and was a keen opportunist. Oh he also played the big businesses well and it's miraculous that he Hitler, as a person was actually a popular figurehead to the German people.


    (Original post by felamaslen)
    Adolf Hitler was one of the major butchers and abusers of human rights of the 20th century. He was very good at what he did, but what he did was evil beyond words. His ideas of course are what deserve the most repudiation, because his ideas have the power to live on, if humanity lets them.

    More useful than thinking about how bad Hitler was though, is dealing with the current evil in the world. Fascism had its heydey in the 1930s, Communism in the latter half of the 20th century. Today the world needs to confront Islamism, which continues to oppress and murder people to a similar extent to the previous two.

    ^lol.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theotherside_)
    Presumably if you had studied your GCSE history you would know that Britain, France and the United States declared war on Germany. Do you attack someone then blame then for your own injury if they defend themselves against YOUR attack? I wish Hitler, Saddam Hussein & Colonel Gadaffi had been able to defeat these attacks that a corrupt power is causing in your name and unfortunately with innocent people's blood.
    Germany invaded and annexed various parts of Europe before the 'line in the sand' became Poland. Germany was warned that if action was taken to invade Poland, it would be met with an international response. Germany invaded Poland anyway, resulting in war with the Britain, large parts of it's empire, and France.

    The US only entered the war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour.


    I'm afraid pointing the finger at Britain and France as aggressors is misleading and misinformed. Neville Chamberlain believed in a policy of appeasement and only became inclined towards war once every option had been exhausted. The main criticism of Chamberlain was the lengths he went to to try and prevent war, which included concessions in terms of territory and a blind eye to treaty obligations in the build up to war.

    On your wider points about Hitler as a statesmen: he was responsible for the killing of millions of Jews, gays, Roma Gypsies and people with disabilities. There aren't many people out there who would argue this did not take place.

    It was genocide on the scale never before seen, and is probably the principal reason why Hitler will never be viewed in a 'neutral' light. Frankly, it should never be any different. The worst thing about his suicide was the fact he was not tried for his abhorrent crimes against humanity.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jjj90)
    Okay... Britain and France declared war on Germany. The USA did not, Hitler declared war on the US, just like he idiotically declared war on the Soviet Union. You also seem to think that Britain and France were the aggressors... well this is total nonsense. Britain tried to appease Germany (Neville Chaimberlain's piece of paper etc.) and ceded the Sudetenland to Hitler on the understanding that he would leave the rest of Czechoslovakia alone, he reneged on this promise (because he was an underhanded liar) so Britain and France threatened that if he invaded Poland they would declare war... he did invade Poland (murdering thousands upon thousands by the way). How can you possibly suggest that Hitler was 'defending' anything here? By this very early point he had illegally invaded two sovereign states and, unless i'm mistaken, the Rhineland too.

    Or did Mark Weber omit all of these niggling details?
    Sudetenland & the Dansig Corrior were not about attacking Czechoslovakia or Poland, they were about uniting the German people in those areas with Germany. The people in those areas invited him with flowers and tears. Why were there these German populations over other boarders? Because of artificial lines drawn up by the victors in 1919.

    Same with Austria, Hitler never invaded Austria, the Austrian people literally invited him with flowers and tears. In a poll it was found that 99% of people supported this.


    Hitler bent over backwards to avoid war with Britain. He literally did everything in his power to avoid this including personal pleas to Chaimbelain.


    Hitler tried everything possible to avoid conflict with the USA. Insofar individual hostile acts on the part of the USA against German merchant ships or individual U-boats would not necessarily have changed this basic German position. One of the decisive aspects was that the US, contrary to their neutrality status, sent convoys of ships carrying military material to England with the convoys, as old film reels show, occasionally extending from horizon to horizon, sometimes two or three lines next to each other. A few miles away in the sea German U-boats were observing the convoys, their torpedos ready to fire, but with orders from Berlin to just sit still and do nothing. So independent of heavily publicised individual insidents it was really the gigantic supply routes to England across the Atlantic, which inevitably forced the Germans to declare war on the US, who pretended all the while they were neutral, to secure their supply ships to England with this fraud. At first when U.S. ships fired on German ships, the German ships were ordered not to fire back in order not to provoke.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Define Statesman, as in someone who fought hard for his country and only had it's best interests at heart?

    Not only did he kill so many and ruin so many economies across the world, he also destroyed Germany, causing unbelievable costs in life and money, and leaving a lingering war guilt. Then causing it to split and be at the centre of the Cold War for 40 years.

    No in fact, I'd consider him one of the worst. Plus statesman of who, he was Austrian.

    I would love to hear some INDEPENDENT first hand sources, not that any exist I suspect.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    In my opinion it is worth making the point that economically, he was superb. Created a lot of jobs and was a very, very intelligent men.

    Killing or putting anyone through the brutality of concentration camps though, kind of overshadows any good he did... so no, he wasn't a great statesman who has bought decades of shame to Germany.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theotherside_)
    And how would you handle a country in such conflict between itself with 2 groups blowing each other up. You would need to implement some type of emergency policy. At least he had the courage to do it and bring order to Germany. Its similar to Saddam Hussein. He was the best thing for Iraq, it was stable and people were much happier than today.

    There is an obsession with democracy. America would do well to have a military coup and take over the mass media who control everything and expel the occupation government.

    How many people do you think have been murdered with allied carpet bombing indiscriminently in German, atom bombs in Japan, Iraqi over a million children killed.

    What criterion decides who is righteous and who is a murderer. Surely the only criterion are a. who wins and b. who writes the history.
    This list is a comparison of the number of innocent civilians killed by a few different states in the 20th century. The source is here: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

    Communist China: 76,702,000
    Communist USSR: 61,911,000
    Fascist Germany: 20,946,000
    Axis Japan: 5,964,000
    United Kingdom: 816,000
    USA: 575,000

    So fascist Germany killed a number of innocent people in 1933-45 orders of magnitude higher than Britain did in virtually the entire 20th century (1900-87). That fact alone should demonstrate to you that Britain is and always has been far more righteous than fascist Germany.

    Where's your source that over a million children were killed by Allied soldiers in Iraq? I don't dispute that large numbers of innocent people have been killed, but they were mostly (in fact I would bet almost exclusively) by the sort of Islamists who behead people for fun on the internet.

    A military coup in America would spell the end for the concept of liberal democracy. I hope that day never occurs. If you want to see the consequences of long-term military rule, look at Congo or Uganda.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seathestars)
    In my opinion it is worth making the point that economically, he was superb. Created a lot of jobs and was a very, very intelligent men.

    Killing or putting anyone through the brutality of concentration camps though, kind of overshadows any good he did... so no, he wasn't a great statesman who has bought decades of shame to Germany.
    Totally agree also i personally think he was one of the greatest public speakers around, granted his visions were messed up but he always got the crowd going and on his side.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spooks88)
    Totally agree also i personally think he was one of the greatest public speakers around, granted his visions were messed up but he always got the crowd going and on his side.
    Ah I should have remembered to mention that. Yeah, plus he was passionate. I tell you something, I'd love to see one of our politicians have Hitler's passion when speaking, albeit channelled in a better way of course.
 
 
 

2,727

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.