Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What are your thoughts on Hitler and nazism? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I hope that you have actually looked Hitler up and aren't just going by what you've been taught in GCSE history
    -__-
    But anyways, I'd like some opinions on Hitler and Nazism, what do you think of them? Were there any positives? Do you agree with it, even a little?

    And if you're too shy to say it on the thread then PM me what you think.

    Thanks! Your replies are much appreciated ^_^
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    When studying the early life of Hitler, I suppose I felt some kind of empathy towards him and his situation. However, his later actions were obviously disgusting and inexcusable.

    Although, society in Nazi Germany was not completely negative by any means, especially when considering things such as infrastructural and medical advances. I am not advocating Nazism in any way.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I can't put this in to the right words but I'll try anyway.

    So on the one hand he was a despicable, contemptible pile of trash. In short. His bigoted (a light way to put it) and intolerant views were disgusting and his 'techniques' (not the right word but oh well) of sterilising or euthanising those who weren't seen as ideal (gays, homeless, gypsies, people with disabilities, prostitutes etc.) cannot be described strongly enough as abhorrent. And that's only a small part of it all.

    But he was a very clever man, who used very clever methods of getting in to power. He also did drastically improve life for some Germans at the time, but this of course was only for the white, straight able-bodied Germans. He reduced unemployment, improved quality of living and I'm sure there's other things I just can't recall them currently.

    I haven't said everything I wanted, but I hope that all makes sense. He was awful, but he was clever, and not everything he did was bad - if you were the 'ideal German'. But most of it was. And sorry but my knowledge does come from GCSE History haha, I have thought about this deeply previously though and wish I could put what I'm trying to say into better words.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The ideology was much closer to progressive leftism than anyone likes to admit, even eugenics has it's roots in the British Fabian school. Morally a Nazi not employing a Jew and the modern American state forcing racial and gender quotas are moral equivalents and Britain has no real right to claim moral superiority over the Nazi state given the Jewish refugees they turned away as well as the fact that a losing Allied Axis could easily have committed some sort of hysterical and extreme horror as the Nazis did.


    I can understand why Hitler wanted to put his in-group first even if I would have seen him as the enemy, but I don't see that aspect of his mentality as wrong for much the same reason as you do more for your family than you do for your wider circle, at the same time I think the allies should have utterly destroyed Germany after WW2 so they were never able to even attain even regional power rather than dominating Europe as they do currently.


    The economic miracle was a complete lie, the Nazi state issued MEFO bonds to covertly hyperinflate their economy to fund rearmament whilst reducing unemployment, this is what forced them to randomly declare war on minor states, they had to strip the resources of the nations around them to avoid the long-term effects of this policy. That's not a good economic policy any more than taking on drug debts and robbing your neighbour to pay them is a good career move.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Pseudo-science.
    Socialist-nationalist no. He is simply mein Fuhrer .
    What i actually mean is you can't define who he was as a person and what he actually wanted, but his war crimes are known and suggest that he was a bad person.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brahmin of Booty)
    The ideology was much closer to progressive leftism than anyone likes to admit, even eugenics has it's roots in the British Fabian school. Morally a Nazi not employing a Jew and the modern American state forcing racial and gender quotas are moral equivalents and Britain has no real right to claim moral superiority over the Nazi state given the Jewish refugees they turned away as well as the fact that a losing Allied Axis could easily have committed some sort of hysterical and extreme horror as the Nazis did.


    I can understand why Hitler wanted to put his in-group first even if I would have seen him as the enemy, but I don't see that aspect of his mentality as wrong for much the same reason as you do more for your family than you do for your wider circle, at the same time I think the allies should have utterly destroyed Germany after WW2 so they were never able to even attain even regional power rather than dominating Europe as they do currently.


    The economic miracle was a complete lie, the Nazi state issued MEFO bonds to covertly hyperinflate their economy to fund rearmament whilst reducing unemployment, this is what forced them to randomly declare war on minor states, they had to strip the resources of the nations around them to avoid the long-term effects of this policy. That's not a good economic policy any more than taking on drug debts and robbing your neighbour to pay them is a good career move.
    I can see why you're saying that but the two have different ideas behind them. The regressive left is about so called equality (more like forced equality), but nazism is more about the good of the people (the people being those of the aryan race/german descent) and in nazism Jews are viewed as evil and satanic because they are hurting the aforementioned people. Since both groups are excluding people who are doing well in society I can see why you have compared the two. But there are many differences.

    When you look at the state Germany was in after WWI, you can see that Germany needed a Hitler of sorts, someone who would put the German people above all else. (Of course the means were questionable to say the least).
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I think Hitler was not only intelligent but very, very charismatic. I guess he was in the right place at the right time for his message to grip hold of people. I saw something of him on You Tube the other day. Can't remember for the life of me what it exactly was. But a young woman leaned over and kissed him on the cheek. He smiled at her, but looked very shy and uncomfortable by her attention. I know he liked classical music and didn't he play the violin? I also read years ago that when his pet dog died he was devastated and cried for hours. What I am trying to get at is although what he DID and what he BELIEVED in were evil and vile, Hitler just like the rest of us was a human being. Maybe he never initially intended the extermination of six million Jews. Or maybe he had dreamed about it for years before. Maybe people around him are more to blame for giving orders they did. Who knows? We must never ever forget what happened, to ensure it never happens again. But I think it is silly to think of him as some sort of a monster. He wasn't. His actions were monstrous, but he was just a man like any other.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Just to add, even the British Royal Family were taken in by his charm. I'm sure we've all by now seen the infamous footage of a young Princess Elizabeth giving a Nazi salute. He must have had a big impact on people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Electrospective)
    I can see why you're saying that but the two have different ideas behind them. The regressive left is about so called equality (more like forced equality), but nazism is more about the good of the people (the people being those of the aryan race/german descent) and in nazism Jews are viewed as evil and satanic because they are hurting the aforementioned people. Since both groups are excluding people who are doing well in society I can see why you have compared the two. But there are many differences.

    When you look at the state Germany was in after WWI, you can see that Germany needed a Hitler of sorts, someone who would put the German people above all else. (Of course the means were questionable to say the least).
    It's the ideology of victimhood

    The regressive left uses conspiracy theories such as patriarchy and White privilege to explain a lack of equality in the modern world, in the exact same way Hitler and Goebbels used conspiracy theories to explain the existence of Jewish success, particularly in cities such as Vienna and Frankfurt
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He was definitely a very smart man. He had managed to get full control of Germany right from nothing.
    I studied GCSE History. A very interesting yet unsettling topic.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Well either he was a nice guy who was just a bit misunderstood. Or he was a complete psychopath.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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