Will Hitler be seen in a more positive way in the far future?

Holy Cow! You might be exactly right about where I heard that statement!, thought it made sense, but I guess it's nonsense, anyways, hope no hard feelings?

Holy necropost!

That is better suited for its own thread.

Less a necro-post, and more like a zombie invasion. WH and OT are invaded by re-revived Domen threads, and it's our duty to put them to death.

I declare myself the ally of the great necromancer Domen. I shall not let this thread die! Plus necromancers are cool anyways.

I find the economics argument fascinating, but I think that economics is a side note to Hitler's decision to invade Russia. I mean, I don't think that Hitler didn't think about it, but I feel that if Hitler wanted to increase the agricultural base of Germany, he would have kept the truce with Russia and focused on conquering eastern Europe.

I really just think they were LARPing.

Why not take what the man himself said at the time about his decision to invade the Soviet Union?


Link to video.

Isn't it simply that he feared an attack by Stalin and decided to pre-empt him?

Discussing propaganda is pointless. Hitler was recorded speaking privately to the commander-and-chief of the Finnish army:


Link to video.

Borachio said:

Why not take what the man himself said at the time about his decision to invade the Soviet Union?

Click to expand...

Then why not take what the man himself said about his decision to annihilate Jews?

He prophesized that if they brought about another world war, they would experience their annihilation. This was no empty talk. The world war is here. The annihilation of the Jews must be the necessary consequence.

Click to expand...

http://ww2history.com/key_moments/Holocaust/Hitler_talks_of_Jewish_annihilation

and let's not forget that actually they didn't actually see many of the divisions . Supposed to have something like 200 and discovering 360 . Not that Germans were not planning to invade and Russians planning not to invade and West making the whole gameplan on having the two fighting each other ...

The German strategy was based less on a cold-objective-logical assessment of the actual economic situation and more on Hitler reverting back to his original strategy arising from WWI experiences. His main thesis was that Germany, a continental power is a natural ally to Britain, a naval power. Germany needed lebensraum to avoid what happened in the winter of 1918-19 when a continued naval blockade caused widespread hunger. The Ukraine was to be an emergency breadbasket as well as long-term colony. Hitler seemed to have convinced himself that he could win perhaps a tacit understanding of his motives from the British aristocracy allowing him free-hand to crush the Bolshevik beast. I believe it was wishful thinking combined with obstinate ideology that determined the actual course of events.

Also, Hitler believed he could crush the Soviets because he believed that no matter howm many divisions they had they had inferior organization and weapon technology. More fatally, he failed to understand that whereas in WWI many in Russia wanted defeat or at least were less than enthusiastic about the Tsar winning in 1941 the Soviets could convince the masses that this was a patriotic war to save mother Russia from a colonist conqueror. This is the single most important factor in Hitler's downfall and only partly the winter boots and trucks mde by GM and Ford for the Red Army.

Mouthwash said:

Posting, and responding to propaganda is pointless. Hitler was recorded speaking privately to the commander-and-chief of the Finnish army:


Link to video.

Click to expand...

Maybe. But if the question is why Hitler thought he should invade the Soviet Union, why he said he should is a good place to start with.

I've read that Mannerheim conversation before. I don't have time to reread it now but, iirc, there's nothing that contradicts what he said to the German public.

Borachio said:

Maybe. But if the question is why Hitler thought he should invade the Soviet Union, why he said he should is a good place to start with.

I've read that Mannerheim conversation before. I don't have time to reread it now but, iirc, there's nothing that contradicts what he said to the German public.

Click to expand...

So? Propaganda can be true, but always in a harmful context. Strategic aims are conflated with moral ones.

hobbsyoyo said:

Don't Arab cultures have a hard-on for Hitler and Nazism?

Click to expand...

If by "Arab" you mean middle easterners in general, and if Persian culture is representative of such in this way, then the answer would be mostly no. Hardcore ultra-nationalist foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics would indeed idolize Hitler and Nazism. But that's well under 3% or so of the general Persian population. These are the openly racist "proud to be aryan" idiots, and since that only applies to Persians I'd imagine there are even less Arab Hitler-worshipers than there are Persians.

So the bottom line is mostly no, we don't worship Hitler and Nazism. I mean, I'm even Persian Nationalist myself (much more so than most Iranian-Americans) and even I wouldn't go near as far to say I would actually respect Hitler.

Of course, a lot of this depends on how you define "Iranian Nationalist" to begin with. The ones that see nationalism in a racial/ethnic way are the ones which are very racist themselves with the "we are the pure, true Aryans, Iran is the land of the Aryans" nonsense.

There are also people (like me) that just want the best for Iran as a country and want to preserve its culture, which realize that culture and race/ethnic migrations are two entirely separate categories.

Pretty sure Ghandi showed remorse for his statements when he realized what a monster Hitler was.

Click to expand...

Not that I agree with Hitler worshiping of any kind, but that probably had less to do with Hitler's antisemitism, and more to do with Hitler's antiBritish-ism (the enemies of your enemies...)

2 year necro and still extremely on-topic. I can't be mad.

In that case, I'm not going to feel guilty about posting this relevant article here.

This thread is an atrocity.

It is, a bit.

christos200 said:

Many conquerors who killed millions of people, like Caesar or Genghis Khan, are admired now and people see them as heroes.

Click to expand...

Julius Caesar didn't kill millions of people.

hobbsyoyo said:

Don't Arab cultures have a hard-on for Hitler and Nazism?

Click to expand...

FWIW, cultures don't have hard-ons.

Wow, this thread is still going on? I am somewhat proud.

I wouldn't be proud about being as admirer of Hitler or other genocidal megalomaniacs. But there are all kinds. And distance does seem to make people detach themselves about the bad deeds of those people. So this thread did offer an opportunity for interesting discussion.