1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Is it time? Hitler as leader of Germany

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by mattavich, Dec 14, 2010.

?

Is it now time enough to allow Hitler to join the Civ 5 leaders of Germany?

  1. Yes, I would like to see Hitler join Civ

    142 vote(s)
    34.9%
  2. No, I don't think it is the right time, or he should ever be in Civ 5

    265 vote(s)
    65.1%
  1. Zen Blade

    Zen Blade Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    247
    Bob,

    Jews were not viewed in the same light as "enemies of the state". Not in any way that is defensible. Little children who are fleeing... are an enemy of the state?

    I don't think anyone can defend that statement. They are in no way an enemy. If you wanted to say adults, then yes. You could argue that they adults were serving as leaders who opposed the regime (or whatever).... But that was not their target. Their target was every civilian, man, woman, and child.
     
  2. }{ELL/\/()

    }{ELL/\/() Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2001
    Messages:
    102
    They have had Stalin in civ games and Mao, two men who while might have not gone after minority groups as much still resulted in genocide on the same scale. I feel hitler will always be the boogey man though.
     
  3. mutant-enemy

    mutant-enemy Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    136
    Location:
    Würzburg, Germany
    They would have argued that the children could have tried to avenge their parents' fate. Additionally, this was an ideological thing: In their view, Jews were some seed of evil and plotted against everyone. Well, at least this was their official "reason". From a political point of view, they abused them as extreme scapegoat for all that went wrong during and after WW I. (Versailles Treaty, Dolchstosslegende / Stab-in-the-back legend, Black Friday, etc.)

    Still, they didn't invent antisemitism: it was already there (not only in Europe) since the 19th century, however, they actually kind of "refined" it for their own purpose.
     
  4. dreami

    dreami Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2010
    Messages:
    6
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Many Russians (generally, don't know about russian civ gamers ^^) don't think of Stalin as a bad person despite what he as done.
    Completely unthinkable in Germany.
    Lately there's been a little bit of a controversy about the first Hitler exhibition in Germany. If it was right to make an exhibition focusing on him and not so much on the Holocaust, the nazis in gerneral an so on. I imagine most Germans wouldn't be happy to have Hitler as one of their leaders in Civ, even if it's only a game. At least, I wouldn't like it (and in this regard, being Austrian and not German doesn't really make a difference).
     
  5. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Unintentionally a feminist.

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,497
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    I wouldn't oppose to Hitler, personally. I have more problems with Stalin, who was just as (if not MORE) cruel and yet gets a lot less flack because he won the War and was a bit less successfull at exterminating people.
     
  6. mutant-enemy

    mutant-enemy Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    136
    Location:
    Würzburg, Germany
    Yup. :)

    (And I think Stalin is just part of the game, because he was part of the WW II allies and thus "on the right side", even if he was a murdrous tyrant.)
     
  7. bob_page

    bob_page Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    109
    Was this kid an "enemy of the state"?



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
     
  8. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    I'd also argue that, whether or not Stalin is a bad person, it is justifiable to include him in the game because of his accomplishments and how they had an impact. But he includes the negatives of both Hitler (intentional killings, often targeted at specific groups) and Mao (indifference to the negative consequences of his policies that led to famine and death). But the Soviet Union before his reign and after his reign are night and day (change for the stronger). But nice human being he is not and if there is any argument for something being "too soon" it's certainly too soon for both figures (even if he is liked in Russia, he is despised in the Ukraine, Poland, etc for good reason).
     
  9. Grapa

    Grapa Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    114
    I don't see why not. Stalin and Mao killed far more people than Hitler. But history is written by the victor I guess... Genghis Khan probably slaughtered his fair share of babies and mothers too.
     
  10. Zen Blade

    Zen Blade Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    247
    Bob,

    Not sure what you want me to say. The Wikipedia page itself makes it sound like the event is debated between intentionally inflicted suffering and simply horrible economic policies....

    The latter of these two options was not uncommon in communist countries. Of course those children were not "enemies of the state". And I have never read or been taught anything recording this particular occurrence. So, I can't make any assessment.

    The best I can do for you is say what the wikipedia article said, which is that some scholars think it was intentional. Other scholars think it was not intentional.
    The most important part of the article may be:

    "R.W. Davies and Stephen G. Wheatcroft have interacted with Conquest and note that he no longer considers the famine "deliberate".[82] Conquest—and, by extension, Davies and Wheatcroft—believe that, had industrialization been abandoned, the famine would have been "prevented" (Conquest), or at least significantly alleviated:

    "[W]e regard the policy of rapid industrialization as an underlying cause of the agricultural troubles of the early 1930s, and we do not believe that the Chinese or NEP versions of industrialization were viable in Soviet national and international circumstances."[83]

    They see the leadership under Stalin as making significant errors in planning for the industrialization of agriculture."

    But again, I really don't know anything about this period.

    Let me give a hat tip to a former roommate of mine who was mentioned in the article, Canadian Adam Jones.
     
  11. markantony

    markantony Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    205
    Except that Hitlers actions were the very opposite of what he would have done, were he influenced by the theory of evolution. (not Darwinism which only exists in the mind of Creationists)
     
  12. Jolly Rogerer

    Jolly Rogerer Prince

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    402
    By that metric, so was the plague.
     
  13. Surgeon

    Surgeon Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    154
    Plenty of leaders in Civ would be called monsters given modern standards (Stalin comes to mind) so I don't see why Hitler should be treated much differently.

    However.... Hitler didn't preside of any lasting period of growth for his empire so I'd cut him based on that.
     
  14. YourDeath/TSAR

    YourDeath/TSAR Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    warsaw, poland, EU
    go home
    hitler destroyed his country, he didnt make it better. germany was divided in two because of him for more than 40 years. secondly, he wasnt a brilliant general, his generals such as rommel and paulius where. its directly because of hitler that he attacked stalingrad, didnt attack britain when it was about to be destroyed
    so, definately no.
     
  15. Alan McG

    Alan McG Cannelloni

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Dresden, Altstadt
    Germany was divided because of the USA and USSR, *not* because of Hitler.
     
  16. Grapa

    Grapa Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    114
    No, Germany was divided because Hitler thought he could take on both Russia and America at the same time. :rolleyes: Hitler was not a good leader. Yes he conquered pretty much all of Europe and North Africa, but it was too short lived and overall completely destroyed the country. Look at pictures of Berlin before the war. Now look at it today.
     
  17. Alan McG

    Alan McG Cannelloni

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Dresden, Altstadt
    Hitler didnt divide anything. How could he? He was worm fodder when it happened. The inability of USA and USSR to handle things properly created the division. Was it a consequence of WW2? Of course it was. But the way people put it here is like he deliberately had it as his personal goal.
     
  18. CornPlanter

    CornPlanter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,066
    Location:
    Lithuania
    It was a direct result of Hitlers incompetence. And insanity. That's how his rule ended. Petty excuses "Rusians/Americans did it!" doesn't belong in a great leader's resume, does it?
     
  19. nody

    nody Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,168
    Location:
    Noviomagus, Batavia
    Would be cool to see him rant at you in the diplo screen with all his famous manourisms.
     
  20. Alan McG

    Alan McG Cannelloni

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Dresden, Altstadt
    It was a result of losing a war and having two ideologically opposed factions taking over the country.

    Or do you think the country would have been divided if the instead of USSR the east had been occupied by, say, UK?
     

Share This Page