Question for Germans: How do you view Adolf Hitler?

[Defiant47]

Actually this is a question for just anybody really but I would really like to hear from Germans as well. I just want to know how different culture and people view history.

Very well then.

Well first off Hitler was a bad person but at the same time he could be looked at as a talented guy.

It is perfectly possible to be evil and talented. Hitler is a perfect example of this. He was pure evil, but he was also an absolute genius (until his irrationality lead to his demise). He was indeed talented. I must point out, however, that the "but" in your sentence has no place there. There is no exclusion between bad person and talent: a person can be good or bad, and talented or untalented.

He loved to paint,

And how is that relevant to anything? Sometimes I like to sing in the shower... how is that in any way reflective of who I am or my character? If I was a lead singer in a band and my career actually included singing, then you could say that, but since it isn't, it's a useless bit of information.

he wrote a book that sold millions being the best seller only next to the Bible.

Again this is pointing out to his talent. Yes, the man was a genius. His intelligence and cunning were amazing. I think that much is pretty well-established, and usually well-accepted by those who don't let rage blind them.

He was against communism

Now we get into things that are subjective.

Do you say this is a good thing? If so, you are introducing your opinion that communism is bad, which is a whole other topic.

Do you say this is a bad thing? Again, you introduce an opinion.

If you do neither, then this statement does not add anything to the purpose of your thread. You're just giving us information on Hitler; big deal.

but the only thing that made him bad was his hatred towards Jews.

There are a few points of naivety in your remark:

1) His hatred towards the Jews and his treatment of them is enough to place him as one of the most evil people to walk the Earth. Although I'm sure you know this, saying that it's "the only thing that made him bad" makes it seem like you're decreasing the significance of this.
2) He was also a megalomaniac that wanted to conquer the world. That's kinda mean, don't you think?
3) He kind of killed people other than the Jews too, like the Polish, homosexuals, political leaders of various conquered countries, and I haven't even started on it.

Perhaps that should get you started on realizing what's wrong with your statement.

And after watching a documentary about the unpublished squeal to Mein Kampf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweites_Buch) it stated that Hitler never intended to conquer the world and destroy everything.

Though I'm sure you already do, I will remind you to be careful not to believe everything you hear. Also, he never intended to conquer the world? It sure seemed like that! Of course, we can't ever accuse him of wanting to conquer the world unless he would have actually done that. Regardless, his actions spoke louder than his words.

Hitler stated that his number one goal was to expand the land of Germany so the farmers could have more land.

First of all, what he stated is irrelevant. He would have stated that he wanted to have more of Bambi if it would have gained him the political power and support he needed to achieve his ends.

Second of all, that's still an evil goal. Sure he wants to expand his land, but how are you going to expand it? By conquering other nations, of course. It's a simple war for territory kind of thing, and I guess it's up to you to decide the morality of taking something that you want by force from someone else.

So his plan was to have the British and Italy team up with Germany and take out Russia the communist. He said Britain would keep her colonies, Italy can have the Mediterranean and Germany would have eastern Europe and Russia.

I would said the exact same thing in his position! And if these countries are even stupider, then after Russia is out, I'd try to team up again against Britain and tell everyone else that I don't plan on taking any of their land. After I'd gain enough military power, I'd just skip the theatrics and take everything by force.

The only reasons he wanted this land was so that German farmers could expand and grow their crops.

Reason is irrelevant, it's method that's important. I want money so that I can give more gifts to my family. Does that justify stealing it? No. Neither does "wanting land so that German farmers could expand and grow crops" justify taking the land by force. And I must also remind you that, again, I would say the exact same thing in his position. Thing of how politically awful it would sound if I just said "yeah, I kind of want your land so that I have more power and my nation becomes stronger"... surely it's much more noble to claim it's for the farmers!

He believed his duty was to help save the Aryan race.

There are two ways to "save" or increase a race:

1) Increase the output of that race (breed)
2) Suppress other races

Number 2 is kind of evil in my opinion, especially in the way that Hitler did it.

So from what you heard now and have heard before what is your perspective of Hitler?

He was a genius evil dictator. He used his genius to rise to power, to crush his enemies, until he let his irrationality rule over him, and he made strategic errors that lead to the demise of the Third Reich.

I am just curious about these kinds of things. Hitler was a bad man indeed but when I watched the documentary on the History channel they seemed to show a lighter side of Hitler. So without further adieu what is your view of Hitler?

There is a lighter side to everyone. It's just that Hitler had much less of a lighter side and much more of a darker side than just about everyone.

 

[Defiant47]

Stalin was way worst than Hitler.

Stalin killed people just because he feared rebellion. Stalin also murdered Jews and wouldn't feed his people or send them any money to eat.

He also murdered millions and committed numerous atrocities. Most russians understandably have a mixed view of Stalin. He brought them industry and technology, although how he did it was monstrous.

Stalin was bad, but not as bad as you make him out to be. Yes, he was a dictator and did all those bad things dictators do, but I must point out a single thing: he did not murder millions.

He sacrificed millions of Russians in self-defense of his country. Those Russians died in battle against an enemy that wanted to conquer them. A leader is not (fully) responsible for the deaths of people in a war. Stalin WAS reckless and did not have much care for the life of his soldiers, but you cannot put the weight of all those deaths on his shoulders.

The only way you could evaluate how many deaths he is responsible for due to the war would be to replay history with another leader and see how many deaths that leader would need in order to achieve victory. And then again, maybe that is only a showing of leadership capabilities.

Stalin was evil and insane, but he is not personally responsible for the deaths of millions.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Stalin was bad, but not as bad as you make him out to be. Yes, he was a dictator and did all those bad things dictators do, but I must point out a single thing: he did not murder millions.

Stalin was evil and insane, but he is not personally responsible for the deaths of millions.

Are you making a some kind of sick joke or completely unaware of any real history behind Stalin?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Terror

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Number_of_victims

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/stalin_joseph.shtml

"Joseph Stalin (1879 - 1953)

One of the most powerful and murderous dictators in history, Stalin was the supreme ruler of the Soviet Union for a quarter of a century. His regime of terror caused the death and suffering of tens of millions, but he also oversaw the war machine that played a key role in the defeat of Nazism."

There's so lot more, but you can do digging yourself.

 

[Defiant47]

Are you making a some kind of sick joke or completely unaware of any real history behind Stalin?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Terror

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Number_of_victims

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/stalin_joseph.shtml

"Joseph Stalin (1879 - 1953)

One of the most powerful and murderous dictators in history, Stalin was the supreme ruler of the Soviet Union for a quarter of a century. His regime of terror caused the death and suffering of tens of millions, but he also oversaw the war machine that played a key role in the defeat of Nazism."

There's so lot more, but you can do digging yourself.

Holy . .. .. .. .!

I don't know what to say... I guess all I've known and been taught so far has been incomplete. I just... I'm sorry, I have no excuse.

I admit ignorance and I promise to research more into it (beyond what I've already researched to make sure you were telling the truth).

 

[Leeksoup]

Hitler was an absolutely evil genius. Every (early) move he made was excecuted flawlessly, and worked perfectly. He was a great ruler (to those he liked) and a masterful strategist.

This does not excuse his random slaughtering of 12 million people. There were 7 million Jews, but not just Jews were killed. He suppressed disagreeing voices, he enstated a police state, and he tried to rule all of Europe by force. But of course, he wasn't TOTALLY evil. I'm sure Hitler played cards with some of his friends, and they thought he was a great guy.

Should he be in civ? All things being equal, yes. He was a leader who left his mark. But all things are NOT equal, and as such putting him in would cause too many problems. In fact, if he was put in Civ 5, don't ever expect a Civ 6. Firaxis would be sued to their last penny and Sid's family sold into slavery.

 

[vicawoo]

When I mentioned the AH debate to my german friend, he said, why would you want to include Hitler? They don't like Hitler in Germany.

And I've thought about this, and it's the thoroughness and zeal he had for persecuting and exterminating Jews and other peoples. Some people were generally brutal and hated and persecuted Jews, but nobody went as far as he did.

Mao, well, lots of Chinese still revere him, if only because they are taught to.

 

[Tanktunker]

Hitler was an absolutely evil genius. Every (early) move he made was excecuted flawlessly, and worked perfectly. He was a great ruler (to those he liked) and a masterful strategist.

Obviously you have never learned anything about WWII that concerns the way the Germans executed the war.

Call Hitler anything, he wasn't a master strategist, nor was he a genius, and hardly anybody in Germany actually liked him once his fascist rule came into place.

Hitler had a wide array of strategists and tacticians that managed every battle, any fool can say "conquer Poland" or "Annex Czechoslovakia", he had hardly any part in actually planning the attacks themselves.

Nearing and during the invasion, Hitler's pride, stubbornness and, well, stupidity, reared it's ugly head, err, more, and him getting in the way of his Generals doing their work, and once even giving one of his best leave just before what they knew would be the date of arrival is what killed Germany, along with his insistence to fight Russia.

Hitler may have been a renaissance man, but of his many talents was not waging war.

 

[xfactor99]

Hitler often misquoted Nietzsche, slaughtering completely the original meaning of Nietszche's works. I generally don't believe in "good" and "bad", but that's inexcusable

Sounds like the master morality to me!

Quite honestly, Nietzsche's sister was the biggest culprit in the complete defamation of his works after his mental collapse. Curse you Elizabeth Nietzsche

Call Hitler anything, he wasn't a master strategist, nor was he a genius, and hardly anybody in Germany actually liked him once his fascist rule came into place.

Nearing and during the invasion, Hitler's pride, stubbornness and, well, stupidity, reared it's ugly head, err, more, and him getting in the way of his Generals doing their work, and once even giving one of his best leave just before what they knew would be the date of arrival is what killed Germany, along with his insistence to fight Russia.

Hitler may have been a renaissance man, but of his many talents was not waging war.

The problem was that Hitler believed himself a genius military tactician, when that was clearly not the case. His major blunders have already been elaborated on in detail (invasion of Soviet Union, declaration of war on United States, refusal to push through to Moscow, relying on Italy to do anything), and combined largely contributed to the Third Reich's downfall.

On a lesser known but equally interesting note, consider what Hitler thought of the United States:

In Mein Kampf, Hitler rarely mentioned the United States and when he did, it was in a tone of deep contempt. In Mein Kampf, Hitler portrayed the United States as a “racially degenerate” society on its way to self-oblivion. By contrast, in Zweites Buch, Hitler portrayed the U.S. as a dynamic, “racially successful” society that practiced eugenics and segregation and followed what Hitler considered to be a wise policy of excluding “racially degenerate” immigration from eastern and southern Europe. What promoted the change in Hitler's views between 1924 and 1928 is not known. By 1928, Hitler seems to have heard about the massive industrial wealth of the U.S., the Immigration Act of 1924, segregation and the fact that several American states had eugenics boards to sterilize people who were considered mentally defective, and was favorably impressed. Hitler proclaimed his admiration for these sorts of policies and expressed his wish that Germany would do similar things, though on a much greater scale.

 

[Jeff2121]

He also became sexually aroused at the sound of his own voice. Anyone who experiences that should not be the leader of.....anything.

Sounds like he liked the sound of his voice a little too much

 

[Proteus]

If I should name the 3 most evil leaders of the 20th century Hitler would be in the list,
along with Stalin and Pol Pot.

 

[flyingbunnys]

Please I beg you. Add Hitler Mussolini and Tojo and add a good WW2 scenario. PLEASE!

 

[wicshade]

Im not supporting Hitler in what im about to post but i realize im going to geteing flamed on this.

**1. Thomas Jefferson has written things degrading african slaves, calling them inhuman animals, and basically saying they are no different then a donkey to pull a wagon,(not my words or fellings,) This was a man that wrote a document descrbing freedom

*Edit after further reasearching, i realized that the source i took thins infromation was one sided and did not try to reconize Jefferson's views, but only exploit certain ones and take them out of context, my apologies and a thnkyou to Falk for pointing out my error. end of edit.,but he did at one point in his writings have a degrading view towards, afacan slaves, if you read on about his abolitionst writtings it becomes more then apparent his views on equalaty, and i aqolagize again.*

2. Washington was slightly more human in his views of the african race, he was believed to have even had relations with one or more of his slaves.

Overall why the western race, in my opion, hates Hitler and not stalin or the mongols, is because they did not loose in the end stalin was sucesful as were the mogols, both had killed many people, obviosly. To me society scorns loosers and praises those that win. If you look at anybody that is a neo nazi, aka a hitler want a be, they don't think that nazi Germany failed, they see them as winners not loosers.

also the western nation deserves some of the blame for the holocaust because well befor the war it was more then obvios that germany's army was growning to a capacity that was inteded for conquest.

there was also a time period when hitler was a good leader, but i believe most of his foolish mistakes were from certain brain disorders he developed, along with his addiction to heroine,

something that is rarely discussed is the things done in the concetration camps, some of the tests that were performed inside of these concetration camps have done much to advance medicne and scince but you will never see somebody that has benifted from these attrocaus acts assaciated with the holocaust.

Last of all i think that if the 3rd riech did not fall, and hitler did not fail, we would be saying something very much different today, only because he would have won in the eyes of the western world. We will take an unjust winner over a rightous loser.

That what i said may sound like i support hitler, but belive me i wish The western countries should have taken him out of power befor he turned nazi germany into a war machine, i think that is the most important thing for all to learn, when good people do nothing evil can thrive.

 

[A1CBOZ]

No one in their right mind could ever say that Hitler was a good man by any means. Though many ppl say that his war for land was unjust, what war for land isn't? England tried to conquer as much of the world as possible through colonization (Which frequently included mass murder and enslavement) up until WWI. The United States did the same thing. Anyone say anything different, look up how Hawaii came into the US and how the US also conquered the Philippines, not to mention the native americans. However, Stalin is not regarded as a worse man even though he killed many more people for the simple fact that he did not start a global war as Germany did. Mao killed many people also, but I will not go into detail about that mostly because I don't know enough of that history. The main reason that Hitler is regarded as more evil is that he (arguably) started the second world war. Another reason is because he failed. Stalin succeeded and made the USSR a superpower capable of challenging the US. And because he 'won' his objectives, his atrocities are more readily overlooked. History has always been like that. Look down on the beaten and kind of overlook what the successful did.

Personally, they need to add Hitler to the scenario at least!

 

[shmily_dana]

I'm part German and having Hitler in a game would not bother me. I'm not sure I would play the Germans with him. I might change the leader name to Rommell or some other General if it was a WWII scenario.

I bet if we posted a screenshot of a Jewish or Christian Saladin who wants another player to convert to either of those religions, it would upset a lot of people in the Islamic world.

 

[Falk]

@wicshade

Thomas Jefferson has written things degrading african slaves, calling them inhuman animals, and basically saying they are no different then a donkey to pull a wagon,(not my words or fellings,) This was a man that wrote a document descrbing freedom

Is this even true!?
I couldnt believe it, so i checked it at Wikipedia and Wikipedia says otherwise.
Jefferson was an abolitionist. He did write that black people seemed inferior to him, but nevertheless he insisted that they must be free. Later he repudiated his earlier views and wrote:

Sir,--I have received the favor of your letter of August 17th, and with it the volume you were so kind to send me on the "Literature of Negroes". Be assured that no person living wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a complete refutation of the doubts I have myself entertained and expressed on the grade of understanding allotted to them by nature, and to find that in this respect they are on a par with ourselves. My doubts were the result of personal observation on the limited sphere of my own State, where the opportunity for the development of their genius were not favorable and those of exercising it still less so. I expressed them therefore with great hesitation; but whatever be their degree of talent it is no measure of their rights. Because Sir Isaac Newton was superior to others in understanding, he was not therefore lord of the person or property of others. On this subject they are gaining daily in the opinions of nations, and hopeful advances are making toward their re-establishment on an equal footing with the other colors of the human family. I pray you therefore to accept my thanks for the many instances you have enabled me to observe of respectable intelligence in that race of men, which cannot fail to have effect in hastening the day of their relief; and to be assured of the sentiments of high and just esteem and consideration which I tender to yourself with all sincerity.

So if Wikipedia is correct, your accusations are very inaccurate.

 

[wicshade]

i edited my previous post to show that i was wrong, thankyou for pointng out my error, but my statement was not completley inaccurate, but nor was it intended to be a direct qoute , just taken out of much needed context that should be used to illustrate Jefferson's character. I am sorry that i used such poor context, and i also feel ashamed for posting something that disgraced one of the framers of the constitution. To make up for this I am going to buy a biograhpy of Jefferson, and imaybe even read it.

 

[Kanute]

There are a dizzying number of apparent contradictions in the character of all humanity, including historical figures. Had Adolf circumscribed his/Germany's desire for land after Munich he may have been considered one of the greatest statesman in history despite his other flaws.

Should our collective emotional response to recent historic figures and symbols (i.e. swastika) dictate that we should omit them from our games? In effect this is a sort of historical revision. I vote for presenting a little more accuracy in our games (though game modeling the holocaust and other atrocities would definitely be sick).

However, I have nothing financial or otherwise at stake and the perception may be that these things would be intolerably offensive to segments of the population. Besides, Sid has given us a game platform where, with a little hard work, we may create more accurate historical accounts than hitherto provided.

I've thought about historical sensitivity in reference to playing my other favorite AOE Warchiefs when my Portugese are cutting down the Souix... before enjoying a cup of chocolate...

 

[A1CBOZ]

I've thought about historical sensitivity in reference to playing my other favorite AOE Warchiefs when my Portugese are cutting down the Souix... before enjoying a cup of chocolate...

You don't give a crap about political correctness do you? Thank god I'm not the only one!

 

[ThERat]

Actually this is a question for just anybody really but I would really like to hear from Germans as well.

Did you realize that hardly any German answered your call here? We Germans are tired of arguing with ignorant folks about Hitler. People who know nuts about him and haven't had to suffer under him. Have you ever talked to victims of his regime as I did when I was in school?
Sure. we got some idiots in Germany who would say Hitler did good things too...like the autobahn etc.
He was lunatic, megalomaniac, insecure, anal and whatnot...foremost he was a fascist and racists mass murderer who had the ability to bring out the worst in people. He played well with the general German populace to bring out the darkest elements of human mankind...

I don't need such a guy in the game...I am sure we don't need Stalin and Mao there as well. We don't need Pol Pot and other mass murderers.

So, all you non Germans, stop discussing here about who was more evil. Have you guys actually ever watched real footage of concentration camps? (try the French docu Nuit et Brouillard for a good star) Anyone that defends Hitler is either a complete ignorant fool or pure evil as well...

 

[karlhegna]

Hitler was elected by the German people by something like 51%. So Germans out there who blame the entire Holocaust on Hitler are also responsible. The SS which ran the camps were also German and the people who squealed on their Jewish neighbors, destroyed Jewish shops, and ignored the frequent falling ashes coming from the camps are just as bad as Hitler in my opinion. Was Hitler pure evil? No man can be pure evil and he was a man, an evil psychopath, but still a man. Is it still possible to justify his actions on the international stage? No it certainly is not. He forcibly took numerous countries, not just Russia and pretty much went out to pick a fight with Britain when he attacked Poland. He also exterminated millions of Russians simply for being, what he thought, an inferior race.

You could say the same about President Bush then. He was barely elected (if that). So therefore its every Americans fault for his actions? I do blame everything on Bush for poor leadership skills and misrepresentation, not on the American people. Bush is not my president.