The poll to stop any other hitler threads.

[Öjevind Lång]

Hitler was a great leader, he brought the German people out of a recess, just as FDR did to America. To quote Wikipedia (although not a scholarly source, I'm sure I could find countless "good" sources if you wish): "Hitler oversaw one of the greatest expansions of industrial production and civil improvement Germany had ever seen, mostly based on debt flotation and expansion of the military." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Economics_and_culture)

Germany's economy was not fixed by Hitler, who was a total ignoramus in economical matters; it was fixed by his Minister of Finance, Hjalmar Schacht. What Hitler did was preside over a powerful, highly developed country suffering from temporary problems and, in 13 years, turn it into a heap of ruins, occupied by its enemies (most of whom had not been Germany's enemies before Hitler's policies changed that), with several important provinces ceded to Poland and the Soviet Union and its inhabitants expelled, and with its economy and reputation destroyed.

Hitler was not a great statesman. A great statesman would not have attacked the Soviet Union (on which Germany depended for vital resources) while still at war with the British Empire (and America looming behind Britain). A great statesman would not have made things easier for FDR by declaring war on America after Pearl Harbor. Neither was he a great general; in fact, his incompetence shortened the war by several months. I suppose one should be grateful to him for that, but it does not constitute a qualification for being included in Civ.

Öjevind Lång

 

[Sam_Yeager]

I voted yes purely because the game is called Civilization. Whatever your views on him he was undeniably a major factor in the last century and profoundly affected thinking and attititudes for a large proportion of the last century and beyond. The fact that this discussion is taking place underlines this.

 

[Stexe]

Germany's economy was not fixed by Hitler, who was a total ignoramus in economical matters; it was fixed by his Minister of Finance, Hjalmar Schacht. What Hitler did was preside over a powerful, highly developed country suffering from temporary problems and, in 13 years, turn it into a heap of ruins, occupied by its enemies (most of whom had not been Germany's enemies before Hitler's policies changed that), with several important provinces ceded to Poland and the Soviet Union and its inhabitants expelled, and with its economy and reputation destroyed.

Hitler was not a great statesman. A great statesman would not have attacked the Soviet Union (on which Germany depended for vital resources) while still at war with the British Empire (and America looming behind Britain). A great statesman would not have made things easier for FDR by declaring war on America after Pearl Harbor. Neither was he a great general; in fact, his incompetence shortened the war by several months. I suppose one should be grateful to him for that, but it does not constitute a qualification for being included in Civ.

Öjevind Lång

Of course almost all leaders were not directly responsible for the finances of a nation, they always have people under them. I do not believe that the problems faced in Germany were temporary at all. Sure after the war Germany was defeated, but Hitler himself did not make all these blunders. He was a charismatic figure head with a group of people behind him and manipulated others into getting his goals. I mean he was featured as Man of the Year (1938) in TIME Magazine, and got military support from Britian and France. Ultimately, he was just over confident (although being insane didn't help either) and lost, in addition to that he, or the people under him, made militaristic blunders which did cause his downfall, but during his reign he unified the German people and did run successful military campaigns. If not include him as a main Civilization leader, he should have been included into some World War II scenarios atleast.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Of course almost all leaders were not directly responsible for the finances of a nation, they always have people under them. I do not believe that the problems faced in Germany were temporary at all. Sure after the war Germany was defeated, but Hitler himself did not make all these blunders. He was a charismatic figure head with a group of people behind him and manipulated others into getting his goals. I mean he was featured as Man of the Year (1938) in TIME Magazine, and got military support from Britian and France. Ultimately, he was just over confident (although being insane didn't help either) and lost, in addition to that he, or the people under him, made militaristic blunders which did cause his downfall, but during his reign he unified the German people and did run successful military campaigns. If not include him as a main Civilization leader, he should have been included into some World War II scenarios atleast.

The problems in Germany were temporary. It is true that Germany was particularly hard hit by the Depression because they were still expected to pay war indemnities, but the hard-working Germans would no doubt have pulled out of it once the economical situation began to look up in the rest of the world. Besides, the war indemnity payments had already been restructured to their advantage once (the Young Plan, 1930), and it would very likely have happened again.

What military support from Britain and France are you talking about?

The German people had been unified already, back in 1870 (by Bismarck), unless you are talking about the occupation of Austria and the Sudeten area in Czechoslovakia.

It is a matter of record that Hitler personally made a lot of decisions that hastened Germany's defeat. It would be too much work to write down the whole list of his blunders, but among a great many other things he:

1. Halted the advance of the German troops before Dunkirk, which made the evacuation of almost the entire British Expeditionary Force (plus hundreds of thousands of French soldiers, many of whom decided to fight on) possible.
2. Sent reinforcements to Rommel in North Africa too late, when the battle was already lost, thereby ensuring that more German troops were captured by the British.
3. Forbade the German troops to retreat in order to escape encirclement at Stalingrad. That led to the death or capture of almost the entire German Sixth Army - half a million men.
4. For several days forbade the German High Command in France to move the panzer reserves at their disposition to Normandy because he was convinced that the invasion in Normandy was a feint and the real invasion would come over the Pas de Calais.
5. Forbade the evacuation of the German troops in the Baltic countries until they were cut off and it was too late to save more than a handful of them.
6. Forbade the German troops in Königsberg to retreat: they were surrounded and lost.
7. Forbade the German troops in Frankfurt-an-der-Oder to retreat: they were surrounded and lost.
8. Forbade the evacuation of German civilians from areas about to be captured by the Red Army. That was not only inhumane but also demoralizing and meant the loss of a lot of German labour.

Among themselves, the German Generals gave Hitler the nickname Gröfaz, which is short for "Grösster Feldherr aller Zeiten", that is to say, "The Greatest Commander of all Time". The nickname was ironical.

Öjevind

 

[Smidlee]

Why would you use Hitler to represent Germany as a whole when it resulted in Germany divided in half? Hitler ulimately was bad for Germany in the end.

 

[GenMarshall]

I am sorry, but I dont want to see the creators of the Civ Series approving Nazism. So no, NO HITLER!

Plus if Hitler was in the Game, what would you think would happen to the game rating? Raised to teenager due to Nazism themes. What would happen to Civ if it was in Germany? It will be banned.

 

[Quijote]

If your views, arguments and rhetoric - CivGeneral - represent the majority who voted no in this poll, then I would have to question the whole democratic process involved in determining if Adolt Hitler should be included or not.

I am sorry, but I dont want to see the creators of the Civ Series approving Nazism. So no, NO HITLER!

There is a difference between accepting something in history and approving of it. If Firaxis include Adolf Hitler in the game they accept him as a significant/influential figure in German history, they may not support his views or opinions.

Plus if Hitler was in the Game, what would you think would happen to the game rating? Raised to teenager due to Nazism themes. What would happen to Civ if it was in Germany? It will be banned.

It will not be banned from Germany if Adolf Hitler was there. Present Germany is not a fascist country where the government controls the arts or freedom of speech to a degree where you cannot mention Nazism or people involved with it – you may actually be a have Nazi ideals, as long as you don’t hurt anyone by it.
And if the game ESRB rating was raised because Adolf Hitler was in the game, then it is the ESRB that should be criticized.

 

[theimmortal1]

I am sorry, but I dont want to see the creators of the Civ Series approving Nazism. So no, NO HITLER!

Plus if Hitler was in the Game, what would you think would happen to the game rating? Raised to teenager due to Nazism themes. What would happen to Civ if it was in Germany? It will be banned.

Replace the world Nazi with communism

 

[T_Khan]

It will not be banned from Germany if Adolf Hitler was there. Present Germany is not a fascist country where the government controls the arts or freedom of speech to a degree where you cannot mention Nazism or people involved with it – you may actually be a have Nazi ideals, as long as you don’t hurt anyone by it.
And if the game ESRB rating was raised because Adolf Hitler was in the game, then it is the ESRB that should be criticized.

No that's complete BS. Germany has strict anti-fascism/Nazism laws that forbade the sale of Nazi memorabilia, any sort of Nazi party, etc., whether or not you "intend to hurt someone." I'm not sure if this ban on Nazism would apply to the inclusion of Hitler in a computer game, but it might. For Firaxis, the question is: why risk it? They don't want to cut off any markets (and the rating could be raised based on the idea that children will play as Hitler and succeed and then think: Hitler's cool!).

 

[Quijote]

No that's complete BS.

Impolite and unnecessary - please do relax.

Germany has strict anti-fascism/Nazism laws that forbade the sale of Nazi memorabilia, any sort of Nazi party, etc., whether or not you "intend to hurt someone."

We are talking about present day Germany.
I will give you the benefit of doubt and encourage a German law student to present himself/herself and inform us about the precise complications associated Nazism in present day Germany.

For Firaxis, the question is: why risk it? They don't want to cut off any markets

I agree. If you had bothered to read my first reply to this post you would know that.

and the rating could be raised based on the idea that children will play as Hitler and succeed and then think: Hitler's cool!).

Try to avoid generalization of children. Not all children are oblivious to the fact that they are playing a game. And regarding the children who are at risk of developing unpleasant behavior due to the game, then do remember that there are other risky game play elements such as war, religious hostility (the computer may dislike you because you have a different religion), slavery and so forth. I believe the responsibility lies with the parents to help the children understand why these things may be fun in a game, but not in real life.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

We are talking about present day Germany.
I will give you the benefit of doubt and encourage a German law student to present himself/herself and inform us about the precise complications associated Nazism in present day Germany.

Apart from possible repercussions in Germany, let me once more point out that there are many of us who would make the individual choice not to buy a game featuring Hitler as a leader one can play.

Try to avoid generalization of children. Not all children are oblivious to the fact that they are playing a game. And regarding the children who are at risk of developing unpleasant behavior due to the game, then do remember that there are other risky game play elements such as war, religious hostility (the computer may dislike you because you have a different religion), slavery and so forth. I believe the responsibility lies with the parents to help the children understand why these things may be fun in a game, but not in real life.

Fun to play a Jew-gasser, a man who murdered millions of people (Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, mentally ******** people, cripples) because they were "inferior"? He even gassed the children. But then, I know that those who want Hitler included simply refuse to grasp why the inclusion of Hitler is so repulsive to many; they always start to talk about Mao and Stalin instead. If they simply said that they don't want to see Mao or Stalin either, I could understand their way of reasoning. But no, they want Hitler.

 

[King Flevance]

Impolite and unnecessary - please do relax.

But it's true, thus not impolite.

We are talking about present day Germany.
I will give you the benefit of doubt and encourage a German law student to present himself/herself and inform us about the precise complications associated Nazism in present day Germany.

Well, here some very easily accessible information on Germany's laws concerning Nazism.

Source 1: Morning Star Online

Spoiler :

GERMANY'S parliament tightened laws against neonazi demonstrations yesterday, seeking to block a planned far-right march on the 60th anniversary of the nazis' surrender and protect a new national Holocaust memorial in Berlin.

The Bill cited a "steady rise in far-right gatherings that resemble ever more the character of the nazi regime's marches."

Germany already has laws to combat neonazi propaganda and bans the display of nazi symbols.

Source 2: AOL News

Prosecutors have argued that what happened under Nazi rule was too horrifying to allow for the reproduction of swastikas as any kind of "fashion accessory."

Now, this case is a little wild but I posted it to show if this guy was fined for this, imagine throwing Hitler into a video game and trying to put it on a German shelf. Sure, you can try pass it off as an "educational purpose" but have fun trying to prove that in a court.

 

[holy king]

please make this sticky, i'm very tired of seeing all those hitler threads too....

 

[Quijote]

But it's true, thus not impolite.

Your logic is broken. Eventhough the term BS is does mean nonsense, lies, or exaggeration, and from his point of view that probably is true, it is however it is a very negative word that can show hostility towards an individual or an situation. The word is unnecessary and impolite to use - it may be different from household to household, though. People are welcome to disagree, but you do not have to be impolite about it and call someone else’s views BS.
I find some people to be stupid and pathetic, and while that may be the truth it would certainly not be polite to say.

Now, this case is a little wild but I posted it to show if this guy was fined for this, imagine throwing Hitler into a video game and trying to put it on a German shelf. Sure, you can try pass it off as an "educational purpose" but have fun trying to prove that in a court.

They are very wild and focus on Nazism and not Adolf Hitler, and thus as easily comparable.
Here is a different example of Adolf Hitler presented to the arts that focuses on Adolf Hitler.

Der Untergang:

Spoiler :

It's the last days of Adolf Hitler, April 1945, and Hitler's personal secretary Traudl Junge finds herself in the Der Fuhrer's bunker. Facing inevitable defeat, Hilter's moods range from defiance to fight or flee, remain loyal or opt for self-preservation. Eva Braun parties while Magda Goebbels kills her children. The movie goes on to show how Hitler and Eva lived their last hours in the Bunker.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0363163/

Statistic showing the movie doing well in Germany.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/germany/2004/41.htm

 

[Franks]

Just skip them if you don't like them.

 

[kcbrett5]

How did anyone vote "No" at all? .

Hitler was a great leader, he brought the German people out of a recess, just as FDR did to America. To quote Wikipedia (although not a scholarly source, I'm sure I could find countless "good" sources if you wish): "Hitler oversaw one of the greatest expansions of industrial production and civil improvement Germany had ever seen, mostly based on debt flotation and expansion of the military." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Economics_and_culture)

I wonder, if your family had been executed in a concentration camp if you would feel the same way.

How can anyone vote "yes" unless they are just starting an argument? Are you all so ignorant that you can't see how the Hitler is worse than Stalin or Mao? It is not an enlightened point of view to suggest that others in history have committed atrocities as bad as the ones Nazi Germany perpetrated. However, the Holocaust might be the single worst act initiated by any man that ever walked the face of the earth. Whether you agree with that statement or not is irrelevant. Many, many people do agree with it.

Are you really so naive that you think the public in general wouldn't protest a game that allows you play as Hitler and take over the world? You think nobody would mind a game where you can be Hitler and go on a conquest to wipe out all of the jews in the world? The game makes it easy, they put little stars of david next to every city to let you know where the jews live (sound familiar anyone?).

This entire discussion is silly. Whether you think he belongs in the game or not is irrelevant. No single figure inspires as much hatred in the minds of the public as Hitler. No american video game company will ever put him into their product because it will mean lower sales, more controversy, and inevitable public apologies for being insensitive.

I suspect if you had family members executed in the Holocaust you might think differently. But in the meantime, why not show at least a shred of decency and sensitivity to those that did and stop lobbying for the inclusion of a genocidal madman.

 

[King Flevance]

They are very wild and focus on Nazism and not Adolf Hitler, and thus as easily comparable.
Here is a different example of Adolf Hitler presented to the arts that focuses on Adolf Hitler.

Der Untergang:

Spoiler :

It's the last days of Adolf Hitler, April 1945, and Hitler's personal secretary Traudl Junge finds herself in the Der Fuhrer's bunker. Facing inevitable defeat, Hilter's moods range from defiance to fight or flee, remain loyal or opt for self-preservation. Eva Braun parties while Magda Goebbels kills her children. The movie goes on to show how Hitler and Eva lived their last hours in the Bunker.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0363163/

Statistic showing the movie doing well in Germany.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/germany/2004/41.htm

This is a movie done for educational purposes to view the life around Adolf Hitler's existance. There are no laws against educational material that involve Adolf or Nazism. There are laws set in Germany that outlaw the celebration of such a charactor. Nazism was a racist form of facism - not merely facism. If you put Hitler in a game where you have the option to pretend to be Hitler, Germany will most likely view it not only as misrepresentation of their country but also as Nazi paraphanelia. (sp?)

As to put him in, the flag would have to be the Nazi flag. Or to fly the German flag under him would be an insult to Germany. (Misrepresentation) You can be upset about this all you want but that's just the way it is. I view it as nothing more than a game and don't care either way. But I doubt this will ever happen because it isn't worth Firaxis's efforts to put him in the game to upset the same amount of people or more to please just as many or less. That is bad business as at best it only means spending money on an idea that holds no profit.

As to the whole "BS" thing, I grew up in the midwest. Don't come here if you're offended by having your views refered to as BS. Especially the "show me state".

If you find someone stupid and pathetic, it is an opinionated viewpoint, which is always BS. That is why it is impolite to say. We are not talking about an opinion, we are talking about German laws. It's either true, or BS.

 

[Mango]

Germany is the second largest market that Firaxis sells to behind, of course, the US. While there are plenty of people in the US who would like to see Hitler in the game just because he is a historicial figure who significantly impacted the world, there are a lot of German's who, as King Flevance so eloquently put it, would view the idea of playing as Hitler as Nazi paraphernalia.

Now ask yourself, should a leader whose inclusion in a game could jeopardize potential sales in the second largest market you target be included in a game? Of course not. End of discussion.

 

[jan33]

dammed man stalin and mao where mass murderers aswell
the first through prosecuting people and murder them and mao through stupidity his famous step forward when he let the chinese breed as hell wich led to famine and 30 million chinese died and he executed people to so...
of course this is not as bad as wat hitler did but hey hitler IS a german leader so why not include him if u dont want to play him well dont play him....

 

[Sohan]

The bottom line is money. If including Hitler reduces the amount of money Firaxis earns, don't put him in. Bottom line. If you want Hitler so bad, mod him in yourself.