• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did We Misunderstand Hitler?

Hitler was evil. And the Germans deserved everything they got after WWII for fanatically following him to the very end.

Anyway..

11- Hitler's father beat him, a couple of times he almost beat him to death.

All 11 points aside we need to also remember that at 1st Hitler mostly used the Jews as scapegoats. Countries, even today, love to pick out a minority and blame all of the country's woes and problems on that minority. Keeps the people in line, it strokes their nationalism and patriotism. He blamed the Jews for the bad economy, starting WWI, the Germans losing WWI, Versailles, trying for world domination, etc. He used the German people hatred of the Jews as his path to power.

Once he got that power he continued to use them as scapegoats, then when he didn't need them anymore his, and Germany's hatred turned to killing them.

So his biggest reason for what happened to the Jews in Germany, and Europe may have been political. Doesn't excuse anything he did, actually if what he did was because of mostly politics IMO that makes him an even worse human being, if that is possible.

Hitler and Stalin were both beaten severely by their fathers. Stalin's arm was deformed when his dad broke it, I believe. And, they report Hitler's dad beat him so bad he put him in coma.
 
Great Britain, France and Russia defended themselves against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Had the Germans not wanted war there would have been no war.

Russia was doing their own warring
 
Hitler was evil. And the Germans deserved everything they got after WWII for fanatically following him to the very end.

Anyway..

11- Hitler's father beat him, a couple of times he almost beat him to death.

All 11 points aside we need to also remember that at 1st Hitler mostly used the Jews as scapegoats. Countries, even today, love to pick out a minority and blame all of the country's woes and problems on that minority. Keeps the people in line, it strokes their nationalism and patriotism. He blamed the Jews for the bad economy, starting WWI, the Germans losing WWI, Versailles, trying for world domination, etc. He used the German people hatred of the Jews as his path to power.

Once he got that power he continued to use them as scapegoats, then when he didn't need them anymore his, and Germany's hatred turned to killing them.

So his biggest reason for what happened to the Jews in Germany, and Europe may have been political. Doesn't excuse anything he did, actually if what he did was because of mostly politics IMO that makes him an even worse human being, if that is possible.

The German people did not fanatically follow him to the very end, a select few did but most were merely Germans fighting for their country.
 
Great Britain, France and Russia defended themselves against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Had the Germans not wanted war there would have been no war.

Germans did not really want war in fact the Kaiser was writing many letters to his cousin to stop it. Germany thought it would stop the war from happening. It was Austria-Hungary and the war mongering military leadership that was only kept in check by Archduke Ferdinand that lead to the war.
 
Last edited:
Reply to the OP of course we misunderstood him. If only we had tried ot understand him WW2 would never have happened
 
The German people did not fanatically follow him to the very end, a select few did but most were merely Germans fighting for their country.

I disagree. Obviously there were some who weren't fanatical to the end. But many were.
 
Reply to the OP of course we misunderstood him. If only we had tried ot understand him WW2 would never have happened

WWII was going to happen, with or without Hitler. The Allies completely F'ed up at Versailles. Many say WWII was just an extension of WWI. I agree with that.

There was Japan. And many believed by 1943 or so Stalin would have started a war in Europe. It was going to happen, sooner or later.
 
I disagree. Obviously there were some who weren't fanatical to the end. But many were.

99% of them were not fanatical merely people who believed in their country and what they were doing was right for their country. No one but Hitler's own confidants and the SS knew what was really going on. Why do you view Germans as evil?
 
99% of them were not fanatical merely people who believed in their country and what they were doing was right for their country. No one but Hitler's own confidants and the SS knew what was really going on. Why do you view Germans as evil?

99% huh? No one knew but Hitler and his confidants huh?

No use taking this discussion any further.

Good day.
 
Actually, he's right. The assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian was the trigger point of WWI. Germany's invasion of Belgium and Luxembourg...and then France, happened after that.

No one is arguing against that. My point is that Germany's determination to go to war is what turned a trivial assassination into a continental tragedy. Without Germany's pressure, Austria would have extracted a humiliating concession from Serbia and life would have gone on.
 
Furthermore he does not represent German historians on the matter. Not even the average of them.

He was, when he wrote in the 1960s, pretty much isolated in his views. That, on its own, cannot serve to discredit his findings, yet it allows for scepticism.

Just as Clark's entries on the issue do not constitute just an attempt at revising, he raises pertinent points on the popular version of events and he was and is by far not the first one.

Where one, as a reader, decides to stick to one version on account of holding the historian in question to be the one-all-to-end-all (and subsequently the words to be gospel for ever more), one does not study history any more.

Fischer was in fact part of my undergraduate and graduate studies in history. I do not turn to him exclusively but I find his argument persuasive.
 

Russians fought Austria-Hungary in support of Serbia, but Russians never set foot in Serbia. If you consult a map, especially one showing the military movements of the time, you will see that I am correct.
 
Germans did not really want war in fact the Kaiser was writing many letters to his cousin to stop it. Germany thought it would stop the war from happening. It was Austria-Hungary and the war mongering military leadership that was only kept in check by Archduke Ferdinand that lead to the war.

That is a novel interpretation.
 
Hmmm what makes you think Russia would have stopped it's expansion?

The Russians moved forward because of their treaty obligation to France. That obligation came into play because Germany was preparing to invade France.
 
Hmmm what makes you think Russia would have stopped it's expansion?

1 of Hitler's biggest mistakes was invading Russia. But yeah, even if he didn't eventually Russia and Germany would have been at war. Stalin was going to expand west when he was ready, probably by 1943 or so.
 
Dude was an idiot at battle though. What ****ing moron would put upon his military two fronts stretching their forces to the max in opposite directions? That idiot... that's who.
 
1 of Hitler's biggest mistakes was invading Russia. But yeah, even if he didn't eventually Russia and Germany would have been at war. Stalin was going to expand west when he was ready, probably by 1943 or so.

Just to keep everybody clear, you have wandered into a tangent in which we're actually discussing the outbreak of WW1. Not your fault. We're out of line.
 
2. His hate of Jews could have been a result of propaganda he himself was fed early on in life, especially as to why Germany lost WW1.
Here it is wrong. Hatred of Jews was wide spread in all countries. It was not a "Hitler" thing only. Churchill had anti-Semtic views and most countries had laws and rules that discriminated against Jews. Some of these laws/rules actually continued after WW2. Jews were the go to scapegoat for centuries. Only blaming Germany for having such views is rewriting history. The whole racial purity idea that the Nazies went with, was in fact invented and practiced in the US and Sweden long before Hitler came to power.. hell almost even before he was born.
3. He may himself have been a Jew. He most certainly could not prove he was not one, since he had no idea who his paternal grandfather happened to be.
Irrelevant.
4. Germany did get a raw deal after WW1, and the allies definitely exploited the little country in a very inhumane fashion. At the very least, he had a right to hate France, US and England.
Yes she did, and that created hardship. The 1929 crash did not help either. National pride was hurt and when nationalism spurs its evil face because of economic hardship, then there are problems. Just look at today.. there are massive amounts of similarities to the conditions that made Hitler...
5. The part of Poland he attacked had always been a part of Germany. It was land stolen by France, England and the US which was then given to Poland.
Correct.. and that was deliberate... idiotic but deliberate. The Prussians were the main powerbase of the 1871 new German nation so they had to be "delt with" to curb Germany. Problem was that the Prussians were not delt with, just made homeless which caused even more animosity and became a fertil ground for Hitlers rise. A funny fact is that the very Prussians that the Allies tried to hurt after WW1 were the ones who in the end made the rise of Hitler possible and that actually survived after WW2 to form what we then knew as West Germany.. ironic no?
6. Communists. The battle to keep communists out of Germany began almost immediately after the Russian revolution. Back then, most people in that region saw communism as a Jewish thing. There were several armed confrontations between communists and right wingers in Germany during the two decades between wars.
Correct. But it was not only in the region, it was world wide. Basically Jews were blamed in most countries for all the bad things. Communists were a threat to the conservative establishment and even the newly started socialists and it was easy to link the communists to the already hated jews. It also helped that Lenin and others in the Bolshevik revolution were at least part Jewish.
7. Hitler really was a socialist. A national socialist who hated capitalism, which he considered another Jew thing.
No he was a nationalist and populist. His policies were all over the place. If he was a socialist of the time, then he would have been for state ownership of all industry. That did not happen.. in fact industry was rarely owned by the state directly but by loyal party members/supporters who basically were for the most part, part of the old conservative establishment around the Kaiser. These people in some cases were also allowed to keep their fortunes after the war and their dirty deeds and products still exist today... BASF, VW, Mercedes, Thyssenkrupp and so on.
8. He was a gifted speaker who was used by the German Right after WW1 to persuade people to hate communism, and by default Jews.
That he was. He had help, but he was a very gifted speaker. It also helps when he spoke things that were simple (blaming Jews and communists) and that people understood. You see it in how Trump does his talking these days.
9. The WW1 vets loved him. He was a hero who spoke their language.
Of course they did. The German Army after WW1 was villainized for the defeat, and the Generals whos fault it was were given a free pass basically. The fact the allies demanded that Germany dearm also did not help at all. Many were also Kaiser loyalists (until Hitler came around).. including Hitler himself. They did not want to get rid of the Kaiser and certainly did not want the socialists/communists to change their society. They were for the most part highly conservative, Christian and nationalists.
10. Hitler understood that to build a national coalition you need a common enemy. Jews served that role.
Exactly...and it would not be the first time nor the last. It is even happening today.
 
Dude was an idiot at battle though. What ****ing moron would put upon his military two fronts stretching their forces to the max in opposite directions? That idiot... that's who.

Certainly strategically dubious in that, but otherwise he had his moments. 1940 offensive into France through the Ardennes was quite a stroke.
 
Certainly strategically dubious in that, but otherwise he had his moments. 1940 offensive into France through the Ardennes was quite a stroke.

Superior tech.
 
Not really. German tanks were not superior to the French, but their concentration in armored spearheads was revolutionary.

What? German tanks were at the forefront in speed, armor and missile power. That's precisely why the blitzkrieg worked so well. France had let their military fall into disrepair after WWI and never updated anything hardly.
 
Back
Top Bottom