Was Hitler Evil?

He understood how using the Jews was a keen political move which is one of his admirable qualities; a very sharp mind. His understanding of politics and how people think was astounding. Sadly many of his speeches are too long to quote but here's just a simple article I found quite amusing:

Advice for a Dictator
And for Those Who Want to Become One

by Joseph Goebbels

1. A dictatorship requires three things: a man, an idea, and a following ready to live for the man and the idea, and if necessary to die for them. If the man is lacking it is hopeless; if the idea is lacking, it is impossible; if the following is missing, the dictatorship is only a bad joke.

2. A dictatorship can rule against a parliament when necessary, but never against the people.

3. Sitting on bayonets is uncomfortable.

4. A dictator's first task is to make what he wants popular, bringing the will of the nation in tune with his own will. Only then will the broad masses support him in the long run and join his ranks.

5. A dictator's highest duty is social justice. If people sense that the dictator only represents a thin upper class that has nothing to do with them, they will see the dictator as a hateful enemy and quickly overthrown him.

6. Dictatorships will rescue a nation when they know better ways than the previous governmental forms that they are fighting, and when their power is so anchored in the people that they do not depend on weapons, but rather on their followers.

7. A dictator does not need to follow the will of the majority. He must however have the ability to use the will of the people.

8. Leading parties and masses is the same as governing a nation. He who ruins a party will lead a nation into the abyss. Political ability is not demonstrated by using treacherous methods to rise to a ministerial chair on the labor of others.

9. Dictatorships must be able to survive on their own spiritual reserves. It will not work if what is good in their ideas comes from their opponents, and what does not come from their opponents is bad.

10. The ability to speak is no shame. It is shameful only when actions do not follow words. To speak well is good. To act bravely is even better. The typical reactionary can neither speak nor act. He has somehow gained power, but has no idea what to do with it.

11. Nothing is more foreign to dictatorial thinking than the bourgeois concept of objectivity. A dictatorship is by its very nature subjective. It takes sides by its nature. Since it is for one thing, it must be against another. If it does not do the latter, it runs the risk of having people doubt its honesty about the first.

12. A dictatorship speaks openly about what it is and what it wants. Nothing is farther from it than to hide behind a facade. It has the courage to act, but also the courage to affirm.

13. Dictatorships that hide behind the law to give themselves an appearance of legality even if their actions disagree, are short-lived. They will collapse of their own incompetence, leaving behind chaos and confusion.

14. Only those who lack the courage to join a party value being above party. When worlds collapse, when foundations shake, when revolutionary fevers spread through peoples and nations, one must join a party, one must be for or against. He who stands between will be torn apart by the contradictions, a victim of his own indecisiveness.

15. It may sound grotesque, but it is true: The nature of a dictator must be clear from his name. One cannot rule with a name like Müller or Meier. And the claim to a title must be fought for. It can not be gained by swindle.

16. A true dictator depends on himself. His false counterpart hides behind the rules and depends on legal paragraphs to justify his actions.

17. Everything great is simple and everything simple is great. The little man likes to conceal his insignificance through complexity.

18. The army exists to defend the country against external threats, not to suppress the people in the interests of a thin layer of usurpers. A dictatorship that cannot defend itself with its own supporters deserves to be displaced.

19. Primo de Rivera [the Spanish dictator who lost power in 1930] fell because his power rested on guns, but he earned only hatred and scorn from the people.

20. Mussolini's work is unshakable, for he is his people's idol. He gave back to Italy what has always been the surest and best foundation of a state: confidence.

Hitler wasn't evil at all 😂 /sarcasm

He understood how using the Jews was a keen political move which is one of his admirable qualities; a very sharp mind.His understanding of politics and how people think was astounding.

An admirable quality when used for evil purposes ceases to be an admirable thing. Goebbals used his mind for Genocide. He personally approved of the needless slaughter of 3 million+ people. Thus, he was scum. Nothing more that human effluence*. To say anything else is to have a warped view of reality.

* Poo

Also, everything Goebbels says above is nothing more than common sense. I could have told you all that.

Once more, STFU.

Edit: I suggest you read this thread, becuase you are probably one of the sick shits the guy talks about-

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f11/t509020.html

He used that talent to do horrible things but doesn't make him any less talented . . .

True, but it certainly means he isn't 'admirable', which is what Luminatus is claiming.

You can admire genius and still detest the person.

True to a point. However, the kind of genius that Goebbels possessed was the kind to manipulate people, which isn't an admirable kind of genius. A twisted quality isn't admirable or good. For example if you are the type of person who works hard on your physique, that is an admirable quality. But if you only work hard on it so you can kill, maim and rape, that quality has become twisted and is no longer a positive force.

Not to mention, the thing that Luminatus apparently admired in Goebbels was his willingness to scapegoat the Jews, citing it as sound politics, which clearly it wasn't judging by how the Nazi regime turned out.

Uh, first, Nazi Germany fell because it engaged in a war it could not win. On its own front it was pretty stable. There was a Resistance but it never amounted to much until after World War II started and Hitler's followers began to lose confidence.

Second, I admire Goebbel's mind for politics. Does that mind for politics include a shrewd strategy to use the Jews? Yes. But like SC said, that doesn't mean he wasn't talented.

Finally, his political beliefs are not only "Hate Jews!!!!" For instance, his view of communism is agreeable for me.

That is Bolshevic propaganda. That is the form in which it clothes itself and lives, using falsehood and slander and chicanery, so as to make the nations suspicious of one another and hate one another, thus spreading a general spirit of unrest; because the Bolshevics know so well that they can never bring the communist idea to triumph except in an age that is distracted and sceptical.

Originally posted by Nephthys
An admirable quality when used for evil purposes ceases to be an admirable thing. Goebbals used his mind for Genocide. He personally approved of the needless slaughter of 3 million+ people. Thus, he was scum. Nothing more that human effluence*. To say anything else is to have a warped view of reality.

* Poo

He was working towards what he thought was the best interests of his own country (syntax?) and did not consider himself evil.

Also, everything Goebbels says above is nothing more than common sense. I could have told you all that.

Once more, STFU.

Edit: I suggest you read this thread, becuase you are probably one of the sick shits the guy talks about-

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f11/t509020.html

True to a point. However, the kind of genius that Goebbels possessed was the kind to manipulate people, which isn't an admirable kind of genius.

A twisted quality isn't admirable or good.

For example if you are the type of person who works hard on your physique, that is an admirable quality. But if you only work hard on it so you can kill, maim and rape, that quality has become twisted and is no longer a positive force.

Not to mention, the thing that Luminatus apparently admired in Goebbels was his willingness to scapegoat the Jews, citing it as sound politics, which clearly it wasn't judging by how the Nazi regime turned out.

Go ahead and prove that Hitler was objectively evil. Knowing those criteria will be useful later. What's that? Morality is not an objective phenomena? You cannot detect morality in the universe independent of human opinion? What's that? A law of morality would be fundamentally different from any other law of the natural world you've ever found?

Maybe he was immoral because so many people don't like him. Good to know morality is a popularity contest. The concept of good/evil is simply absurd. There are actions that benefit society, actions that do not; actions that benefit the doer and those that do not. Determining which ones are 'good' or not, let alone evil depends upon the lens with which we examine them.

Originally posted by Boots
?

Ich weiß nicht, Zum Donnerwetter!

First you would have to decide what you believe evil is. For instance, I have a friend who doesn't believe in an actual "Good" and an actual "Evil", as for me I believe that there is Good and Evil, but I don't think a person in and of himself is Good or Evil, but, instead is influenced by either Good or Evil.

The reason I see it that way is because as humans, I believe that we have the capacity for both, and can choose what path to follow. Though I don't believe that a person that chooes an evil path is evil in and of himself, because he still has the ability and chance to turn from that path, whereas if he wer evil in and of himself then he would have no ability to leave an evil path.

Edit: I suggest you read this thread, becuase you are probably one of the sick shits the guy talks about-

It makes my stomach lurch every time I read one of Goebbel's speeches or articles and hear him hate on the Jews. Why? Because one of my favorite teachers was openly Jewish. I respect and like her and still talk to her even after graduating. It makes me feel horrible and ashamed of my admiration for the man. I fear if she knew of my interest in the man that she'd hate me for it.

I do not worship Hitler or Nazism. I do not parade around giving a Hitler salute (which predates Hitler and should not be exclusively linked with Nazism) . I simply find some policies agreeable and even with the policies I don't agree with, there's no denying their effectiveness.

Also, did you know it was Goebbels who first pronounced that there'd be an iron curtain between the Soviet Union and the rest of the world? Funny how Mr. Churchill is credited for it in most texts I've read and the texts I remember most are my school history textbooks.
Propaganda is as much a part of life now as it was back in Nazi Germany. Because politics cannot exist in any form without it.

Originally posted by Luminatus
It makes my stomach lurch every time I read one of Goebbel's speeches or articles and hear him hate on the Jews. Why? Because one of my favorite teachers was openly Jewish.

Normal people have problems with rampant hatred and genocide due to the hatred and genocide . . .

Not sure if I'm getting you. Are you just saying it's normal to read something like that and feel repulsed?
I would hope so. I was just defending myself against accusations of Hitler worship.

No I'm saying that your justification is weak. You should dislike Hitler and the Nazis because you know someone who's Jewish, you should dislike them because of the genocide no matter who you know or don't know.

A personal reason is always a stronger justification.
It's all well and good to say "I hate HItler killed Jewish people" but what if you personally knew a Holocaust survivor? You will have a stronger dislike for the man than if you just knew he killed some people you didn't know.

I got nothing against Jewish people or any ethnicity or religion. I just happen to feel bad about admiring a man who caused so much suffering to a group someone I know belongs to.

Nemesis! I thought we were fwends!!

Define evil.

He was working towards what he thought was the best interests of his own country (syntax?) and did not consider himself evil.

sigh I knew using that word would bite me in the ass. I only used it because I could think of no other. As it is, I believe there is no such thing as evil. However, certain things can be proven to be illogical, harmful and hateful and it is these which should fall under the term 'evil'. If a person uses their genius to try to prove the earth is hollow, their genius ceases to be admirable (admirable being a term used for something inspirational and for something people can aspire too). If a person uses their genius to murder people, their genius ceases to be admirable. etc etc

And I don't care a fig for what Goebbels thought about himself. I only know I consider him a moron and thats all I care about. Just becuase He thought he was right doesn't make him anything less than a raving loony.

It took one of the most powerful minds of civilized human history to elucidate that things will fall to the ground if unsupported. Genius is often the ability to say simple things correctly, rather than confusingly.

Nah, common sense is common sense. The theory of gravity wasn't common sense at the time and thus is a poor example.

So, the guy might be a 'Hitler worshiper' so he is therefore wrong? There is nothing to indicate emotional bias outside so this qualifies as an ad hominem, rather than a simple insult. You don't want to win that way.

Where did I say that made him wrong. Don't put words in my mouth.

Why not? It takes just as much (if not more) skill than being good at chess. There's nothing to suggest that it is any less difficult, and it is certainly more useful.

Manipulation can be proven to be harmful to people and thus shouldn't be deemed as a quality people should aspire to have, else we would promote anarchy and wide-spread harm. If we promoted the concept of people taking what they wanted by guile then we would see a negative impact upon society. For that reason, manipulation and deceit shouldn't be held as admirable and good.

Twisted by your definition. Would you care to share your criteria for what is and is not 'twisted'?

Something that harm other or yourself/both.

Why is working on physique admirable? It seems like you're extending your own values past your personal life and into others.

First, I'm skinny as a rake and have never willingly worked out in my life. Second, why wouldn't you think improving the body is admirable? By itself it's only positive. Personally I think you are now just being argumentative for the hell of it, because that first bit was frankly stupid and beneath you.

While working to kill and rape is not good for society (rape is a particularly socially disruptive crime) if 'good for society' is your only concern, then why not use eugenics and forced sterilization

Because such things take away freedom, the very bedrock of society and mankind. Not only that, but they are demonstrably illogical and in no way helpful to society. You can't 'cure' mental defects and disease via eugenics. Where do you think that these things came from in the first place, because they can't always have been passed on. You are merely hurting people in search of an apparent good,.

gas chambers?

Becuase killing the Jews isnt good for society.

Go ahead and prove that Hitler was objectively evil. Knowing those criteria will be useful later. What's that? Morality is not an objective phenomena? You cannot detect morality in the universe independent of human opinion? What's that? A law of morality would be fundamentally different from any other law of the natural world you've ever found?

Maybe he was immoral because so many people don't like him. Good to know morality is a popularity contest. The concept of good/evil is simply absurd. There are actions that benefit society, actions that do not; actions that benefit the doer and those that do not. Determining which ones are 'good' or not, let alone evil depends upon the lens with which we examine them.

Absolutely agree and am stumpted as to why you thought any differently.

@ Luminatus

Uh, first, Nazi Germany fell because it engaged in a war it could not win.

A war which was partially caused by the Goebbles approved policy of mass genocide.

On its own front it was pretty stable.

Only if you term members of its own populace being carted off to be executed. And if you ignore the perpetual fear of being reported as an enemy of the state to the Nazi's. Or if you term 'stability' as forced stability.

Second, I admire Goebbel's mind for politics. Does that mind for politics include a shrewd strategy to use the Jews? Yes.

So you admire him becuase he thought that genocide was acceptable as long as he gained power. How high-minded of you.

do not worship Hitler or Nazism. I do not parade around giving a Hitler salute (which predates Hitler and should not be exclusively linked with Nazism) . I simply find some policies agreeable and even with the policies I don't agree with, there's no denying their effectiveness.

Policies which drove Germay to the point of ruin for the second time in 30 years. Which caused the murder of other 3 million people and the incalculable cost of war. Yeah, they're really effective. Or maybe you admire the policy of punching a nation into submission and denying it basic human rights, becuase that's a really 'effective' policy isn't it.

Also, did you know it was Goebbels who first pronounced that there'd be an iron curtain between the Soviet Union and the rest of the world? Funny how Mr. Churchill is credited for it in most texts I've read and the texts I remember most are my school history textbooks.

I have no idea what this is about.

hitler was probably evil if he wasnt mentally ill to the point that his actions were not his responsibility. he had no empathy for parts of the human race, he found PLEASURE in torturing and belittling others, actively going out of his way to inflict as much of it on the jews in as painful ways, as he cud fathom{sadism and narcissism on that level, unjustified by serious mental illness are a good marker for objective EVIL}, he did not feel guilty about sending his self proclaimed comrades to their deaths in the battlefield or outside it{hypocrisy/betrayel, also a good indicater of evil}. he did to other what he would never have allowed, done unto him, and had no justified inherent superiority to base it on. he loved almost no1 and hated others liberally, and had horrendous effects on the world which were based on his premeditated intentions.

all of this combined makes him EVIL. but, that also makes pat robertson evil.

None of those things can be proved to equal evil though. There is no giant rulebook in the sky with a definition of absolute morality. You can say that from your point of view, he was evil, but you can't state that as fact.

i can say that from HUMANITY's point of view, he was evil. i can also say that if he or others as individuals DENY this point of view, they are being hypocritical in the same sense that a person who claims that he is inherently superior to other humans beings based on birth or skin colour is beign hypocritical because he or she isnt basing that claim in any facts.

I just went through your post and disagreed line by line. no worries?