i've just seen a disturbing number of posts here speaking highly of hitler's few and far between positive points, and also criticising this film for demonising him. i found it to be a refreshing break from films portraying hitler as a cartoon villain. it bordered on sympathetic. it portrayed him as a person with really human flaws that serve as a root cause of the truly evil things he did. yes, it was more consistent about them than would be expected realistically, as nobody is one way all the time, but i think this portrayal was probably consistent with his personality in general, though maybe a little overplayed. it seemed geared to helping the audience understand him rather than just hate him some more. but i'm really disturbed by how much praise of him i'm seeing here. no matter how much you understand him, nothing excuses the things he believed, let alone the things he did. he was a little man compensating for his feelings of weakness, like thousands of others you'll meet, who found himself in a place and time where people were desperate enough to pay him more attention than he deserved. he was not an admirable leader or inspirational figure who went too far or made a few mistakes. that's just nuts.
Sad, but that shows you how popular the Nazi mentality still is. I am sure that most of these geeks are the same ones who complain about political correctness stifling their freedoms then claim Obama is like Hitler.
I even slammed the Bush = Hitler types too. Comparing people to Hitler is so lame and usually dishonest. But there is one ugly crackpot in the US who has a radio show, Michael Savage, who loves calling people Hitler & Nazis. Ironically this hate filled creep sounds more like Hitler than anyone he accuses as well as he is Jewish. Figure that out
my point was that there are a lot of posts on here trying to make hitler out to have been not such a bad guy. while still being very careful to be seen as denouncing what was done on his orders, they seem to be trying to downplay his guilt
the fact that he had one or 2 admirable qualities (he was very anti-tobacco, for instance) doesn't change the fact that he was overall an unbelievably despicable person. this would still have been true had he never gotten into politics at all. he could have been an unbelievably despicable drunken madman on a street corner.
of course, that is why I hedged my praise of him so much. He did have some good qualities, but more way more bad ones than good ones. Then again, he sucked in a way that his culture found acceptable so most of the Germans were his accomplices in a way.
but on here, the claim seems to be the other way around. to hear it told here, he was a great leader who made some mistakes, took things a bit too far because of the desperate times he lived in. makes me wonder how many million deaths he'd have needed to order to be considered a psychopathic tyrant.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ How a person feels about Jews does not define how they feel about everything else in life, that you place this Jewish issue at the very center of importance reveals your obsession with the subject and not anything about Hitler's overall character which his staff says was very noble indeed. I can already tell that you are one of these simpletons who has never read any of the memoirs written by those who worked for Hitler. Yes, those memoirs actually exist. Start with Heinz Linge and Hans Baur and work your way to Erich Kempka and Heinrich Hoffmann.
Obama and Bush can't be compared to Hitler. Hitler ended poverty in Germany. Obama didn't. Hitler gave everyone jobs. Obama didn't. Hitler kept his campaign promises. Obama didn't. Hitler ended corruption in Germany and didn't take bribes. Obama didn't.
Here is a list of Hitler's positive qualities and accomplishments that the Western media doesn't want you to know about:
- He never drank alcohol, and never smoked or did drugs. - He was a vegetarian who was kind to animals, especially his dog. - He liked kids and talked to them and posed with them on camera. - He didn't even like sex that much. - He was an artist who preferred to "create rather than destroy" he said. - He believed in God and wanted to vanquish evil from the world. - He made Time Magazine's "Man of the Year". - Those who knew him said that he was a man of high honor and values, even though he may be fanatical, extreme and misguided. They never described him as evil or a cartoon villain. Only people who never knew him think that he's evil. - He was beloved by his people who supported him and admired him. - He brought the German nation from poverty and bankruptcy to become one of the most powerful nations on Earth (with the help of American corporations and bankers of course). - He gave everyone in his country a job, national healthcare, and plenty of vacation time. - He hated all forms of corruption and ended corruption in Germany. He did not cater to special interest groups or bribes. - He was committed to the ideal of "social justice" and did not discriminate between rich and poor. This is why his people loved him. He did not cater only to the upper class elites, as American and British plutocracy does. - He rose to power despite coming from a background of poverty. He was not from a wealthy elite family, like most politicians are. So he understood the needs of the poor. - He kept his campaign promises that he made before he became Fuhrer, unlike Obama and Bush who are pathological liars and have broken nearly all their promises, and are not as loved by their people as much as Hitler was. - He gave people something to live for, something to believe in, and a purpose in life to strive for in the quest of a better society and world. In contrast, US politicians and Presidents usually just diss out BS and humor people with no soul, passion or authenticity.
Now how many US politicians can claim all that? NONE! As you can see, this is not the portrait of a man of "pure evil" as you were led to believe. A truly evil man would not have been supported by the people or allowed to rise to power. Only a man of great charisma who stood for noble causes would have. Nor would an evil man be committed to social justice either.
What's interesting that most Americans don't know, is that no one who knew Hitler personally thought that he was evil. Only those that never met him think that he's evil, due to the bad rap he's been given in the Western media. That says a lot, and it's too bad the Western media doesn't want you to know that.
I mean sure the man had his faults. He was extreme, fanatical, misguided, maybe delusional, and overly aggressive in his war campaigns. But nothing suggests that he was a villain who enjoyed killing innocent people and doing bad things. Sure the man did some bad things. He did kill some innocent people in the process of doing what he thought was right, but not as many as Western history claims. But many other leaders killed innocent people as well, including the US and its Allies.
Now it is true that Hitler overdemonized the Jews and persecuted them too harshly. But everyone overdemonizes their enemy. The US overdemonizes Muslim terrorists and Saddam Hussein, and even lies about them. America has also overdemonized Hitler, communism and the Soviet Union too. And the conspiracy movement and alternative media overdemonizes the US government. It seems to be human nature to exaggerate and overdemonize the other side.
Mm- few minor faults. Destroying democracy in Germany, total suppression of all opposition, persecution of whole races, invading other countries and the Holocaust- which did happen!
Didn't Hitler: - End corruption in Germany, something which every US politician has failed to do, or got assassinated while trying? - Keep his campaign promises, unlike American politicians? - Do good things for the common people rather than just for the elite/wealthy like America always does? - Ban alcohol and cigarettes?
And wasn't he a vegetarian who was kind to animals? And an artist as well? Vegetarians and artists are the least likely to be violent.
Doesn't all this not fit in with the cartoon villain image that Hollywood has given him?
I don't think the Nazis can be classified as evil. They were wrong, but not necessarily evil. You see, to be evil, one has to knowingly do bad things to others and enjoy it. One has to knowing do wrong and delight in it. The Nazis did not knowingly do wrong. They felt that they were in the right.
For example, if one knowingly kills innocent people and enjoys it, then that person could be said to be evil. But the Nazis did not knowingly kill innocent people. They thought they were doing what's necessary to create a better and greater world. Many conquerors throughout history used the same logic. The US government does too. When the US government kills people during its imperialistic conquests, it considers those casualties necessary in their larger aims. They don't consider that to be evil, just necessary sacrifices. How is that any different than how the Nazis thought?
Are Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and the First Emperor of China also considered evil because they killed a lot of people? They may have been wrong. But does that make them evil?
In the ancient world, wars, conquests and executions were the norm. People did not have the luxury of sitting on their asses and getting fat while enjoying freedom like we do today. Our life today is an aberration, not the norm throughout history.