Hitler had one good idea. Right at the end when he decided to shoot himself.
Reminds me of this great street art I saw posted at some point. Can’t find the source though.
More than one in five apparently.
Judging by the latest election, the number seams a lot higher, more like three in five
One in five do not think Hitler was all bad. Two in five think he was better than a lady who laughs sometimes.
And the idiots that didn’t bother to vote, accepted this outcome
My thoughts exactly. Wait though, actually that is the fault of Democrats, somehow. I’ll get back to you on how
Kind of a loaded question to include the word “all” but I understand the lack of faith or respect for the USA right about now.
That’s not fair phrasing and will lead to high numbers.
Hitler wasn’t “all” bad technically, he was just so bad that the good shouldn’t matter at all. Pushing forward technology (VW Beetle, Autobahn) should is no way be justified by genocide (obviously).
A better question would have been something like “do you like Hitler overall?”
The full poll data: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Views_on_Hitler_poll_results.pdf
Do you think of Adolf Hitler as. . . ?
- A completely good person: 1%
- A good person who did some bad things: 4%
- An equally good and bad person: 7%
- A bad person who did some good things: 12%
- A completely bad person : 65%
- Not sure : 12%
So 12% felt he was at least as good as he was bad, 12% fell into the 'well, even a horrible person can do something right, and 12% were somehow not sure…
This is interesting, thank you for sharing.
I personally would tally this up as “12%” rather than “24%”.
Or at least in my opinion, option “D” (bad person that did some good things) is most likely the closest to an objective answer and “E” (completely bad) is a totally acceptable summary. But both D and E both summarize Hitler as bad. The people summarizing him as “balanced” or “good” totaled to 12%.
To be clear, this is still horrific imo.
and 12% not sure aka couldn’t really make up their mind if Hitler was bad or not… so ads up to 24%
That’s fair, but we don’t know why they said they weren’t sure. Could be educational issues, memory issues, etc.
Not a good look either way. Wild to me that number is so high.
Yes a question about Hitler being good overall is far better. Attempting to shove him into an all bad category is just dishonest and allows opponents a free win. The good absolutely should matter, because painting people as all one thing isn’t accurate and makes understanding how things happen more difficult.
It’s like watching a horror movie. You know the killer is in the basement, yet people go and have a look while the audience knows what’s going to happen. A classic fuck around and find out.
Well we now know there are truly people stupid enough to do so.
This is how hitler came to power.
Related: we’ve all heard the stories of a time traveler going back to kill Hitler before his rise to power. One common theme in almost all those stories is that the attempt fails, that’s why history is as we remember. This morning has me thinking that maybe time travel was involved in a couple of Trump assassination attempts.
They did get Jenkins tho!
The only conclusion you can make is that Hitler is VERY good at killing time travelers.
Or we were forked into a garbage timeline to keep the main timeline from being irreparably harmed.
Fools never see evil until its at their door.
They see the evil but think it will be to their advantage because they aren’t like “those people.”
Point of vampires is to never invite evil in
We’ve got to stop talking about “if” and “when.”
It’s NOW. This is happening. We are watching the rise of the next Hitler, now, live, today. This isn’t hypothetical anymore - yesterday just gave them carte blanche to go full stormtroopers.
At this point, all of our conversations need to be about how we stay safe in the wake.
I sometimes fear that
people think that fascism arrives in fancy dress
worn by grotesques and monsters
as played out in endless re-runs of the Nazis.Fascism arrives as your friend.
It will restore your honour,
make you feel proud,
protect your house,
give you a job,
clean up the neighbourhood,
remind you of how great you once were,
clear out the venal and the corrupt,
remove anything you feel is unlike you…It doesn’t walk in saying,
“Our programme means militias, mass imprisonments, transportations, war and persecution.”–Michael Rosen.
It doesn’t walk in saying, “Our programme means militias, mass imprisonments, transportations, war and persecution.”
Yeah but evidently it does, and people still choose it.
American fascism certainly does say those things, but it’s always other peoples’ faces the leopards will be eating.
That’s crazy wtf.
I will do you one better. There are people thinking Stalin was not all that bad.
Obviously, Hitler even gave credit to Jim Crow policies as being an inspiration for his generic policies.
The dixiecrats aren’t ashamed of that, game recognizes game.
Hitler was nothing without the NSDAP and the fascist movement.
There were 915,000 Germans in the Waffen-SS.
In case you don’t remember, what we’re talking about here:
What a terrible question. He was an awful person but obviously nobody is all bad.
He only has one redeeming quality: killing Hitler.
but also he killed the guy who killed hitler
Yeah, but that can’t possibly be true - which we ofc all know it can’t be, yet what you said is a very standard thing to say.
(Even “killing Hitler” was at that point of no good consequence - but “he” (?) would have been a hero if he killed Hitler at least one year sooner … but also max about 22 years earlier … so he completely missed the window on that “one redeeming quality” as well … so that whole thing is just a nonsense saying.)
He also prevented his capture and his prosecuting.
“Saved him from prosecution.”
(Or a lifetime of cozy government admin job in USA somewhere :D.)
/j
There is literally nothing I can think of that would make him good in any isolated field. For a long time people held the believe that he was pro environment and animal rights. But he also killed his own dog. People also say that he had a special aura around him. That he was very charming. But those people were likely like trump supporters today. My great grandmother actually got to see him before she fled Germany. She said that there was nothing particularly interesting about him except for the way he speaks maybe.
The question is still to vague. Obviously all of his politics were the worst. But the way it’s phrased, you’d kinda have to agree he wasn’t ALL bad if, for example, he made a pretty tasty pasta sauce. Like. Not that it’d be relevant. It’s the vagueness of the question that I’m critiquing. Maybe I’m just having an autism moment.
Nah, it’s deliberately formulated so it can be pulled out of context, misrepresented and cause outrage. And it works.
The more nuanced data: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Views_on_Hitler_poll_results.pdf
I was hoping that the ‘not all bad’ would be almost all of it. Unfortunately while it was half of it, a full half said Hitler was as good a guy as he was a bad guy, with an equal number responding unsure, which is likely leaning toward I don’t want to give a socially unacceptable answer.
Depends on how pedantic one wants to be.
No it doesn’t.
Well I can’t think of any good qualities that actually mattered.
That’s the point. He was objectively all bad.
Even without or beyond judging the person, it’s the actions, results, and consequences of those actions too.
Which is even more complex, but important for understanding the context.
But it’s def really important to avoid black & white (wrongful) memefication, bcs suddenly the memetic value (the “idea” that the image of Hitler represents to masses on average) is vastly corrupted & serves other purposes.
He was vegetarian (loaded topic, I know but probably gets more support than 20%) and loved dogs, for example.
He wasn’t, it’s well documented he wasn’t vegetarian this was spread as anti vegetarian propegand.
Oh yeah? Care to share some links for that claim? Since Wikipedia has a whole article about Hitler being vegetarian. Apparently, he wasn’t super strict about it but he identified as one and the article also quotes newspaper articles of the time. I’d assume “anti-vegetarian propaganda” is a more modern thing.
https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/myth-check-was-hitler-a-vegetarian/ Yeah you’re right later in life he identifies as one however still ate meat his chef fed him so the claim is dubious at best and may have been propergander for the war effort.
