3 ms·
> The only objective difference I can find is what you called "factually wrong about the universe". That is the difference between not only Hitler and any allie
by boxed 3y ago
> The only objective difference I can find is what you called "factually wrong about the universe". That is the difference between not only Hitler and any allied commander, but between Hitler and Genghis Khan.
I disagree. Hitler thought jews made Germany weaker. In fact it was the exact opposite: the Nazis made Germany weaker. A LOT. Partially by killing Jews obviously, but partially by just not caring about reality but going all in on their preconceived ideas. Just like Mao or Pol Pot.
- trabant00 3y agoThat is exactly my point. So how are you disagreeing?
- boxed 3y agoI guess I just disagree in word choice. I think we can still use words like "evil" and "villain" and still hold the belief that people who do evil don't consider themselves evil.
- YurgenJurgensen 3y agoRelevant to this discussion on how most of the worst atrocities in history were committed by people who believed themselves to be morally justified: The fact that it wasn't just morally wrong but strategically a mistake does suggest that Hitler genuinely believed the rhetoric, as if he just wanted to make up some lie to scapegoat a people, he could have made up a slightly different lie that wasn't quite as self-destructive.
- simiones 3y ago> I disagree. Hitler thought jews made Germany weaker. In fact it was the exact opposite: the Nazis made Germany weaker. Why do you believe that Hitler honestly believed this? Why is not much more plausible that Hitler saw that many around him had a historical suspicion or even hatred of Jewish people, and that many Jewish people were very wealthy, and believed that he could get that wealth for himself and enormous power by convincing people that he will strengthen the country by hurting these people?