4 ms·

This is a great reminder that at one time Hitler was not the caricature of pure evil that he is now. He was real and nobody knew what the future held. Amazing s

by paul_f 12y ago

This is a great reminder that at one time Hitler was not the caricature of pure evil that he is now. He was real and nobody knew what the future held. Amazing snapshot into that time.

krick 12y ago
Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2 it's only natural that it wasn't the case before he lost his war. Far more interesting about this article is the fact how much it was known about what the future held. Sure, Orwell might be somewhat above average in questions of history and politics, but still I'd say it is pretty surprising that he is giving attention precisely that parts of Mein Kampf and Hitler personality which are interesting now, 70 years after. Especially that part about Hitler seeing himself as "Christ crucified". "Hero who fights single-handed against impossible odds". Indeed, wasn't it pretty clear back then, that whatever war he started — he couldn't win? What must had happened in order to make victory possible? Yet his popularity was amazing, and Orwell describes perfectly why. I'm not sure I understood the reason so well before I read this.
- chatmasta 12y ago
  > "Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2" I'm not sure that any propaganda is necessary to convince 99.9% of people that the instigator of the largest genocide in human history is, in fact, a "caricature of pure evil."
  - Russell91 12y ago
    Stalin's genocide was larger.
    - declan 12y ago
      >Stalin's genocide was larger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll Mao Zedong is believed to be responsible for 34,300,000–63,784,000 deaths and Joseph Stalin for 23,000,000–60,000,000.
      - chatmasta 12y ago
        Ok, point taken. But at least I was correct in saying "a caricature" rather than "the caricature." Man, that's a lot of people.
      - Russell91 12y ago
        Yea, Mao Ze Dong wasn't the same thing though. It's estimated as many as 60 million people died in China from hunger. Many others died from the civil war (Cultural Revolution). There may have been some genocide but the term doesn't apply as well as in Germany/Russia.
        andr3w321 12y ago
        Yes but people were dying from hunger as a direct result of the policies that Mao implemented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine He is largely responsible for these deaths even if he didn't personally exterminate them.
        Bootvis 12y ago
        But presumably there was a different intent behind Mao's actions. It seems to me that the goal of central planning was prosperity, not death.
        lutusp 12y ago
        Yes, true, but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent. As has often been said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    - yk 12y ago
      You may be able to find a specific definition of genocide, which makes that statement true. But in a very narrow definition of genocide as targeted extermination policy, as well as in a very broad definition, where a large part of the people who died in WWII would count against Hitler, this is not true. For a discussion on the historiography see http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/#fn-* http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-...
    - corpselord420 12y ago
      famine isn't the same thing as genocide
  - gaius 12y ago
    Consider that modern day fascists are (rightly) reviled by modern mainstream society, yet communists are tolerated. There are even communists being voted into various parliaments and no-one bats an eyelid. Aren't you curious as to why this is, given Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Kim family, even Castro?
    - dirtyaura 12y ago
      The reason is that roots of communism and nazism are different. Marx wrote Communist Manifesto in 1848 and it influenced working class movement in many ways, which, one can argue, has led to several good things in society. It also influenced the horrors you mentioned. Nazism, on the otherhand, is largely associated with Hitler, although it has roots in pan-Germanism and nationalism in general. Thus, communism is associated with a wider spectrum of ideas and events than nazism, and because of that expressing some forms of communist ideas is tolerated in the modern society better than expressing the Nazi ideology.
- naland 12y ago
  >What must had happened in order to make victory possible? the nuke could have done it. Scientifically Germany was on top since the second half of 18-nth century. Oppie took a Ph.D. in theoretical physics at Gottingen, 1927. > this thread rises lots of questions 'evil is perverted good' Paracelsus of middle-ages.
- sytelus 12y ago
  From my reading of WW-II, no one was fighting war to stop Hitler was committing genocide. Participating countries really didn't cared so much about jews, they were just afraid that Hitler will march in to their borders. In fact, nations actively refused to give fleeting jews asylum. There are however also theories that people actually didn't knew how ugly this was and there was often uncertainty if actually systematic genocide was in progress. It was only after allies found concentration camps, mountain of skulls, gas chambers etc, they realized full extent of what was going on. So Hitler's "caricature of pure evil" probably wasn't possible because of lack of reliable facts until he got defeated.
rangibaby 12y ago
http://www.rotten.com/library/history/nazi/ http://www.rotten.com/library/history/nazi/ The mistake often made in describing the crimes and actions of the Third Reich is to somehow dehumanize them, turn all the players into demons and monsters, the same techniques used by the Nazis themselves to target and exterminate Jews and other undesirables. To dehumanize Nazis is to turn them into archetypes as opposed to functioning humans; it sets us up to be "surprised" again when traits of the Nazis show up elsewhere, in other places, at a lessened level but with the same misguided goals and logic behind them.

by paul_f 12y ago

This is a great reminder that at one time Hitler was not the caricature of pure evil that he is now. He was real and nobody knew what the future held. Amazing snapshot into that time.

krick 12y ago

Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2 it's only natural that it wasn't the case before he lost his war. Far more interesting about this article is the fact how much it was known about what the future held. Sure, Orwell might be somewhat above average in questions of history and politics, but still I'd say it is pretty surprising that he is giving attention precisely that parts of Mein Kampf and Hitler personality which are interesting now, 70 years after. Especially that part about Hitler seeing himself as "Christ crucified". "Hero who fights single-handed against impossible odds". Indeed, wasn't it pretty clear back then, that whatever war he started — he couldn't win? What must had happened in order to make victory possible? Yet his popularity was amazing, and Orwell describes perfectly why. I'm not sure I understood the reason so well before I read this.

chatmasta 12y ago
> "Bearing in mind that this "caricature of pure evil" image is basically result of propaganda of the winning side of WW2" I'm not sure that any propaganda is necessary to convince 99.9% of people that the instigator of the largest genocide in human history is, in fact, a "caricature of pure evil."
- Russell91 12y ago
  Stalin's genocide was larger.
  - declan 12y ago
    >Stalin's genocide was larger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll Mao Zedong is believed to be responsible for 34,300,000–63,784,000 deaths and Joseph Stalin for 23,000,000–60,000,000.
    - chatmasta 12y ago
      Ok, point taken. But at least I was correct in saying "a caricature" rather than "the caricature." Man, that's a lot of people.
    - Russell91 12y ago
      Yea, Mao Ze Dong wasn't the same thing though. It's estimated as many as 60 million people died in China from hunger. Many others died from the civil war (Cultural Revolution). There may have been some genocide but the term doesn't apply as well as in Germany/Russia.
      - andr3w321 12y ago
        Yes but people were dying from hunger as a direct result of the policies that Mao implemented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine He is largely responsible for these deaths even if he didn't personally exterminate them.
        Bootvis 12y ago
        But presumably there was a different intent behind Mao's actions. It seems to me that the goal of central planning was prosperity, not death.
        lutusp 12y ago
        Yes, true, but in politics the outcome is all that matters, not the intent. As has often been said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  - yk 12y ago
    You may be able to find a specific definition of genocide, which makes that statement true. But in a very narrow definition of genocide as targeted extermination policy, as well as in a very broad definition, where a large part of the people who died in WWII would count against Hitler, this is not true. For a discussion on the historiography see http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/#fn-* http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-...
  - corpselord420 12y ago
    famine isn't the same thing as genocide
- gaius 12y ago
  Consider that modern day fascists are (rightly) reviled by modern mainstream society, yet communists are tolerated. There are even communists being voted into various parliaments and no-one bats an eyelid. Aren't you curious as to why this is, given Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Kim family, even Castro?
  - dirtyaura 12y ago
    The reason is that roots of communism and nazism are different. Marx wrote Communist Manifesto in 1848 and it influenced working class movement in many ways, which, one can argue, has led to several good things in society. It also influenced the horrors you mentioned. Nazism, on the otherhand, is largely associated with Hitler, although it has roots in pan-Germanism and nationalism in general. Thus, communism is associated with a wider spectrum of ideas and events than nazism, and because of that expressing some forms of communist ideas is tolerated in the modern society better than expressing the Nazi ideology.
naland 12y ago
>What must had happened in order to make victory possible? the nuke could have done it. Scientifically Germany was on top since the second half of 18-nth century. Oppie took a Ph.D. in theoretical physics at Gottingen, 1927. > this thread rises lots of questions 'evil is perverted good' Paracelsus of middle-ages.
sytelus 12y ago
From my reading of WW-II, no one was fighting war to stop Hitler was committing genocide. Participating countries really didn't cared so much about jews, they were just afraid that Hitler will march in to their borders. In fact, nations actively refused to give fleeting jews asylum. There are however also theories that people actually didn't knew how ugly this was and there was often uncertainty if actually systematic genocide was in progress. It was only after allies found concentration camps, mountain of skulls, gas chambers etc, they realized full extent of what was going on. So Hitler's "caricature of pure evil" probably wasn't possible because of lack of reliable facts until he got defeated.

rangibaby 12y ago

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/nazi/ http://www.rotten.com/library/history/nazi/ The mistake often made in describing the crimes and actions of the Third Reich is to somehow dehumanize them, turn all the players into demons and monsters, the same techniques used by the Nazis themselves to target and exterminate Jews and other undesirables. To dehumanize Nazis is to turn them into archetypes as opposed to functioning humans; it sets us up to be "surprised" again when traits of the Nazis show up elsewhere, in other places, at a lessened level but with the same misguided goals and logic behind them.