Was Hitler right when he said.........

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

My, my, aren't we pedantic?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't think so - I think it was apropos your question, the point of which seemed to be about biases in how historical events are viewed from hindsight. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (popular perception versus reality) is a perfect example of this. Sure, it doesn't run the same ridiculously broad spectrum as the Hitler question, but I think it's more valuable, seeing as how history generally doesn't offer us controlled experiments for our perusal. If you don't believe it, ask yourself if Lincoln would still be seen as "The Great Emancipator" if the South had won the war and slavery still had been eventually abolished within a short period of time (as it almost certainly would have).

[/ QUOTE ]


I was All Valley wrestling champion back in high school.

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]

I was All Valley wrestling champion back in high school.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hell yeah - I remember when you whooped up on Marvin Neidick and Zack won the dirtbike in a bet on the match.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming the reich maintains both its political cohesion and political direction (i.e. Hitler is not demonised by later 'nazi' leaders with their own agenda.) Then yes the political consensus would be that he is a hero.

The point being??

[/ QUOTE ]


I like how you put that. Yes, exactly, assuming all those things.

My point is that there is no objective good or evil. Assuming the following scenario we would live in a world where Jews are considered evil terrorists and those that slaughter them would be the hero's. Good and evil can only be viewed subjectively.


If this is true. Then how can there be a God that presides objectively over what is good and evil?

Anyone who votes 'Yes' admits that there is no God, whether they know it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have proved that homosapians have subjective morality. You have not proved that there is no objective right or wrong.

[CCass]

I voted no, but it depends on how you define winning the war. I say that Hitler would have won the war if he had controlled all of Europe (there was almost no chance that he could successfully invade the USA). In that instance, there would still have been people that would have prevented the "indoctrination" that would be neccessary for Hitler to be known as the greatest hero that ever lived.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
I voted no, but it depends on how you define winning the war. I say that Hitler would have won the war if he had controlled all of Europe (there was almost no chance that he could successfully invade the USA). In that instance, there would still have been people that would have prevented the "indoctrination" that would be neccessary for Hitler to be known as the greatest hero that ever lived.

[/ QUOTE ]


Had Hitler conquered Europe (by not dividing his forces towards Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad and provided winter clothing for troops and allowing his army to go on the defensive during the Russian winter and somehow managed to defeat the British Air force and carrying out a seaborne assault of England) then the Germans would have eventually conquered America. Maybe not in his lifetime, but the territorial gain combined by the increase in industry and the militant mindset of the German peoples, then America may have ended up being conquered in the 50's or the 60's (If the first scenarios occured the German's would have acquired the atomic bomb before the U.S. did.)

[KidPokerX]

[ QUOTE ]
It does in the same sense that people who think of GWB as a hero do not consider him to be evil. In fact, I am sure they think he is a good person.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you being so close-minded? This has nothing to do with malorum's point. I believe he was using the example of the earth being considred flat at one time to prove that not everything is always as it seems. Just because an era of people believe certain things to be correct at the time does not mean that is generally a good thing. A basic example would be slavery in America or even Hitler and the masses behind him.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't try to mesmerize me with your semantical gibberish, college boy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that necessary? If you want an unbiased discussion on this topic (which happens to be your own), don't criticize the open-minded.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It does in the same sense that people who think of GWB as a hero do not consider him to be evil. In fact, I am sure they think he is a good person.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you being so close-minded? This has nothing to do with malorum's point. I believe he was using the example of the earth being considred flat at one time to prove that not everything is always as it seems. Just because an era of people believe certain things to be correct at the time does not mean that is generally a good thing. A basic example would be slavery in America or even Hitler and the masses behind him.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't try to mesmerize me with your semantical gibberish, college boy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that necessary? If you want an unbiased discussion on this topic (which happens to be your own), don't criticize the open-minded.

[/ QUOTE ]



You dare challenge your intellectual better!

Nein!!

Ich Bin Flagenheinem!!!

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming the reich maintains both its political cohesion and political direction (i.e. Hitler is not demonised by later 'nazi' leaders with their own agenda.) Then yes the political consensus would be that he is a hero.

The point being??

[/ QUOTE ]


I like how you put that. Yes, exactly, assuming all those things.

My point is that there is no objective good or evil. Assuming the following scenario we would live in a world where Jews are considered evil terrorists and those that slaughter them would be the hero's. Good and evil can only be viewed subjectively.


If this is true. Then how can there be a God that presides objectively over what is good and evil?

Anyone who votes 'Yes' admits that there is no God, whether they know it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is ridiculous. There is a very simple belief that circumvents this chain of logic, and that is the belief in man's imperfection in analyzing his world and God's place in it.

And you are playing loose and fast with your previous argument, that good and evil can only be argued subjectively. Because even if the majority of people form their beliefs on the basis of history written by the winners, this doesn't necessitate that good and evil are arbitrary - merely that the way each is perceived is due to, again, humanity's flaws.

By the way, I think even if Hitler had won the war, history would recall him as evil. Because truly totalitarian regimes are almost essentially cannibalistic, decimating their own resources and population. They are too unstable to survive and be remembered fondly.

NT

[A_C_Slater]

"By the way, I think even if Hitler had won the war, history would recall him as evil. Because truly totalitarian regimes are almost essentially cannibalistic, decimating their own resources and population. They are too unstable to survive and be remembered fondly."



I agree. This is almost a pure hypothetical scenario. But it basically falls in line with the Orwellian theory that man is infinitely malleable and is a blank canvas in which anything can be imprinted upon it.


The most horrid conditions of living can be seen as acceptable and even revered if give enough time and reinforcing social consensus.

Monkey see. Monkey do.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Stalin is not seen as a hero despite the soviet union being among the victors of WWII

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe Stalin is very well liked in the Soviet Union. In fact, I think his popularity has grown since the collapse of the Soviet Union.