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

[A_C_Slater]

"If I am victorious in this war, I will be known as the greatest hero to have ever lived. And if I fail, I will be the most despised villian in all of history." (Not verbatim, from memory, taken from a passage from 'Inside the Third Reich by Albert Speer)


Had Hitler won the war would he have been seen as the greatest hero of all time? Keep in mind, that this assumes the next generations were given the proper "education" or indoctrination into the "The Fuhrer is good, the fuhrer is great, mantra." Which they almost certainly would have been.



If you choose no, I hope you will explain yourself. And you DO owe me an explanation, for I am your intellectual superior.

[malorum]

Depends what you mean by "war".
Had he won world war two, he would have been briefly hailed as a hero, until at some point, possibly after his death the empire/reich broke up (as did the soviet union), and he would likely still have been seen as a villian.
Stalin is not seen as a hero despite the soviet union being among the victors of WWII

[A_C_Slater]

Assume the Reich never breaks up. Assume it lasts as long as Hitler dreamed it would. Assume a world of the 'Thousand Year Reich.'

[malorum]

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??

[A_C_Slater]

[ 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.

[A_C_Slater]

Also, anyone that votes YES is admiting that Hitler was indeed not evil. They are merely recognizing the fact that a different imprint was given for us to follow. That being the liberty, equal rights, democratic, imprint.

Had one been born into the Thousand Year Reich in say, the year 1984 [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] then one would be denouncing such things as evil and against God or whatever.



There is no good and evil. We are no more guilty than the animals. Everyone has known it since Darwin. But still, no one will admit it.

[ 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.

[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

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
Had Hitler won the war would he have been seen as the greatest hero of all time?

[/ QUOTE ]

I answered “NO”, as most of the world’s population would still despise him, and would have their own national heroes to boot.

There might be scenarios where Hitler would be generally acclaimed the greatest hero of our time after 60 years, but I think that possibility has a very low likelihood given just that Hitler won the Second World War.

[ QUOTE ]
My point is that there is no objective good or evil. Good and evil can only be viewed subjectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, we can agree on that.

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

Ah! This is where you are going off track.

You cannot use logic to prove there is no God. (Or that there is a God)

I think it is easily possible for someone to both believe in a God and not believe in absolute morality. Although such a pairing would clearly not be consistent with many peoples concept of God, that does not however make it impossible.

Further being a Great Hero does not neccesarily make someone good where good is being used as the antonym of evil. So even if you do not accept the possibility of both God and no absolute morality, it would still be perfectly possible to believe someone both evil and a great hero.

Still I guess we won’t know for sure until the Forth Reich creates a world empire at the end of the genetic cloning wars of the late 21’st century. Eeek! [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[baggins]

[ 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 ]

nonsense. voting yes is stating an either/or general opinion about how people would view Hitler under different circumstances post WWII.

you cannot ASSUME that good and evil are subjective and derive that there is no God. that is logical fallacy. there may be disagreement about what is Good and what is Evil, but that doesn't mean that there isn't an objective standard. Those of us who believe in God would say that He is the standard of good and evil. whether people accept that, or have different opinions of whether or not an evil villain was truly evil doesn't affect the fact (true or false) that God is the objective standard of morality.