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

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
It is not clear that had he won he would have been revered. I suppose it all depends on who you asked. Strictly in terms of population, there would have been far more "losers" had Hitler won than "winners."

Its hard to imagine any amount of foreign indoctrination convincing, say, Jews, Russians, Britons or Americans that Hitler was a hero.

[/ QUOTE ]


No. There would never be a cohesive world view that Hitler was a hero in his lifetime but future generations indoctrinated into the Third Reich ideology would all agree that he was indeed a hero.

This is of course, if there is an actual garrisoned presence of SS in all the defeated countries (America, England, Russia.)

[malorum]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, was trying to be concise.
Let's simplify my point.

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure they think he is a good person.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thinkin' so don't make it so.

[Quercus]

[ QUOTE ]
...but future generations indoctrinated into the Third Reich ideology would all agree that he was indeed a hero.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, no.

You don't have to look hard in this very country to find people who believe Abraham Lincoln was evil incarnate, despite a hundred years of positive reinforcement of his hero status. If you can't convince everyone of *his* glory, how in the world are you going to do it for a foreign conquerer?

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
And you DO owe me an explanation, for I am your intellectual superior.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh yeah? What about that time you almost had to miss the big game because you and the rest of the football team were failing history class and you got mad at Kelly Kapowski who was temporarily teaching for not letting you slide?

Sometimes I wonder where you would be today if Screech hadn't given you the answers...

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...but future generations indoctrinated into the Third Reich ideology would all agree that he was indeed a hero.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, no.

You don't have to look hard in this very country to find people who believe Abraham Lincoln was evil incarnate, despite a hundred years of positive reinforcement of his hero status. If you can't convince everyone of *his* glory, how in the world are you going to do it for a foreign conquerer?

[/ QUOTE ]


But the majority of the population believes "honest" Abe was a good guy for freeing the slaves. Of course there would be dissenters in the Thousand year Reich. That's what the SS is for, and all those dissenters (libertarians) would be viewed by the majority of the Reich population the way we view racist red-necks who hate Abe Lincoln cause he freed the slaves.

They would be objects of scorn.

[RJT]

Known as the greatest hero by whom? By his followers? Yes, of course. By anyone with a brain larger than a pea? Nope.

Do you really need further explanation regarding what constitutes a hero?

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]
But the majority of the population believes "honest" Abe was a good guy for freeing the slaves.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an excellent example of how a majority of the population can be fooled even after so many years. The Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves in the rebelling states (over which Lincoln by definiton had no power) only; it did absolutely nothing for the slaves in the North.

Lincoln gets credit for freeing the slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation when all it was was straight political hedging. Brilliant hedging, but far from the superhuman nobility that people associate with it.

Of course, straight commonsense thinking will tell you that there's no way in hell a president is going to be able to upset a deep-seated economic institution singlehandedly, no matter how vile that institution (or how great that president) may be.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
Known as the greatest hero by whom? By his followers? Yes, of course. By anyone with a brain larger than a pea? Nope.

Do you really need further explanation regarding what constitutes a hero?

[/ QUOTE ]


So you're saying that a baby born into this Third reich and indoctrinated into National Socialist ideology from childhood on, would conclude that Hitler was not a hero in his adult life if he was possessed of great intelligence?

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the majority of the population believes "honest" Abe was a good guy for freeing the slaves.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an excellent example of how a majority of the population can be fooled even after so many years. The Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves in the rebelling states (over which Lincoln by definiton had no power) only; it did absolutely nothing for the slaves in the North.

Lincoln gets credit for freeing the slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation when all it was was straight political hedging. Brilliant hedging, but far from the superhuman nobility that people associate with it.

Of course, straight commonsense thinking will tell you that there's no way in hell a president is going to be able to upset a deep-seated economic institution singlehandedly, no matter how vile that institution (or how great that president) may be.

[/ QUOTE ]


My, my, aren't we pedantic? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ 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).