161–170 of 252 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well they pretty much got Crimea, don't they ?
Crimea also has been historically part of Russia/USSR until 1954. (I'm French, just stating)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "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."
Stalin's genocide was larger.
For a discussion on the historiography see http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-...
I wonder if hitler is studied in political sciences. Especially his speeches, rhetorics and strategies, and why they worked out how they did. I hate to feel that hitler is somehow still a little controversial today. I don't really want to watch his speeches or read what he was saying because it's a little depressing and painful to think about, but understanding how he politically convinced people, and the underlying…
Mein Kampf actually does not have any plans or even hints for the atrocities that Hitler's regime performed later on. There are few words of Hitler's dislike for jews here and there where he basically complains that they are not as sophisticated as Germans, they smell, have unusual rituals, they look different etc. He then complains about they controlling major outlets of newspapers and art. Finally he discloses his real reason for dislike: He believed that jews supported socialist party that Hitler hated truly bottom of his heart, perhelps far more than jews.
One should not underestimate frustration of German people in those days. After WW-I, the peace treaty essentially put Germany in the dumpter. They can't have their army, Austria was broken apart, country needed to pay huge sums as part of the treaty and entire nation was under extreme financial depression. It was difficult to get a loaf of bread during that time for an average person. German people though their nation was sold off to winners of World War by their monarch. They thought they had been forever relegated as defeated people from who winners of the war stole everything. This was quite opposite to their belief of Germany as the greatest nation before the WW-I started.
Hitler promised to make bold moves including breaking the post WW-I treaty and payments all together. He promised to throw away monarch and socialist party which were favoring the status-quo. It was little surprise that he won hands down in elections.
The interesting part of Mein Kamf is that Hitler was rather regular guy without any political connections and even desires during the early years. He had bad experiences with members of socialist party which combined with his belief that nation was being sold by them and monarchs, lead him to rebel without caring about consequences including going to prison. This gave him publicity and outlet to write articles in newspapers as well as his autobiography. This in turn earned him strong supporters and even more exposure. Rest is the history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do not forget that, whatever the strength of Russia's conventional forces, Russia also possesses nuclear weapons. For that reason, it would be unthinkable for the West to fight a head on war against Russia.
I don't think that is really a factor, nukes only really come into it if you have an irrational regime that would rather be destroyed themselves than outright lose.
An example could be nuking a large staging area or aircraft carriers. There's nothing irrational about it, once war progresses this far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "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."
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?
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.
I wonder if hitler is studied in political sciences. Especially his speeches, rhetorics and strategies, and why they worked out how they did. I hate to feel that hitler is somehow still a little controversial today. I don't really want to watch his speeches or read what he was saying because it's a little depressing and painful to think about, but understanding how he politically convinced people, and the underlying…
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.
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…
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.
I wonder if hitler is studied in political sciences. Especially his speeches, rhetorics and strategies, and why they worked out how they did. I hate to feel that hitler is somehow still a little controversial today. I don't really want to watch his speeches or read what he was saying because it's a little depressing and painful to think about, but understanding how he politically convinced people, and the underlying…
I wonder if hitler is studied in political sciences. Especially his speeches, rhetorics and strategies, and why they worked out how they did. I hate to feel that hitler is somehow still a little controversial today. I don't really want to watch his speeches or read what he was saying because it's a little depressing and painful to think about, but understanding how he politically convinced people, and the underlying…
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.
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…
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.