Poll of the Day > "Hitler wanted to end poverty"... how do you even respond to that?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It's Godwin's law at its finest, and is being used in defense of corporatism

Then again, it's just dumb old people on facebook

---

The ends dont justify the means

---

"You know who else was an artist?!"

"Okay"

---

His army did hand out food to the poor in USSR countries
that' gets buried a lot

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

His army did hand out food to the poor in USSR countries
that' gets buried a lot

If that's true it's a shame it's buried, but I get why.

It's hard to look at people like that as people, especially hard to think of them as capable of anything good.

It's a lot less uncomfortable to think of Hitler as some monster, not human at all, than to accept that someone can be a human and be monstrous.

But it's a shame because it doesn't put anything into perspective, it just furthers a very black and white view of how life works.

If you're for ending poverty it means you're an evil bigoted Nazi who deserves all the bad things ever

---

ChaosAzeroth posted...

If that's true it's a shame it's buried, but I get why.

It's hard to look at people like that as people, especially hard to think of them as capable of anything good.

It's a lot less uncomfortable to think of Hitler as some monster, not human at all, than to accept that someone can be a human and be monstrous.

But it's a shame because it doesn't put anything into perspective, it just furthers a very black and white view of how life works.

oh it gets even better than that
women had free schooling to become nurses or teachers
were awarded money for having kids

men were in the youth from like 13 on wards
groomed for defensive war, had healthcare

cheap housing everywhere, it was more about living close to your job then some 30 year payment plan

---

how do you even respond to that?

"So you aren't even as good a person as Hitler was? I'm not sure if that's sad or impressive."

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

oh it gets even better than that
women had free schooling to become nurses or teachers
were awarded money for having kids

men were in the youth from like 13 on wards
groomed for defensive war, had healthcare

cheap housing everywhere, it was more about living close to your job then some 30 year payment plan

Just more points proving people and life are messy as hell.

Try something like "Doesn't mean he wasn't a scumbag"

---

Dont waste your time talking to crazy people and trolls

---

I would probably say something cheeky like, "He also wanted to end some ethnic groups".
---

That's just a troll response. Ignore it.
---

And here I thought "literally is worse than Hitler" was hyperbole.

---

"He probably drank water, too; therefore, people who drink water are clearly Nazis."

---

"Why are you trying to defend hitler?"

---

Lokarin posted...

It's Godwin's law at its finest, and is being used in defense of corporatism

Then again, it's just dumb old people on facebook

ok?

---

Hitler's favorite movies included Snow White and Metropolis.

---

Hitler did not do nothing wrong: he boosted the economy, created thousands of job places, the heavy industry boomed.

But, for real, Hitler is despised, but Stalin is a good guy to someone. What?

He may have had good intentions, but he went about it the wrong way.

---

Fierce_Deity_08 posted...

He may have had good intentions, but he went about it the wrong way.

He didnt have good intentions.
if I said Im gonna end poverty in my family and friends circle by killing your family is that good intentions? No. Its merely self perseverance.

---

he only cared about Germans. he was going to exploit everyone else in the world to raise up the germans

Ze germans

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

His army did hand out food to the poor in USSR countries
that' gets buried a lot

Those must have been the spontaneous actions of a few individual soldiers then, because around 3.3 million Soviet POWs died, mostly of starvation and disease, in slow death camps run not by the SS but by the Wehrmacht.

---

I mean, who cares? He only wanted to end poverty for "the right kind of people"

---

deoxxys posted...

I mean, who cares? He only wanted to end poverty for "the right kind of people"

And at the expense of the liberty, lives and health of millions of slave workers and millions of civilians under brutal occupation who starved while his regime ruthlessly asset-stripped their countries.

---

Firewerx posted...

And at the expense of the liberty, lives and health of millions of slave workers and millions of civilians under brutal occupation who starved while the regime ruthlessly looted their countries.

Precisely. The right people were germans. everyone else was dirt to walk on

---

aurick79 posted...

The ends dont justify the means

Someone nailed it in one. Good job.

---

aurick79 posted...

The ends dont justify the means

^lol yeah that pretty much sums up a lot of the Pol Pot, Stalin, Adolph Castro, crazy people.


---

https://i.imgur.com/6mBjn3m.mp4

---

GNS1991 posted...

But, for real, Hitler is despised, but Stalin is a good guy to someone. What?

Stalin was on our side in WWII that's why. Also he pretty much killed anyone he thought was a threat, not just certain ethnic groups.

---

OhhhJa posted...

"You know who else was an artist?!"

"You know who else was a great swimmer?!"

---

Firewerx posted...

Those must have been the spontaneous actions of a few individual soldiers then, because around 3.3 million Soviet POWs died, mostly of starvation and disease, in slow death camps run not by the SS but by the Wehrmacht.

What tends to "get buried a lot" is the very active role that the German Army took in some of the worst crimes of the Nazi regime. The notion that it was an essentially apolitical institution, ignorant of and uninvolved in the Holocaust, is a complete myth.

do you know what a kidnapping is?

---

aurick79 posted...

The ends dont justify the means

it will if push comes to shove.

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Stalin's regime killed more people than Hitler's. But we don't talk about that for some reason.

Because only Jews are important, duh.

"but he went about it in the wrong way"

/thread

Yeah picturing Hitler in any positive light ia hard. It almost creeped me out watching video footage of him being a cheerful normal seeming human being.

---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Yeah picturing Hitler in any positive light ia hard. It almost creeped me out watching video footage of him being a cheerful normal seeming human being.

I've seen that I think.

The one where he asks something about why she's filming an old man like him, or something like that?

I know what you mean. It is super uncomfortable. At the same time, it's better to remember that the most awful people are still technically human. If we forget that we're more blindsided by a cheerful disposition.

ChaosAzeroth posted...

I've seen that I think.

The one where he asks something about why she's filming an old man like him, or something like that?

I know what you mean. It is super uncomfortable. At the same time, it's better to remember that the most awful people are still technically human. If we forget that we're more blindsided by a cheerful disposition.

Yeah that video. And yeah it's why liked the movie devils rejects. And the joker movie it humanized otherwise monsters of people.

---

"Hitler wanted a lot of things. What? Did you think he was some sort of evil monster merely wearing a human skin as a disguise? No. He was a man; just like you or I. We condemn him as evil because of what we did but forget that we all have the same capacity to do evil just as he held the same capacity to do good."

TBH, Hitler was bad, but compared to Stalin or Mao or even lesser despots he... well... Things could have been worse. Let's put it that way. Can you imagine if Kim Jong Ill lead the Nazi's instead of Hitler for example?

---

He's way more relatable in the Hitler Rant Parodies(which is using footage from the film 'Downfall' which he's played by the late actor Bruno Ganz) on YouTube lol

Like who Doesn't get pissed off by idiotic people who do shit like eating Tide pods?
---

Unbridled9 posted...

TBH, Hitler was bad, but compared to Stalin or Mao or even lesser despots he... well... Things could have been worse.

This is veering dangerously close to the "We should have supported Hitler against Stalin as the lesser of two evils during WWII" school of thinking -- which totally ignores the fact that Stalin's death machine had finished the worst of its work by 1941, yet Hitler's was only just starting to shift into high gear. We know that the NKVD did not liquidate millions of people after the Soviet victory in 1945, while we also know that the Nazis planned to do that very thing if they had won in 1942. That's why Hitler was not the lesser of two evils in WWII.

But you're absolutely right that there have been dozens of lesser despots with the same mentality and amorality of a Hitler, yet who've rarely grabbed the headlines or had their own chapters in the history books -- simply because their regimes have been quantitatively less efficient mass killers.

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Stalin's regime killed more people than Hitler's. But we don't talk about that for some reason.

...because Stalin wasn't engaging in genocide and running literal murder camps.

GNS1991 posted...

Because only Jews are important, duh.

Putting the antisemitic overtone aside for a moment, far more than just Jews died in those camps (6 million Jews were murdered, as well as 11 million from other groups) and deliberate genocide is more notable than other forms of murder.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Yeah picturing Hitler in any positive light ia hard. It almost creeped me out watching video footage of him being a cheerful normal seeming human being.

https://youtu.be/1zY1orxW8Aw?t=222

Unbridled9 posted...

TBH, Hitler was bad, but compared to Stalin or Mao or even lesser despots he... well... Things could have been worse. Let's put it that way. Can you imagine if Kim Jong Ill lead the Nazi's instead of Hitler for example?

Not true in the slightest. First, in the case of Mao, the vast majority of deaths attributed to his regime resulted from mismanagement that ended in a massive famine (although, to some extent, starvation had historically been a major issue in China (as well as Russia) so his regime might not be blame for all of the deaths, but it was certainly responsible for most of the 45m~ deaths). That's a pretty fucking massive far cry from deliberate murder and pretending otherwise is deceit (or ignorance) of the highest order. Second, and more importantly, Mao wasn't an advocate of genocide. Stalin has been accused of genocide via claims he manufactured a famine and other events, but it wasn't anything as overt as Hitler's genocide. Either way, neither lives up to Hitler. You claim that things would have been worse with them in Hitler's place, but instead things would have been worse if Hitler had been in *their* places.

---

Zeus posted...

Putting the antisemitic overtone aside for a moment, far more than just Jews died in those camps (6 million Jews were murdered, as well as 11 million from other groups) and deliberate genocide is more notable than other forms of murder.

And yet, there is no such thing as Soviet Hunters (from the family members that were in Gulags), but there are Nazi Hunters (from the family members that were in concentration camps). And before you say Gulags are not equal to CC, in there and in there people died by the hundreds.

Also, what you are essentially saying is... if you do not discriminate and kill every one, you are essentially not as bad as the one who does kill only one portion of nationals. GG.

GNS1991 posted...

And yet, there is no such thing as Soviet Hunters (from the family members that were in Gulags), but there are Nazi Hunters (from the family members that were in concentration camps). And before you say Gulags are not equal to CC, in there and in there people died by the hundreds.

Also, what you are essentially saying is... if you do not discriminate and kill every one, you are essentially not as bad as the one who does kill only one portion of nationals. GG.

That does bring up a interesting moral argument. Whats worse? One who kills indiscriminately or one who kills specific individuals he either fears, hates, finds inferior or some combination of the 3.

---

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Stalin's regime killed more people than Hitler's. But we don't talk about that for some reason.

Having the high score when it comes to killing Nazis is a pretty big mitigating factor.

Not to mention Hitler killed more people total. He was more than just the Holocaust. He was WW2 as a whole.
---

Y'all are kinda missing the point...

Someone I was talking with was against socialized health care because it would end poverty and "hilter wanted to end poverty"

---