Hitlers Ways... Nazism.
-
Hitler, a person who lead germany in WW2.
A dictator who believe in Nazism...He, who uses propaganda to psycho people...
A person who is so good in propaganda that til today, many still believe in Nazism despite how cruel it is...He who is today still consider as a great leader.
Many people still argued regarding his great leadership til today...What do you think?
Is he a great leader? Or a bad one? -
This is from someone who believe Hitler is a great leader.
In my opinion, being a good leader firstly he should be able to take full advantage of favorable circumstance, able to rule the country under a chaotic situation. Besides he made attractive promises to gain popular support, skilled in using of propaganda, amoral. Moreover he should have the organizational ability and has the ambition to make his country powerful in the world. In addition, he could use his words to twist and manipulate the minds of people into believing that what he was saying. Using this power, he could get people to do anything for him, which prove his amorality. He should be skillful in carry out successful policy to bring the country to economic prospect, since economy is very important to a country.
I think Adolf Hitler is the one. Adolf Hitler was one of the 20th century’s most powerful dictators. He was responsible for World War II and the death of millions. Hitler saw a nation in despair and used this as an opportunity to gain political power. He saw a nation of unemployed and hungry citizens and promised them economic prosperity in return for absolute power. Someone once said “The Nazis rose to power on the empty stomachs of the German people”. Although he did not live a very long life, during his time he caused such a great deal of death and destruction that his actions still have an effect on the world nearly 50 years later. I am sure that he is a great leader.
Adolf Hitler joined a small political party in 1919 and rose to leadership through his emotional and captivating speeches. He encouraged national pride, militarism, and a commitment to the Volk and a racially "pure" Germany. Hitler condemned the Jews, exploiting anti-Semitic feelings that had prevailed in Europe for centuries. He changed the name of the party to the National Socialist German Workers' Party, called for short, the Nazi Party. By the end of 1920, the Nazi Party had about 3,000 members. A year later Hitler became its official leader Führer. From this, we can see his potential of being a leader and his development in his propaganda.
In about 1923 Adolf Hitler's attempt at an armed overthrow of local authorities in Munich, known as the Beer Hall Putsch, failed miserably. Hitler, were subsequently jailed and charged with high treason. However, Hitler used the courtroom at his public trial as a propaganda platform, ranting for hours against the Weimar government. Hitler was released from prison after one year. Other Nazi leaders were given light sentences also. While in prison, Hitler wrote volume one of Mein Kampf. This shows how he good at making speech to the people. After Hitler was released from prison, he formally resurrected the Nazi Party. Hitler began rebuilding and reorganizing the Party, waiting for an opportune time to gain political power in Germany. At that time, Germany was already suffering a post-war depression and was greatly affected. Hitler used the suffering of the masses to gain political support. He gained a strong following from the middle class, the workers and the unemployed by promising to improve the economy. As economic conditions worsened, the Nazis gained more support. Hitler staged huge rallies and parades. His speeches called for a strong and proud Germany. He attacked the Jews, making them the scapegoats for all of Germany’s economic troubles. His energy on stage and his motivational style of speaking made the masses believe that they were the master race and destined to rule the world. With the fall of Stresemann, the Nazi party became the largest party in the Reichstag. In1933, Hitler was appointed as the Chancellor. This is the evidence of getting people support although there were still many opponents. He promised stability, glory, economic security, the suppression of communism and employment. He satisfied the need of different classes. Actually he is able to take full advantage of favorable circumstances created by the WWI.
After he became the Chancellor, he controlled the mass media and the textbook, all German books, plays, film and art were strictly censored. Also at that time, all German youth had to join the Hitler Youth Movement to learn Nazi ideas. On the other hand, the German workers were forced to join the German Labour Front instead of trade unions. Other religious beliefs were all banned. Moreover, Hitler formed the Gestapo to supervise the life of the German ordinary people. Complaints against the government were illegal. Under Hitler’s rule, Germany became a police state. From the above, we can see he could use his words to twist and manipulate the minds of people into believing that what he was saying.
With Hitler such amoral people and willing to do anything, he would do what he could to benefit his countries, Germany. He started with suspended all civil liberties and used violence to crush all opposition. He actually started to carry out his promise of economic recovery by employing people in war industries as Germany prepared for war. He introduced pupil project schemes like housing scheme, road construction to absorb the unemployment. The Nazi removed the Jews, Communism and other enemies from their present employment to create vacancies for the German. Besides, he promised to rebuild the Glorious Germany of the past. First he started to build up the Wehrmacht. Germany was not allowed to have more than 100,000 men, but Hitler broke the treaty and gave orders to increase that number. Factories started putting out weapons and people now had jobs. To the Germans this was a very good sign. Mass rallies were held, where Hitler continued to use his powers of speech on the German people. Hitler succeeded in making his countries strong once again, at least for a while and he was skillful in carry out successful policy to bring the country to economic prospect .
As he was not self interested and always considered the country first. He want to expand Germany in order to raise the nation status of Germany, he carried out the aggressive expansionist policy. Germany withdrew from the League of Nation and began to violate the Versailles Settlement by rearming the country in secret. In 1936, Italy and Germany jointly intervened in the Spanish Civil War. Later on, Hitler and Mussolini signed the Berlin-Rome Axis with Italy. In March 1938 German troops occupied Austria, which was a German speaking state. In march1939, another German-populated area, the Stdetenland of Czechoslovakia, was occupied by Germany. In September 1939, Germany invaded Poland to enlarge her German territory. Again we can see Hitler’s organizational ability and the ambition to make his country powerful in the world.
Adolf Hitler was a great leader; his overall success must be attributed to the conditions, which existed in Post War Germany, and Hitler's great talent as a speaker and a politician. His rise to power was not inevitable, it must be noted that he greatly used the conditions of the time in his favor. The power that he held was total .he was gifted in the ability to use propaganda and brainwash people, which in turn proves that he was unethical, and desired to make his countries better and stronger. As Germany can recovered so soon after the WW1 and joined the WWII, Hitler contributed a lot. Therefore, he was a great leader .
Me too.
I personally feel that Hitler is a great leader... -
I don't think he's a great leader mainly because his idea of government was to subordinate the individual's will to his.
The problem with this mentality is that the country can only be as great as he was and would have all the weakness he had. No one man can ever fulfill all the needs of a country and that is the greatest weakness of all dictatorships.
In my view, a great leader would have to inculcate in his citizens the virtues necessary to keep them great after his own death and Hitler didn't manage that. Historically speaking, most of the great leaders managed it by creating some form of social system with portions of the populace in servitude to others whether though class, caste or feudial systems. I'm still waiting for the leader that will buck this trend.
-
Many think that LKY is a good leader too.
-
Hitler was a great leader. This should not even be a debate.
He was however pretty much a "bad person".
History remembers the winners and condemns the losers. If napolean had won the war in russia, no one would even remember the millions who died in the cold marches.
-
IMHO......
Hitler was a great leader in the sense that he united the German ppl and rebuilt a war ravage Germany after WWI and the great depression.....
But he was a bad leader when he tried to return Germany to its former glory by the way of guns & bullets.....
LKY's legacy would very much be known only after his passing...... Like Hitler, he did bring little known S'pore to where it is now...... But like Hitler, he did it in ways that most of us find un-tasteful......
Hitler's control and legacy last no more than 20years...... from the beginning.... to the end. S'pore has lasted more than 40years..... This at least prove that LKY has done more rights than wrongs.....
-
In my opinion, Hitler is a great leader, it's just that he's a bad person...
But if were we in his position, having his mentality, then to me, what he did was right... But only if I haf the same mentality as he is...
So to us he is bad, to his supporters he is a good man... either way, i find him to be a good leader...
-
A good leader, is someone able to lead, and gain support.
A bad leader, is someone unable to lead, and does not have support from it people...Hitler is a good leader. Not just a good one, he is a great one.
He is able to change people thinking, and make what he done is right.
But, him being a great leader is still a to just a certain extent only.
He also lead the germans, to the fall of Germany...
Suiciding, what a coward... -
A good leader leads his followers to victory; a bad leader leads his followers to defeat.
A bad leader will lead his followers to certain death, while his daft followers unable to comprehend issues will still consider their leader good.
It's like leading a bunch of followers to hades and still these followers consider their leader a genius.
In that case, the current leaders of Myanmar and North Korea are also great leaders. They use propaganda and military force to "convince" their opponents to submission.
A good leader uses good reason to convince his followers and lead them to success and victory.
-
Originally posted by popikachu:
A good leader, is someone able to lead, and gain support.
A bad leader, is someone unable to lead, and does not have support from it people...Hitler is a good leader. Not just a good one, he is a great one.
He is able to change people thinking, and make what he done is right.
But, him being a great leader is still a to just a certain extent only.
He also lead the germans, to the fall of Germany...
Suiciding, what a coward...He lost the game, and thus conceded. There's nothing there to do with cowardness.
To call him a coward is equivilent to the man who has already won a chess game, but refuses to acknowledge his opponent's defeat, just so he can draw out the torment.
It's not like hitler was ever going to get away with anything less than death anyway.
-
Germany sustained high military casualty in World War 2, perhaps a good leader like Hitler designed it this way. Germany's high military casualty is only surpassed by Russia, which was ill equipped and the soldiers were more like suicide squads with little or no armaments (if you watched "Enemy at the Gates" you will get the picture).
Germany: 5,533,000 + Italy: 301,400
The only major casualty that Hitler caused was to the civilian population (unarmed and untrained), led like guinea pigs to the gas chamber.
Poland sustained 2,440,000 civilian casualty while Russia sustained 11,400,000.
Hitler was a leader that cannot lead his military to victory, but caused widespread civilian casualty against unarmed men, women and children.
Some great leader he was.
-
hmm if i rmb correctly,
the main tink tat casued Hitler downfall was his aid to Mussolini in South Africa..
tat led to a delay to his initial(full force) atks on e USSR..
n by then he re-gathered his forces(after aiding Mussolini) n atk them, it was ardy winter time..
n his soldiers were not properly equiped wif winter wear or so..
n tanks were unable to move due to its diesel-tank being frozen up by e cold temp.
these few factors casued USSR to counter back..
uhmm correct me if im wrong le
-
Originally posted by a-Lost-9uY:
hmm if i rmb correctly,
the main tink tat casued Hitler downfall was his aid to Mussolini in South Africa..
tat led to a delay to his initial(full force) atks on e USSR..
n by then he re-gathered his forces(after aiding Mussolini) n atk them, it was ardy winter time..
n his soldiers were not properly equiped wif winter wear or so..
n tanks were unable to move due to its diesel-tank being frozen up by e cold temp.
these few factors casued USSR to counter back..
uhmm correct me if im wrong le
No.The main reason is still due to the admission of US.
And the admission of US is due to Pearl Harbour.US is a country too strong for germany to handle...
US has both economic and manpower...Even if Germany didn't attack USSR on Operation Barbarossa, and didn't aid italy, US could easily overthrown Germany...
The pivot point of WW2 is at Pearl Harbour...
If Pearl Harbour wasn't attack by those Japanese, who knows will the US even bother to join the war or not...But then, there are still just too many factors that lead to the defeat of Germany...
-
Popikachu I'd think the opposite that even if US didn't attack Germany on the European continent the Red Army would obliterate Germany's Third reich in due time.
You know the US only invade the Nazi Germany on European continent to race against the Red Army onslaught to Berlin. That's why they only invaded in 1944....when it was obvious that the Russian was going to defeat the Germans back all the way to Berlin. So I regard the US invasion of Europe was to stop the Red Army from taking over the whole European continent under its communism banner. Which resulted in a stand off during the cold war and the rest was history.
You know 1944 is 5 years from 1939 when WWII started.
I'm a victim of grave abuses from people in power in Singapore with access to telepathic person(s). They have friends here too. All abuses are to convince people I'm mentally ill to cover their grave evil. Telepathy is not a far off fiction. It's a fact.
-
You know the US only invade the Nazi Germany on European continent to race against the Red Army onslaught to Berlin.
For more on this interpretation of history, see:
http://www.agitprop.org.au/nowar/20050322_nov_conversation_on_history.php