Envision, Create, Share

Welcome to HBGames, a leading amateur game development forum and Discord server. All are welcome, and amongst our ranks you will find experts in their field from all aspects of video game design and development.

How do you think the world would be like if Adolf Hitler succeded?

GO HITLER! GO LUFTWAFFE!
*Marches around
but seriously if the world would have been taken over by hitler...
there would be constant resistance around the world...
plus people in europe might be breathing poison gas! or
maybe even the whole world!
tsk tsk tsk....
but i hope he spares supporters.
does he?
 
kimpoy2006":2yd6j9yj said:
GO HITLER! GO LUFTWAFFE!
*Marches around
but seriously if the world would have been taken over by hitler...
there would be constant resistance around the world...
plus people in europe might be breathing poison gas! or
maybe even the whole world!
tsk tsk tsk....
but i hope he spares supporters.
does he?

wat

Alright new rule.

Don't post in this thread if you actually think Hitler is the greatest evil the world has ever seen, is actually satan himself, or whatever.

Fucking christ.  :|
 
Mega Flare":2v1mygdv said:
syphonmax":2v1mygdv said:
Well first I'm not really sure if this is the right place but what the hell it will be moved if it isn't.

For those of you who don't know who the guy is go to this site:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

Anyway for my GCSE I picked history and being half German I wanted to learn about the country a bit more, but then I learned about Adolf Hitler and his plans.

It got me thinking how would the world be like if he succeded in his plans. (If you don't know what they were look in the link above)
What if he did wipe out all the Jews?
What if another race of people were on his target list?
What would have happened if the Nazis weren't stopped?, but instead they took over the world?
Would there be peace in the world or would it be total chaos?

So how do you think the world would be like if Adolf Hitler succeded? I'm just really curious.

I'm still trying to figure out the German side of my family, the history and everything. Hell for all I know I could be related to the guy :sad:
wait you just learned about that? wow... sad... and i doubt your related to him

Hitler's family moved to the US and changed their last names so they wont be able to be found... So yeah I know there's one member in Jersey, Texas and I forgot the rest of the member there's about 5 more...

And yes Hitler was a military genius, he produced the machine gun, the tank, and fighter jets and more. So in general if the war was brought to America we'd be controlled by the Nazi party as Asia, Europe, and Africa was controlled by Nazism...

But now in Germany they do have Nazism but it's more Facist anyways so basically you'll see 150 Nazi members and 3,000 Facist beating the crap out of the Nazis.
 

___

Sponsor

On behalf of several members of the community, I would like to express my shock and disappointment at some of Adolph Hitler's adages. So, without further ado, I present you with this all-important piece of information: With Hitler so forcefully destroying our moral fiber, things are starting to come to a head. That's why we must do something good for others. Different people often see the same subject in different lights -- an instructive warning for the future. If I have a bias, it is only against confused, insipid toughies who keep us perennially behind the eight ball. To state it in a more sophisticated manner, Hitler's holier-than-thou attitudes are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that Hitler's power-hungry junta is a benign and charitable agency and they promote the mistaken idea that we should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy.

Hitler has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter. He will hate me for saying this, but he takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. Hitler also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. It is true that his self-deceiving, snarky ethics have led to more, not less, nepotism in our society, but I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of Hitler's writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Hitler's writings to know that Hitler is the embodiment of everything petty in our lives. Every grievance, every envy, every vulgar ideology finds expression in Adolph Hitler.

Just look at the bill of fare served up in recent movies and television programs and you will hardly be able to deny that Hitler has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Hitler's vows of equality did little more than convince people that if I want to crawl under a rock and die, that should be my prerogative. I don't need Hitler forcing me to. One can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Hitler, however, is more likely to poke someone's eyes out.

We must stop tiptoeing and begin marching boldly and forthrightly towards our goal, which is to oppose evil wherever it rears its audacious head. Hitler should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants, every time he wants to. Since this is one of those "don't say I didn't warn you" letters, I want also to note that it's unfortunate that he has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped. Hitler is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand while the other hand is busy trying to burn our fair cities to the ground.

Hitler says that everyone who scrambles aboard the Adolph Hitler bandwagon is guaranteed a smooth ride. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free reign to promote a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk. He is entirely unperturbed by ill-natured, spleeny stirrers breaking down our communities. Likewise, if you've read any of the harebrained slop that he has concocted, you'll honestly recall his description of his plan to turn over our country to aberrant smear merchants. If you haven't read any of it, well, all you really need to know is that Hitler wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving him lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that I appreciate feedback and other people's views on subjects. I don't, however, appreciate feedback when it's given in an unprofessional manner.

Let me move now from the abstract to the concrete. That is, let me give you a (mercifully) few examples of Hitler's outrageous ineptitude. For starters, just because he and his thralls don't like being labelled as "iconoclastic undesirables" or "capricious drug addicts" doesn't mean the shoe doesn't fit. Finding the best way to eschew maladroit hedonism is a challenging problem indeed. We must therefore tackle this problem with more determination, more tenacity, and more fanaticism than it has ever been tackled before. Only then will people realize that inequality does not beget equality. Let me rephrase that: If I seem a bit immoral, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with Hitler on his own level. If you don't think that Hitler is a card-carrying member of the Hypocrisy Club, then you've missed the whole point of this letter.

What I want to document now is that mass anxiety is the equivalent of steroids for Hitler. If we feel helpless, Hitler is energized and ramps up his efforts to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest. All the same, the acid test for his "kinder, gentler" new ideals should be, "Do they still accelerate our descent into the cesspool of pharisaism?" If the answer is yes then we can conclude that Hitler's accusations violate the rational, enlightened claims of their own enunciatory modality, and everyone with half a brain understands that. There are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and Hitler doing some uneducated thing every few weeks. I can assure you that many people are incredulous when I tell them that he intends to create a new cottage industry around his intellectually challenged form of propagandism. "How could Hitler be so disrespectful?", they ask me. "It doesn't seem possible." Well, it is surely possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Hitler plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that I find it necessary, if I am to meet my reader on something like a common ground of understanding, to point out that I call upon him to stop his oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon him to be a man of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon him to forgo his desire to incite pogroms, purges, and other mayhem.

Up to this point, we have explored some of the motivations and circumstances that make Hitler want to repeat the mistakes of the past. However, we must look beyond both Hitler's motivations and history if we are truly to understand his pleas. Am I being too idealistic -- a Pollyanna -- when I suggest that all we need to do is fight him hammer and tong? I don't think so. Admittedly, failure to recognize this salient point will result in Hitler's getting free reign to create problems that our grandchildren will have to live with, but his expositions represent a backward step of hundreds of years, a backward step into a chasm with no bottom save the endless darkness of death.

There's a lot of talk nowadays about Hitler's featherbrained equivocations but not much action. More often than not, our battle with Hitler is a battle between spiritualism and obscurantism, between tradition and subversion, between the defenders of Western civilization and its enemies. With the battle lines drawn as such, it is abundantly clear that Hitler would have us believe that I'm some sort of cully who can be duped into believing that everything he says is utterly and absolutely true. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. He is filled with unrighteousness, wickedness, and maliciousness, right? Right. I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, if you ever ask Hitler to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed.

Hitler's hirelings have been running around recently trying to abrogate some of our most fundamental freedoms. Meanwhile, Hitler has been preparing to scrap the notion of national sovereignty. The whole episode smacks of a carefully orchestrated operation. If you ask me, if Hitler could have one wish, he'd wish for the ability to reward mediocrity. Then, people the world over would be too terrified to acknowledge that Hitler's opinions reek of interdenominationalism. I use the word "reek" because there is a format Hitler should follow for his next literary endeavor. It involves a topic sentence and supporting facts. By writing this letter, I am really sticking my head far above the parapet. The big danger is that Hitler will retaliate against me. He'll most likely try to force me to live lower than dirt although another possibility is that I've tried explaining to his janissaries that there is absolutely no evidence to support his accusations. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to make Hitler's ideas a key dynamic in modern factionalism by viscerally defining "macracanthrorhynchiasis" through the experience of loquacious incendiarism. Not yet, at least. But Hitler manipulates public opinion through raw emotion, sexual desire, "family values", comedy, music, entertainment, false religion, social engineering, journalistic propaganda, and junk science. An equal but opposite observation is that Hitler hates, with a pure and perfect hatred, all those who deal summarily with unregenerate cockalorums. This is not what I think; this is what I know. I additionally know that Hitler sees no reason why he shouldn't represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that I want to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that limit the terms of debate by declaring certain subjects beyond discussion. But first, let me pose an abstract question. What is it about our society that makes gloomy bribe-seekers like Hitler desire to intensify race hatred? It is bootless to speculate on the matter but it should be noted that Hitler is always prating about how prætorianism is a noble goal. (He used to say that divine ichor flows through his veins, but the evidence is too contrary so he's given up on that score.) Sorry for babbling so much, but Adolph Hitler does not play nice with others.
 
Wow! What a long essay you've written up there! So much for a Hitler-hater (don't be offended! I'm a Hitler-hater myself).

Yes, Hitler is just like a hitman. What he was doing is genocide.
And he was doing many propaganda so his people would see his in-human action as the right thing to do.

If he were succeeded though, I won't be here as I probably located somewhere in sahara doing hard-labor work and such as I'm not an aria :(
 
And yes Hitler was a military genius, he produced the machine gun, the tank, and fighter jets and more.

:angel: Dear lord!

First machine guns had already existed since a little before world war I, and they had already changed the battlefield dramatically.  The tank came afterward during WWI as did the world's first fighter planes.  None of them were invented by Hitler who was a lowly message runner at the time.

Second Hitler had very little hand in the development of Blitz Doctrine.  The Blitzkrieg was the postwar reaction to Germany's failure on the western front.  It integrated the successes of the Eastern Front (smaller independent units) and combined them with the criticism of the old guard within the Wermacht (did not take advantage of tanks or modernize small arms).  The major theorist and proponent of this military doctrine was Heinz Guderian.  The early Weimar had already taken steps to adopting blitz doctrine, because the Versailles treaty put so many restrictions on the army that going old school had no hope of success in a conflict.  Hitler merely allowed it to continue and threw the treaty into the fire by going large scale production.  Any idiot can do that.  Heinz like many of the more talented generals in the Wermacht was a patriot first and a Nazi only by the circumstance of regime change.  He and Hitler had many tiffs that led to his eventual fall from favor in the late war period. 

Third, military geniuses win wars, not lose them in spectacular fashion.  Think about it.  The end result of WWII is Germany being utterly devastated and partitioned between the Soviet Union and the Western Powers.  To call this accomplishment the result of military genius is redefining genius to mean its opposite.  Almost everyone of Hitler's personal forays into direct war management has resulted in catastrophic decisions.  During Barbarossa he ordered Guderion's forces that were knocking on Moscow's doorstep into Kiev to help undermanned units capture the red army positions in the Ukraine.  They succeeded but the four weeks it took to complete the operation made Moscow beyond German reach meaning the hope for a quick war was doomed.  Hitler's resolution over Rommel's and Von Rundstedt's dispute over how to deploy panzer reserves in France was another colossal disaster.  He compromised in an unworkable fashion giving a paltry amount to Rommel to safeguard Normandy and locking up the rest of the reserves to be authorized only under Hitler's specific order.  When the invasion began the Fuhrer couldn't be bothered to be awoken from his nap to give a timely order.  As the war spiraled on to its eventual end his decisions and demeanor grew progressively unhinged.  The final straw being the drafting of Hitler youth into military service.  In a last ditch effort to save the Fatherland.  If that's genius in statesmanship and military affairs I'd hate to see what incompetency looks like. 


So in general if the war was brought to America we'd be controlled by the Nazi party as Asia, Europe, and Africa was controlled by Nazism...

Hahh.  The war did come to North Africa but that's about it.  Also the Nazis did not have any Asian possessions.  The Japanese were not Nazis and had a different modus operandi.

But now in Germany they do have Nazism but it's more Facist anyways so basically you'll see 150 Nazi members and 3,000 Facist beating the crap out of the Nazis.

Nazis and Fascists beating the crap out of the Nazis.  Did they become a cult for sadomasochists?
 
Hitler was becoming desperate in the last hours of Nazi-Germany, but i never knew that they had stored so many guns in reserve that they could actually have a good-enough equipped militia. In the end Hitler died and bla bla.

I think the topic title should be changed... it said what would it be like if hitler succeeded?
 

___

Sponsor

kimpoy2006":2683g27u said:
Hitler was becoming desperate in the last hours of Nazi-Germany, but i never knew that they had stored so many guns in reserve that they could actually have a good-enough equipped militia. In the end Hitler died and bla bla.

I think the topic title should be changed... it said what would it be like if hitler succeeded?

Yeah but all the replies are hinged on pretty poor or frankly lunatic perceptions of who Hitler was and what he would have done.  If not for, um, basically Sophist's posts I would not leave this topic unlocked, it's inane and nowhere near "intelligent" or "debate".  At least some people will get a decent education while he continues to post here though.
 
The first machine gun was used during the late stages of the American Civil War. The first single barrel machine gun was invented in 1884. The only truly new weapon used by the wermacht in WWII was the STG-44 assault rifle, the innovation being that it used a cartridge half-way between a pistol and a standard rifle. The "blitzkrieg" was simply an improved version of the "infiltration" techniques used by French and American troops in the closing months of WWI.

What is often overlooked is that failure to wage constant warfare would have resulted in the total economic collapse of the Third Reich. Hitler's economic "miracle" was a result of two things. First, the economic hardships in Germany were deliberately worsened by Hitler's allies in government so that when he gained power he would be able to quickly improve things and gain popular support. Secondly, the entire political and economic structure of the nation-state was geared toward military conquest. Whereas the weapons of America, Britain, and the Soviet Union were largely made in civilian factories hurridly switched to wartime production, most German arms were produced in plants that could be retooled for civilian products only with great expense. Thus, once the USSR and Britain were subjugated, panzers would fall upon China, Korea, and the other lands under the dominion of the Imperial Japanese Army.

BTW, samboy, I can name a few reasons why Africa was a battlefield. Diamonds. Gold. Iron. Tungsten. Basically, any mineral with military value except petroleum. 
 
shiroun":1jjesr2j said:
***NEW INFO ON THIS******
He was 25% jewish. If anyone found out, he'd be in a concentration camp. even if he had succeeded in defeating everyone... bombing rome... etc. He'd be dead soon afterwards due to AIDS, HIV, or any of the other 21 STDs he contracted -_-

He had syphilis... My Great Uncle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Morell was his personal physician lol. He didn't have AIDs/HIV they didn't come until the 80s... o.o
 
Sophist":exbu0mb2 said:
First machine guns had already existed since a little before world war I

It's called the history channel.... Watch it they didn't exist till WWII (ther rapid faire rifles too, and the most accurate pistols.... (they're still the most accurate btw)
 
It's called the history channel.... Watch it they didn't exist till WWII

How about we crack a book.  Maybe one on World War I, perhaps?  Actually I'll save you the time.  You may want to edit this misinformed wikipedia entry to reflect the most current truth as it appears to you.

Filthy Lying Wikipedia entry":2s5x73xe said:
The first machine gun was invented in 1881 by Hiram Maxim. The "Maxim gun" used the recoil power of the previously fired bullet to reload rather than being hand-powered, enabling a much higher rate of fire than was possible using earlier designs. Maxim's other great innovation was the use of water cooling (via a water jacket around the barrel) to reduce overheating. Maxim's gun was widely adopted and derivative designs were used on all sides during the First World War, most famously - during stalemate at The Battle of the Somme. The design required fewer crew, was lighter, and more usable than earlier Gatling guns.

Heavy guns based on the Maxim such as the Vickers machine gun were joined by many other machine weapons, which mostly had their start in the early 20th century such as the Hotchkiss machine gun. Submachine guns (e.g., the German MP18) as well as lighter machine guns (the Chauchat, for example) saw their first major use in World War I, along with heavy use of large-caliber machine guns. The biggest single cause of casualties in World War I was actually artillery, but combined with wire entanglements, machine guns earned a fearsome reputation. The automatic mechanisms of machine guns were applied to handguns, giving rise to automatic pistols (and eventually machine pistols) such as the Borchardt (1890s) and later submachine guns (such as the Beretta 1918). Machine guns were mounted in aircraft for the first time in World War I. Firing through a moving propeller was solved in a variety of ways, including the interrupter gear, metal reinforcement of the propeller, or simply avoiding the problem with wing-mounted guns or having a pusher propeller.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_guns#Maxim_gun

(ther rapid faire rifles too, and the most accurate pistols.... (they're still the most accurate btw)

That is also a pre world war II tech yet again.  And the Germans weren't the first in that either.  Remember among blitz doctrine proponents, the lack of modernization in German small arms was listed as one of the Wermacht's failings in World War I.

More filthy lying wikipedia entries":2s5x73xe said:
The BAR is a gas-operated, air-cooled, magazine-fed automatic rifle that fires from an open bolt. Built for the U.S. military, the BAR was chambered for the standard .30-06 Springfield service round. The rifle weighed between 16 and 19 pounds (7.3 to 8.6 kg) empty, depending upon the model. The barrel is screwed into the receiver and is not quickly detachable. The magazine was a 20 round detachable box, though a 40-round version was briefly issued for anti-aircraft use.

From its inception, the BAR M1918 was an automatic rifle. First issued end of September 1918 to the AEF, it was based on the concept of "walking fire" a French practise in use since 1916 for which the CSRG 1915 had been used in an automatic weapon accompanying advancing squads of riflemen toward the enemy trenches since the machine guns were too heavy to follow the troops during an assault. In addition to shoulder-fired operation, BAR gunners were issued a belt with magazine pouches for the BAR and sidearm along with a "cup" to support the stock of the rifle when held at the hip. In theory, this allowed the soldier to lay suppressive fire while walking forward, keeping the enemy's head down until it was too late. (The idea would resurface in the submachine gun and ultimately the assault rifle.) It is not known if any of these belt-cup devices actually saw combat use. The BAR saw little action in WWI, in part due to the Armistice, in part because the U.S. Army was reluctant to have the BAR fall into enemy hands, its first action being in September of 1918. Eighty-five thousand BARs were built by the war's end.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_A ... and_design

Protip:  Just because you saw some documentary that discusses how a specific weapon was built in WWII doesn't mean the entire class of weaponry was therefore invented in WWII.

Second Protip:  You may want to go do some reading and research before making claims based on a few hours of vegetating in front of a television.
 
I think there is a great deal of hypocrisy regarding how evil Hitler and WWII are percieved. Asking around, I am informed quite simply that Hitler was evil because he allegedly tried to conquer Europe and allegedly tried to kill all the Jews but only succeeded in killing however many died - not to mention the various other groups that "Popular History" tends to neglect.

Frankly, when you look at the entire history of the world, Hitler did nothing to Europe that Europe had not done to other continents. He was just a bit more unhinged as he did it. Hell, if Hitler did what he was doing to... say... the Africans or the Asians, he'd probably be considered a "controversial" historical figure in the mold of Cecil Rhodes.


All around me, bitter tears are being shed over the fate of Holland, Belgium, France and England. I must confess to being a little dry around the eyes. I hear people shaking with shudders at the thought of Germany collecting taxes in Holland. I have not heard a word against Holland collecting one twelfth of poor people's wages in Asia. Hitler's crime is that he is actually doing a thing like that to his own kind...

As I see it, the doctrines of democracy deal with the aspirations of men's souls, but the application deals with things. One hand in somebody else's pocket and one on your gun, and you are highly civilized.... Desire enough for your own use only, and you are a heathen. Civilized people have things to show to their neighbors.""

-- Zora Neale Hurston, 1939.



One thing's for sure: The History Channel would go out of business.
 
The bit that flipped it was the fact he killed 6 million people based on race in like two years. Stuff has happened in the past, but I can't think of another European incident in recent centuries where 6 million of a race were rounded up and slaughtered in two years. More than that, though, this is one of the most 'open' genocides of all time (still no-one really knows what happened to the Hindus between 1000 and 1500) and was carried out in other countries- most are carried out internally or in areas of land long held.

But, yeah, without the bias, what would the History Channel report indeed.
 
I'm sure that if Hitler took over europe, things would have calmed down a bit.

It would have become a police state. The jews and gypsies and blacks would have probably become part of a slave caste (if he wanted to kill them all off, he'd probably have just had them shot instead of sent to labor camps) and it would have probably been like a modern roman empire.

Apparantly, before the war even started, he started building up his collossal empire monuments, all of which were only about 10% completed and many of which were destroyed in bombings or were dismantled, but some remain today.

P.S. Anyone else watch that documentary? It had me laughing out loud it was so dramatic. Apparantly Hitler wasn't evil because he started a war or began a genocide, but because he wanted to build some really big buildings.
 
Incognitus,

You may want to note that in 1939 no one dreamed of what was about to unfurl in the coming six years.  Adolph Hitler was being coddled by Chamberlain et. al. until the invasion of Poland made them all look stupid for thinking Hitler could be reasoned with.  Everyone including the world press operated under the premise that he was a tough talking nationalist with a pragmatic side.  They never imagined he was an ideologue with a gruesome and irrationally stubborn resolve.  Had Zora Neale Hurston a crystal ball, her words would've likely been different.  The newly emerging African American Intelligentsia was also a tad on the naive side when it came to their perceptions of international politics and intrigues.  W. E. B. Dubois for example had a soft spot for Hirohito's Japan, and served them as a full time apologist and justifier for their actions in China.

Japan's campaign into China is well documented as among the greatest atrocities of our modern era, with war crimes that span the entire spectrum of Geneva violations.  Summary extra-judicial executions, torture, and rape akin to what is being perpetrated by Janjaweed right now in Sudan only on a much larger scale.  The rape was perhaps the most notable of crimes given the scale and depravity of it.  Soldiers summarily would round up women from the city on a regular basis along with their families.  They would be brought to a public square and gang raped in front of their families before all of them were murdered gruesomely in ways I will spare the description of.  A lucky victim would be taken into sexual slavery as a comfort woman.  There were also many cases of forced incest, forced necrophilia, and forced bestiality.

Is this unique?  I dunno.  Does it matter?  Is there anything to your point other than cynical nihilism?  Does the three or four hundred prior years of European Hegemony undo any of the wrongness that occurred between 1939 - 1946.  Is it useful to think that since your room wasn't clean a month ago, that it shouldn't matter if its clean three days ago, or today for that matter.  It would be a wonder if it ever got clean with that attitude.  Yet if you wish to compare Hitler to the European slavers and imperialists I'm game.  The differences are clear.  The slaves have value, they're pack animals.  The Jews, the Chinese, and other sub humans, as the Nazis and Hirohito's Co Prosperity Sphere coined, didn't.  In fact they were a pest, whose presence was a detriment to society, and was called upon for extermination.  For the Nazis that project took precedence over the war itself, even when they were losing badly.  Is that unique enough for you?  Does that even matter? 

If you arranged all the casualties of WWII in a line across the world you would circle it a few times.  It is the greatest man made cataclysm to hit this world, easily.
 
Sophist, I don't know how you jumped from concluded that, because I think if Hitler had done what he did to anywhere else but Europe our perceptions of the events that unfolded would be vastly different, and that still a large put of society's perceptions of the post-Hitler world contain a double standard between one thing and another, that it's obviously a reflection of nihilism.

I would have thought it was obvious that the comment by Zora Neale Hurston was merely to illustrate how Hitler was viewed by a section of society at a particular time: the start of the war. It was relevant to the posts before and the general topic that was emerging of the attitudes at the time, which were being discussed in an earlier post. She may have not forseen the scope, but she identified the theme.

Is that unique enough for you?  Does that even matter?

No. It is not "unique" enough for me. And no it doesn't matter. Genocides have happened before and have happened since. All had victims whose lives and unique and important and should all be respected and treated equally regardless. I can't do anything about the past, but acknowledge it's presence on the present.

You seem to conclude by stating that, because the number of people who died in WWII was larger than any other tragedy then the people who died are more deserving of rememberance or that their lives were more valuable. I'm fully prepared to compare Hitler to slave traders. One of my ancestors happens to be Robert Gascoyne-Cecil III, who served in the Disraeli cabinet which is often applauded for a more benevolant approach to British Imperialism - but I can read his notes and substitute Niggar for Jew and see no difference between what he's advocating - and did -and what Hitler advocated - and did. Only the scope - and I think the scope is irrelevant to the victims. Therefore my suggestion that Hitler would be viewed different if he'd acted against anywhere else stands, and so would our perception of him stands.
I think you're using "post-Hitlerian" googles to view a world without Hitler: I've discarded all of the notions of Human Rights and Geneva Conventions which probably wouldn't have existed without him. Nor would the civil rights movement. We are talking about a world without Hitler, right? Those things only exist because he set his ire across Europe and against "civilized people". The fact that the casulties of WWII would encircle the globe several times is irrelevant in a scenario in which Hitler is attacking non-European nations in acts of colonialism and racism is irrelevant because we probably wouldn't have stopped him - ergo no vast WWII.

Is it useful to think that since your room wasn't clean a month ago, that it shouldn't matter if its clean three days ago, or today for that matter.

This analogy is completely and utterly flawed for my attitude and opinion. As far as I'm concerned, I should draw a line under the fact that my room wasn't clean a month or free days ago and ensure that it's clean tomorrow and does not get dirty again. I do not gain any moral virtues by tidying up my room three days ago, if it was already dirty the previous month, and I should assume the moral right to preach about my age-old tradition of room-tidying. That's anything but nihilistic.
 

Thank you for viewing

HBGames is a leading amateur video game development forum and Discord server open to all ability levels. Feel free to have a nosey around!

Discord

Join our growing and active Discord server to discuss all aspects of game making in a relaxed environment. Join Us

Content

  • Our Games
  • Games in Development
  • Emoji by Twemoji.
    Top