punisher73
Senior Master
Something else to consider... Hitler didn't do everything, and doesn't carry sole resoonsibility for what happened during the Nazi regime. He certainly created the environment that allowed it, and knowingly permitted much of the atrocity... but he didn't do it all himself. And many people, knowing the actions of the government were wrong, knowing that the conditions and treatment of people in the concentration camps were at best inhumane, stood by and let it happen
If you read some of Hitler's bio's he was friends with Jews when he was an aspiring artist. Did he really hate the Jews or was it a convienent stepping stool that could bind him to the common people? Again, if you read history, Hitler's "first solution" was to contact Britian and have the jews taken out of germany and relocated to a British owned area down in Africa. Britian wanted nothing to do with the Jews either. We look back now and wonder how that could happen but AT THE TIME nobody cared about the jews/gypsies or what happened to them. After that failure, Himmler instituted the "final solution" and rounded up the jews and many others into concentration camps.
Isn't this almost the same thing that we did to the American Indians? We wanted what they had so we rounded them up and relocated them to where we thought they should be? How many died due to starvation and illness because of that?
I think both events were horrible and evil. I think it is easier for us to point the finger in the other direction than to really look at how ALL countries came to be in power and what they did to achieve that. Again, to the victors go the spoils....and apparantly their own version of how it happened.
Hitler had 6 million Jews killed during the course he was in power. Stalin killed 20 million Russians during his rule. Which one do we always hear about though? Why? Because Stalin and them are "communists" and until recently they were still the enemy so we tended to not care. Now that communism has ended and they are our "friends" we start hearing more and more about this and how bad Stalin was.
Why the double standard in all of this? If you believe killing of innocents is wrong (which I truely believe it is) than it should not matter where/who it is doing it. In all of those cases though, the person(s) doing it thought that they were doing it for "the greater good" of their country.
I remember going to some training a long time ago (it was a course on verbal judo) and the instructor read a quick bio factsheet on someone and we were supposed to guess the person. Some of them were things like wanted to grow up to be a catholic priest, helped bring his country out of economic despair, very charismatic. We, as a class, all read it and said that it described JFK. The instructor said that when he reads that description in Germany the class all picks "Hitler". Interesting in how even an evil person has "good qualities", just the wrong method to go about the change they seek (although I do believe that there are truely evil people out there).
I remember also a while back that Arnold got some flack because he made some reference to Hitler as an orator/politician that was taken out of context. I think ANYONE that picks a good quality from Hitler is going to be taken out of context and lynched in our media for it.