Hitler: Insane Or Genius?

Hitler...

  • Total voters
    37
EladBell said:
i have to say that despite the fact he killed alot of my family and my poeple...he was a genoius for being able to do so....its horrfing how a man can be smart and dumb on the same time
Click to expand...
most "smart" people seem to be aware that they are smart, and this often leads to them thinking that they are actually a lot smarter than they really are. This is most evident in his idea that he was a great military tactician, whereas those early victories that led to this assumption were more likely as a result of his generals planning. Once Adolph started trying to micro manage the forces,things went down hill fast(er).

Being manipulative was one of his greater skills.
 
Last edited:
How can anyone say Hitler was a Genius? Hitlers victories both Military and political were because of the fear, cowardice and incompetence of his adversaries not because of some grand insight on his part.

Sure he was clever, but He was also extraordinarily Lucky. He was lucky that Hindenburg, and von Papen underestimated him and that Chamberlin and the various French Presidents feared him.

Hitler assumptions were almost always wrong, even when he benefited from them. For example he assumed that France and the UK would defend Czechosolakia while at the same time he thought they wouldnt bother going to war over Poland. He was wrong both times. He assumed Britain would sue for peace after the defeat of France, (wrong) that Russia would be finished in a few weeks (wrong), that Italy, Spain, Romania, Austra would be a useful allies (wrong), that America would stay out due to the isolationist movement (wrong) etc etc etc...
 
mmarsh said:
How can anyone say Hitler was a Genius? Hitlers victories both Military and political were because of the fear, cowardice and incompetence of his adversaries not because of some grand insight on his part.

Sure he was clever, but He was also extraordinarily Lucky. He was lucky that Hindenburg, and von Papen underestimated him and that Chamberlin and the various French Presidents feared him.

Hitler assumptions were almost always wrong, even when he benefited from them. For example he assumed that France and the UK would defend Czechosolakia while at the same time he thought they wouldnt bother going to war over Poland. He was wrong both times. He assumed Britain would sue for peace after the defeat of France, (wrong) that Russia would be finished in a few weeks (wrong), that Italy, Spain, Romania, Austra would be a useful allies (wrong), that America would stay out due to the isolationist movement (wrong) etc etc etc...
Click to expand...


well reading the Political map is a great trait...and the man...who was brilliant...with a wicked Idiology knew how to read the political map and how and when to do certian things...u have to face it...it was fear...it was luck but a regular person such as me cold never succeed to control the entire world with out shooting a sinlge bullet.
and then came Sept' 1939.....
 
mmarsh said:
How can anyone say Hitler was a Genius? Hitlers victories both Military and political were because of the fear, cowardice and incompetence of his adversaries not because of some grand insight on his part.

Sure he was clever, but He was also extraordinarily Lucky. He was lucky that Hindenburg, and von Papen underestimated him and that Chamberlin and the various French Presidents feared him.

Hitler assumptions were almost always wrong, even when he benefited from them. For example he assumed that France and the UK would defend Czechosolakia while at the same time he thought they wouldnt bother going to war over Poland. He was wrong both times. He assumed Britain would sue for peace after the defeat of France, (wrong) that Russia would be finished in a few weeks (wrong), that Italy, Spain, Romania, Austra would be a useful allies (wrong), that America would stay out due to the isolationist movement (wrong) etc etc etc...
Click to expand...

I am going to agree with this, over all I think he started out as a manipulative lunatic and evolved into a delusional psychotic maniac who was extremely lucky (which in itself fed his delusions).

It would be nice to be able to attribute whatever "good" Germany managed to do between 1933 and 1939 to Hitler but I am more convinced that it was just pure luck that some of the sycophantic lackeys that formed the Nazi party also had some ability at the posts they were assigned.


BritinAfrica said:
He can't be too bright declaring war on the biggest industrial nation in the world.
Click to expand...

I don't know I really don't think he had a choice but declare war on Russia.
 
Last edited:
MontyB

Actually I think BritinAfrica meant America (correct me if I'm wrong, Brit).

I think Hitler did have a choice to invade Russia. War with Germany was the LAST thing Stalin wanted (he was too busy killing his own people, to have time to kill somebody else). A smart man knew the risks involved of invading the USSR, Hitlers Generals did, as did many of his staff like von Rittentrop who argued against it. In this case Hitler was relying on his ideological hatred, and like Napoleon his ego, so convinced he was that he couldnt not fail. At least Napoleon had some martial skill to back up his ego, Hitler was relying on his gamblers luck which had worked so well in the past. Hitler made the mistake in thinking luck would be with him indefinatly, but all luck runs out eventually.

Hitler was a shrewd and ruthless politician, and like all bullies he was very good at manipulating weak people, but when he actually faced resistence his leadership abilities...lacked.
 
Last edited:
Yes I did mean the USA.

If Hitler hadnt declared war on the US, would I be right in thinking the US would have declared war on Germany?
 
BritinAfrica said:
Yes I did mean the USA.

If Hitler hadnt declared war on the US, would I be right in thinking the US would have declared war on Germany?
Click to expand...

No, I think America's entry into WWII was garenteed at some point. FDR and most of the people in Washington recognized Hitler as a serious threat and wanted to take him out. The problem was the enormous isolationist movement in the USA at the time. If Hitler had decided to stay out of it, FDR would have had to justify Americas entry by some other means, which he probably would have found, for example in the sinking of US ships which was precisely the justification of America's entry in WWI. There is no arguement that Hitler decision made FDR's job so much easier, and that history should FDR have thanked Hitler for his shortsighted stupidity.
 
Pakistan Army said:
Atleast for Germans he was an Angel from God who wanted to see the Germany ruling the Globe
Click to expand...
I think you are quite correct.

The German people's admiration of Hitler was bought about by the fact that he turned the country's fortunes around once he became Chancellor attaining high employment and lifting the standard of living enormously.

After the privations the German people had been suffering as a result of War reparations for WWI, followed by the depression, it's no wonder they were willing to overlook some of his less desirable traits. He would certainly have appeared to be a genius to them. One only has to be in the shoes of the German population who had suffered through the 1920s to see why they were willing to do anything for him.
 
Excuse my French but this is Bollocks.
Lets analyse this a little closer.
1) He led German into a deliberately planned war without putting the countrys economy onto a war footing.

2) His policies led to the murder of hundreds of thousands to millions of German Jews at a time when his nation needed skilled workers and soldiers.

3) His policies toward conquered populations that should have seen Germany as liberators (Ukrainians for example) drove them to form huge partisan armies that tied up much needed front line troops and actually prefer Stalin a complete psychotic nutter.

Seriously how can anyone see this man as a genius?
 
Right on all accounts, if not in detail:

MontyB said:
Excuse my French but this is Bollocks.
Lets analyse this a little closer.
1) He led German into a deliberately planned war without putting the countrys economy onto a war footing.
Click to expand...

And he never knew the importance of doing that.

MontyB said:
2) His policies led to the murder of hundreds of thousands to millions of German Jews at a time when his nation needed skilled workers and soldiers.
Click to expand...

4 Million (in Germany, 6M total), to be precise.

MontyB said:
3) His policies toward conquered populations that should have seen Germany as liberators (Ukrainians for example) drove them to form huge partisan armies that tied up much needed front line troops and actually prefer Stalin a complete psychotic nutter.

Seriously how can anyone see this man as a genius?
Click to expand...

Indeed.

We were lucky he committed all those errors, else half of the world would now speak "Deutsch" and greet each other "Sieg Heil!"...

Rattler
 
God only knows just where his lunatic policies would have taken Europe had he not been straight-jacketed by Churchill and his allies. Not only a lunatic but a big-time loser. His country lost everything, including their self-respect - 1s -9d packet of 50 fags was the price . I know I was there.

Germany has my respect for the recovery of its sanity.
 
Last edited:
The question isn't whether or not he was mad or brilliant, but whether or not, he was a psychopath. Clearly, he was brilliant enough to get people to kill (and to be killed) for him. Let's not mention the fact that he took a backward nation and turned it into a superpower. The question is whether or not, he reveled in it or thought it was just a means to an end. That's the scary part.
 
Last edited:
Neither fully insane neither a complete genius. He was above average in intelligence at the least , but believed in a very stupid ideology and made very stupid mistakes. He was not a complete idiot , but the whole package of Hitler as a leader was a negative one.

If he would take a big part of the "credit" for the expansion of Germany (having to do both with politics and war) he should also take "credit" for the disastrous operation Barbarossa.

He should also take "credit" for consolidating his rule , outsmarting all of his opponents. And also for abolishing freedoms and apointing corrupt officers to positions of power , with not efficiency as criteria.

The creation of several private nazi private goverments on his watch, the genocides , the fact that he forced a whole nation to become nazis and obey him , even when their patriotic sensibilities told otherwise , and his imperialist behavior was also a side of him , for which he must take "credit".

Also for the results of his cruel sadism policies on the people he considered as inferior.

The corrupt nazi state even if Hitler's plan were a success would be an abomination that thankfully i doubt it would surive for a lot. (civil war maybe.) Or maybe it would not have functioned like a proper state.

Other elements of him is the fact that he seemed to like the usage of new technologies and he did support german workers atleast in theory.

Hitler is the whole package and it is important to judge him by that and not just one of his unique qualities.

Incidentally , the existance of Metaxas made me think something about Hitler. Off topic maybe.

Metaxas was a leader who was voted into power , then he created his own dictatorship in Greece after a period of both other coups and uncertainty. From 36 until 1940 he reorganized the military , and greatlly improved it'f efficiency and also created the metaxas line. He was expecting an attack from the Italians , or Bulgarians , Germans and he knew he should organise the military.

He did advocate worker rights as well maybe to appease the people. (8 hour work and social security was created on his watch.)

The biggest difference between the two is a) metaxas didn't do a genocide. B) he joined the allies out of geopolitical necessity long before the Italians asked him to let their army pass over as much of greek territory as they would like when he refuced.

Even though he was a dictator his contributions are mostly seen as positive.

My assessment is that short lived dictators that care for the geopolitical interests of their not able to be imperialist country , at the short term could be seen as a positive influence.

If not a what if Hitler example , one could use a what if Stalin example. (what if he was killed during WW2).

other elements includes not being a mega revolutionary wanabe , having a long history already established , and not been particularly fond of mass exterminations of political enemies.

Out of all dictators of the period it seems that Metaxas was the mildest and the one who died soonest.

But i also think that if one analyzes the character of each dictator , including Hitler , one could see that even if the situation was different he may have avoided his other crimes but i do see him killing the jews eventually and attempting imperialism when he is able to do so.
 
Hitler brought his country together like never before, the people followed and fought for him right up to the last gasps of the War. I think the one thing that broke their spirit in the finish was when many of them were marched around the death camps and saw what was done in their name.
Putting the country on a war footing, well didn't have to as he put all the countries that he over run onto a war footing on behalf Germany. Germany also used millions of Russian POW as slave labour and also many of the men from the countries that Germany over ran were called up as direct labour and forced to work in factories all over the place. The numbers ran into millions of people that were used this way leaving Germany looking quite untouched by many aspects of the war.
 
Like many people, he had some good ideas, and some bloody horrible ideas. His biggest problem was, that he couldn't tell the difference.
 
Theres a fine line between Genius and insanity
A genius would bring his country together like never before, an Insane man would lat his hate consume him.
Therefore I think Hitler started out as a genius, but at the same time was being consumed by his hate, driving him insane.
 
senojekips said:
Like many people, he had some good ideas, and some bloody horrible ideas. His biggest problem was, that he couldn't tell the difference.
Click to expand...

I'd say he had no good ideas, but had a considerable amount of luck which ran out in 1942. Before then, he was able to take advantage of errors (both military and political made by others). This led him to make the same mistake Napoleon made 130 years earlier. The inshakeable faith in his own star. The problem was that Napoleon Star's was based on his real military and political ability, while Hitler's star was luck that he misinterpreted for ability. This is why Napoleon lasted much longer than Hitler did, although he ended up in the same way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top