MovieChat Forums > Triumph des Willens (1935) Discussion > Why is Hitler considered evil, but Alexa...

Why is Hitler considered evil, but Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon aren't?

posted 10 years ago by WWu777
15 replies | jump to latest

I've always wondered why Hitler is portrayed as so evil by America. What did he do that other conquerors didn't? Other great conquerors of Europe did the same things he did. Such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte. They killed many people during their campaigns, and executed many prisoners too. Yet those three are romanticized whereas Hitler is greatly demonized. Why?

Stalin was far worse. So was Mao. They starved millions of people. Hitler didn't. Hitler fed all his people and gave them jobs.

Hitler also has great accomplishments that America never tells you about. He ended corruption in Germany and refused to take bribes. He did not let other officials in Germany take bribes either. And he kept his campaign promises. What US politician can claim all that? None!

Hitler did good things and bad things, like many other conquerors did, especially in the ancient world. But there's no reason to portray him as the most evil man in history. That's way overblowing it. He's been demonized beyond what he deserves.

Also, all great conquerors claimed to be of a superior race. That's what they used to justify their conquests. Alexander the Great claimed that the Greeks were a superior race. Caesar claimed the Romans were a superior race. And Napoleon claimed the French was a superior race. Political correctness is a recent phenomenon and an aberration from all of human history. Racism seems to be more natural and normal than political correctness. So the racism of the Nazis does not appear to be unique or worse than that of others.

http://www.happierabroad.com - The Overseas Solution to Datelessness in America

[–] smigrobustus 10 years ago

Because the others never focused on exterminating one particular race, they destoyed EVERYONE EQUALLY....as stupid as THAT sounds........and the USA never went to ear against those other despots.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] smigrobustus 10 years ago

Oh......and there was PLEEEEEEEEEENTY of bribe taking and theft going on inside the nazis........we STILL can't find many art masterpieces.......

[–] bradford-1 10 years ago

Look, enough with the semantics. Hitler wanted to exterminate European Jewry, which meant a religion, not a race. He also wanted to exterminate and/or enslave the Russian populace and all the ethnic groups contained therein. And if anyone thinks that Nazis were above old-fashioned political corruption, they have to be very naive or very crazy. The only reason Mao and Stalin could be considered worse is that they had more time to do their infamy. Considering the havoc Hitler and his minions wrought in only 12 years, it boggles the mind to think what might have happened if he'd had 20 years!
"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?"

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] smigrobustus 10 years ago

1. Read mein kampf.....after he couldn't get rid rid of them, he had no other choice, in his mind....even if meant diverting war effort....want PROOF??? YOU do the research.....I've done mine. He never thought the Jews were below him....he was AFRAID of them.....he described them as NONHUMAN so it would be easier for the german people to look the other way.

2. That's what and/or MEANS. HE wanted to use those capable as slave labor (the "good"nazi, his arms minister SAID they used Slavic and russian slaves if u can't trust an upstanding nazi, who can u trust?)....and those who couldn't work were imprisoned or killed....see how AND/or works??

3. Read up on all the stolen art.....I'm not doing the research for you as far as corruption is concerned.....put I'll point you in the general direction.....but that's just the beginning.....and saying I the nazi government was ANY different than ANY OTHER government is concerned makes you either naive or a liar.

Look, I agree that most people will never give hitler ANYcredit for all the great things he did for germany, DENYING his psychotic side is JUST as dishonest and nauseating. He he had SIMPLY left the Jews alone, history would look upon him differently....

[–] Jeorj Euler 8 years ago

He isn't considered more evil. He's just more notorious, since he led the transformation of a free society into not only tyranny but reckless such tyranny, at the same time as overseeing some of the most important technological advancements of the twentieth century. A lot of the criticism directed his way has to do with the impact of the poorer of his diplomatic and military strategic decisions. There's so much that could've gone differently for ordinary Germans, if Adolf Hitler hadn't filled up his plate in making so many more enemies than allies in such a short span of time. You can definitely argue that Joseph Stalin surpassed Hitler, but you have remember that Stalin's decision didn't lead to the Soviet Union and its Kremlin becoming besieged by diverse forces invading and attacking from all directions. Which also sort of made it easier for him to coverup his atrocities, but still the regime under his command wasn't a complete loser.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dray45 8 years ago

Simple. Because he lost. If he'd won the war he'd have been idolised. Conquerors may well be evil but history looks favourably on them, being distanced from the events.

[–] silvercometred1 8 years ago

The people of Napoleon's time, and historians, consider Napoleon to be an evil character.

[–] Vargur 8 years ago

by silvercometred1
» Fri Jan 29 2016 10:40:44
IMDb member since January 2014
The people of Napoleon's time, and historians, consider Napoleon to be an evil character.

They must've passed on a different history lesson then.

[–] rothoehler 8 years ago

Read War and Peace...
This is contemporary mainsteam thinking.

[–] rothoehler 8 years ago

He lost.
Simple as that.

I wouldn't say he was a hero or a even remotely good person.
But Cesar was at least as bad. He did planfully and deliberately erase entire Celtic tribes (which were at the time what we call 'nations' or 'people' today).
Hitler even had the benefit of an irrational fear of the Jews, Cesar did so out of cold ratio to promote his personal career. But as stated before, Hitler lost, Cesar vincit, so history takes sides accordingly.

[–] trash_wallyworld 8 years ago

Did you see Schindler's List? He bribed officials every day to buy Jews for his factory.

Also atrocities committed by the other conquerors were not captured on video for the entire history of man to see.