The fighting Hitlers!!!

www.theaustralian.news.com.au...

I think it was all meant to be in good fun until a few people began taking it seriously. Hopefully the students weren't being serious. But this reminds me of mascotts in America being named "whities".

you know i would be hard pressed to find people that don't know what adolf hittler did in starting ww-2 in europe, his death and slave laber camps, and all he did ti those he considdered "undesireables", (young children excepted of course). but on the other hand quite a few people do not realize that he was indeed a masterfull orator and charismatic leader. a leader that DID do some good things as well. but alas because of what he did in the end the rest is dicounted. now i do not support many of the things that he did, in fact he did do quite a lot of EVIL. in fact if he had not committed suicide (or escaped, captured and taken by the soviats whatever you believe), he would have been deserving of a torturous death.

but those kids DO have a point. HE WAS A GREAT LEADER. now at least in the end one can not say he had great policies or was not off his rocker and insane. one can not say that he loved every man as his brother. we ALL know that. irregaurdless that does not make him any less of a great leader. in fact had he not BEEN a great leader there is no way that he could have even begun to acomplish what he did especialy his policy of genocide and hate. had he been any less of a leader he would have failed prety much BEFORE he had even begun. had he not been amoung the great leaders of mankind he would have been lynched fairly early on.

now what was it that places him amounst great leaders? well for one thing like other great leaders of his time he was a great orator. that means that when he spoke the people listened , not only listened but BELIEVED in what he was saying. just as the uk listened and believed the great churchill, and the americans the great roosivelt. all were were great leaders of men, and they were also great orators and had charisma that caused their respective people to listen and believe in them and what they wanted. personaly have always been amazed that these three especialy were all in power within the same time period leading their respective countries through the worst war that has been. take away even one of them (especialy hittler) and things probably would have turned out much differant.

now one of the biggist things hittler did that was a great thing was to put germany to work to end the depression in germany as well as to give the german people HOPE in a better future. like roosevelt hittler started up public works that got the german people working. now as we know some of that work was actualy against the treaty of versails, but still even so it was that work that was created that pulled people out of the hell that was post ww1 germany,. a germany that like the rest of the world at the time was a place where work was scarce, and people were starveing. now he may have blaimed the jews for that depression, but even so he got his people out of it. now you also must remember that though in reality jews had very little to do with the problem that some of that problem was artificial. how is that? well after ww1 was ended there were severe reparation payments to be made to those that had won the war. the realy sad point was that even throughout those harsh times that every country was going through that there was no lessoning of these reparations. this caused both extra hardship on the german people as well as causeing lots of resentment towards those countries that had won. in fact the german people were in a very bad state. just as roosivelt pulled the us out of it hittler did the same for germany. he was looked at as the saviour of germany. he gave germans a measure of their pride back.

another thing of note that he did was the fact that hittler was the one to instigate the building of the vw beetle. a car that one must admit was one of the logest lasting automotive designes to live. a vehicle that except for relitively minor changes was arround for at least 40 years. hittler DEMANDED that a car be built that could be afforded by the average citizen, got good milage as well as being able to atain speeds of at least 100 kph, so that it could be used on his autobhan. one desiner took him seriously and thus was the beginning of the car that was much sought after dureing the "fuel shortage" of the 70's.

hittler managed to take over most of europe very quickly in war. in fact look at what it took to take back what he had taken so easily. admittedly it took a lot of looking the other way to let him accomplish that feat, but he was the one to figure that he could get away with it. in fact had the japanese not attacked pearl harbour, there is a strong possibility that he would have taken the uk as well. these are the things that made him a great leader. like i said there is no mistakeing him for a leader that most of us want arround, but all the same he was a great leader of his people. we might not agree on what he did when he led his people but in no way does that make him any less of a leader. in fact it is just the oppisit. only a great leader would be able to dirrect people into doing what most ordinarily would never even thought of doing. only a great leader can accomplish that type of feat.

as for these kids useing him as an example. well it makes me wonder WHY they did so. he may have been great but he is not one i like to see emulated. was at least one of them aware of what all he did unlike most who only see an evil man killing out of hate? were they trying to make a statement about what makes a great leader while putting aside the evil that was done in his name? possibly pointing out that great does not nessisarily mean good? these are the questions that needs be asked of them. they need to be asked why they chose him. we may find that they were makeing a statement or we could find out that they believe in his ideals. i for one would hope it is the former and not the latter. all the same they were correct, hittler while not the leader that was ultimately a "good guy" was still a great leader. great does NOT ultimately mean good remember that.

Well said drogo.

It is so very easy (and extremely dangerous) to dismiss the abilities of one's enemies. But to even stand a chance you must understand them. Hitler was far from stupid. IMHO he was a very astute man. Comparable perhaps to the competence of those (whoever you believe it was) who planned and carried out the attacks on September 11th. It was clever, I don't see how that can be denied. How else are you going to get that much explosive material close enough to do that much damage? And it was 'successful'. There is no need to be sympathetic to those who commit such atrocities to recognise the thought behind them.

Hitler was an astute man who studied the politics of the day [particularly in Austria where he took what he percieved the most effective techniques of other even opposing parties] and took advantage of the mood and situation at the time to manipulate his way into power. He used his hate for the Jewish population as a uniting factor for the German people, a focus for their anger, a scapegoat to unite them. A technique that was, is and no doubt will be in future very effective. Provide a greater common enemy and your own population will forget about any differences they might have with eachother or even their leader. Even to the extent of reguarding them as petty squabbles compared to such a great evil, perhaps even to the extreme of 'if you're not with us - you're against us' and branding those who dare try to focus on internal issues as unpatriotic. This technique was nothing new:

Source
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." Dr. Samuel Johnson said this in 1775, on the eve of US revolution from British tyranny. When patriotism is used to suppress dissent, to demand blind obedience, and to commit war crimes "in our name," then patriotism has lost its meaning.

Hitler recognise and utilized many techniques and manipulated anyone and everyone he could with a view to a greater end. It is reported that many of his Generals, especially Rommell, disliked meeting him because of his articulation and powers of persuasion. His refusal, until his final hours, to marry because of the damaging effect he believed it would have upon the support he recieved from women was another example of his insight. This opinion has been ratified since through interviews and studies where it appears many women were intrigued by his 'marriage to Germany' rather than another woman. Again you can look for example at the recognition today that a marriage/engagement of a pop star can affect their record sales, their popularity. It may seem a silly comparison - but I think it's valid, Hitler understood the power of the cult of personality.

So while it is apparent that Hitler's actions can never be recognised as being 'good' and it is blatently obvious to anyone and everyone that he was amongst the most evil or wicked (however you want to phrase it) men in history there can be no denying that he was only able to achieve this reputation due to his astuteness.

Saying all this though I do think for the sake of clarity (and parhaps the good of man) his abilities should be recognised but naming a team after him in admiration of these leadership qualities. Err... perhaps not the smartest move

But while I don't agree with this I think the article is written with a certain viewpoint:

The eight students who idolised Hitler were taking part in a four-day leadership camp for brass band members.

Idolise? There's a difference between idolatry and appreciation.


[edit on 5-7-2005 by Mark Harris]