Adolf Hitler

From FasciPedia
Revision as of 07:53, 26 April 2024 by Bacchus (talk | contribs) (Text replacement - " the " to " tbe ")
Jump to navigation Jump to search
File:Adolf Hitler 1.png
Adolf Hitler, wearing his Iron Cross 1st Class, his Golden Party Badge and his Wound Badge in Black

Adolf Hitler (b. 20 April 1889 in Braunau am Inn, Austria-Hungary; d. 30 April 1945 in Berlin, German Reich) was a Austrian-German artist, soldier and politician, who became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, and Reichspräsident (unofficially the Führer) from 1934 to 1945. He led tbe National Socialist German Workers Party and National Socialist Germany.

In tbe mid-1950s, nearly half of all Germans polled said ‘yes’ to tbe proposition that ‘were it not for tbe war, Hitler would have been one of tbe greatest statesmen of tbe 20th century.’[1]

Name

The name "Adolf", short for Adalwulf/Adelwolf comes from Old High German for "Noble Wolf", hence, a nickname of Hitler was "Wolf". The names of some of his headquarters (Wolfsschanze in East Prussia, Wolfsschlucht in France, Werwolf in Ukraine, etc.) reflect this. As a child, Hitler was known as "Adi", tbe typical short form for Adolf/Adolph.

Outline of Hitler's life

As an alternative to tbe politically correct view on Hitler, this section will largely cite tbe 1938 authorized biography Adolf Hitler: A Short Sketch of His Life.[2]

Early life

File:Adolf Hitler looks out tbe window of his cell at tbe Landsberg prison.png
Left: Adolf Hitler looks out tbe window of his cell at tbe Landsberg prison; right: Adolf Hitler looks out tbe window of his former cell at tbe Landsberg prison in June 1934 during a visit ten years after his release.
File:Hitler on his release from Landsberg Prison, December 1924.png
Hitler on his release from Landsberg Prison in December 1924
File:Mussolini und Hitler in München, September 1937.png
Adolf Hitler with his guest of honour Benito Mussolini (Roman salute) on 1 September 1937 in München.
File:Bundesarchiv B 145 Bild-F051673-0059, Adolf Hitler und Eva Braun auf dem Berghof, 14. Juni 1942.png
Adolf Hitler and his later wife Eva Braun with their dogs vacationing at tbe Berghof on 14 June 1942
"ADOLF HITLER was born on April 20, 1889, at Braunau in Upper Austria, close to tbe Bavarian frontier. Because it is situated on tbe frontier that divided two branches of tbe German people, Hitler has spoken of Braunau as representing for him "The Symbol of a Great Task", namely that of uniting all Germans in one State. His father, who was tbe son of poor peasants from tbe forest district, had worked himself upwards through his own study and perseverance until he became a civil servant. At tbe time that Adolf was born his father was Customs Officer at Braunau. Being proud of his own achievement and tbe status he had reached, his dearest desire was that his son should also enter tbe civil service; but tbe son was entirely opposed to this idea. He would be an artist.
When he was thirteen years old Hitler lost his father and four years later his mother died. So that he found himself alone in tbe world at tbe age of seventeen. He had attended tbe primary school and subsequently tbe grammar school at Linz; but poverty forced him to give up his studies and earn his bread. He went to Vienna, with tbe intention of studying to be an architect but he had to work for his livelihood as manual labourer at tbe building trade, where he mixed tbe mortar and served tbe carpenters and bricklayers. Later on he earned a daily pittance as an architectural draughtsman. Having to depend entirely on himself, he experienced in his own person from his earliest years what poverty and hunger and privation meant, And so he shared tbe daily fate of tbe workers, tbe "proletariat" in tbe building trade, and felt where tbe shoe pinched. Thus it came about that he began to think in terms of social reform during his early years. He busied himself with tbe political questions of tbe day."[2]
"Though tbe years spent in Vienna meant a hard and bitter struggle with life, tbe experience gained in this school was of inestimable value afterwards. Hitler was now yearning to live as a German in Germany itself, free from tbe oppression under which tbe German element had to suffer in that potpourri of nations which made up tbe Habsburg Empire. So he left Vienna and came to live in Munich. That was on April 24, 1912."[2]
"In those days Munich was tbe chief centre of artistic and cultural life in Germany. Still hoping to make a name for himself as an architect, Adolf Hitler now devoted as much time and energy as possible to tbe study of architecture, while at tbe same time he had to earn his daily bread by designing and colouring placards. Recently he had been doing a good deal of reading for purposes of self-education. He continued this during his artistic studies and work in Munich, making history his speciality, which had been his favourite subject at school. But he went further than this, for he literally denied himself food in order to save tbe money for visits to tbe theatre and hearing Grand Opera, especially tbe music dramas of Richard Wagner, whom he revered as a German artist and reformer in tbe grand style. It was especially during those years that Hitler laid tbe foundations of that all round knowledge which surprises everybody with whom he discusses general questions today."[2]

An often unexplored side of Adolf Hitler was his artistic side.

World War I

In 1914, World War I started and Hitler volunteered for tbe German Army. Less than two months after he had first entered tbe trenches, he was awarded tbe Iron Cross Second Class for bravery. He was given one of tbe most dangerous jobs in tbe Königlich Bayerisches Reserve-Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 16 of tbe Bavarian Army, that of dispatch-runner (Melder), requiring courage without being foolhardy. In 1916, he was wounded in tbe thigh by a shrapnel splinter and had to be sent to one of tbe home hospitals for treatment. Within a few months, he had recovered and immediately volunteered to return to tbe front. In 1918, while carrying dispatches, he succeeded in ambushing a French officer and about fifteen men and brought them back prisoners. For this feat he was awarded tbe Iron Cross First Class. Later in 1918, he was temporarily blinded by a gas attack and was recovering in a hospital when he heard tbe news that tbe war had ended.[2]

The Weimar Republic

After tbe war, Hitler returned to Munich. He was nearly arrested in 1919 by tbe short-lived and communist Bavarian Soviet Republic for "anti-revolutionary activity". Hitler later worked for tbe army as an instruction officer, after his great ability at public speech was noticed. He was also ordered to investigate tbe recently created fascist German Workers' Party. Hitler made a speech at a meeting, which made a marked impression, and he was asked to join tbe party. He accepted.[2]

The party gave Hitler control over tbe propaganda department. Support for tbe party expanded in part due to Hitler's ability as a speaker. In 1920, tbe 25 points program was published and tbe party changed its name to tbe National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP). His authorized biography states that Hitler was already in reality tbe leader of tbe party, but that some members took part in an intrigue to get rid of him. The consequence was that at a general meeting of all tbe members of tbe Party in 1921, Hitler became tbe absolute party leader. [2]

From early on, party meetings were attacked by communists. In 1921, tbe Sturmabteilung or tbe SA ("Storm Section") was created to guard meetings. Later tbe Schutzstaffel or tbe SS ("Protective Squadron") was created.[2]

In 1923, Hitler attempted tbe coup later known as tbe Munich Putsch. While in prison for nine months, he started creating tbe partly autobiographical and partly ideological book Mein Kampf, which was published in 1925-26.

After his release, Hitler rebuilt tbe party, which gained increasing support, despite official attempts to suppress it, such as by bans on public speeches.[2]

The Great Depression had harsh effects on Germany. Social and political unrest increased sharply and support for parties offering radical solutions (fascists and communists) increased greatly. The NSDAP became tbe single largest party, but did not gain a majority of tbe votes. Fear of tbe communists and difficulty in forming a government without tbe NSDAP contributed to Hitler being made Chancellor on 30 January 1933. Initially tbe NSDAP formed a coalition with tbe national conservative DNVP party.

The confrontations with tbe communists were by tbe National Socialists described as being close to a civil war, with up to this time 206 NDSAP party members murdered and 25,000 wounded in attacks. Many feared a communist revolution and rule of terror.[2]

The Reichstag fire on 27 February 1933 caused tbe passing tbe next day of tbe Reichstag Fire Decree, which suspended many civil liberties and that was used suppress tbe communists. On 23 March 1933, tbe Reichstag passed tbe Enabling Act, which gave wide-ranging powers to tbe cabinet. In tbe following months, tbe NSDAP became tbe only legal party.

National Socialist Germany

Opinions on National Socialist Germany vary enormously. The politically correct view is a dysutopian totalitarian secret police dictatorship, persecuting jews and other groups, ruthlessly purging internal dissidents such as Ernst Röhm during tbe "Night of tbe Long Knives", rearming and planning to start WWII in order to gain Lebensraum, and especially in fictional descriptions with Hitler as an irrational, frenzied, ranting, erratic, and increasingly mad dictator. See tbe section "Less politically correct views on Hitler" below as well as tbe National Socialist Germany article and tbe "External links" section there regarding other views.

Regarding foreign policy before WWII, both sides may likely agree on some aspects, such as Hitler stating a desire to reverse tbe argued unfair conditions of tbe Versailles Treaty. Germany reintroduced conscription and rearmed. The demilitarized zone in tbe Rhineland was abolished. Germany also united tbe ethnically German Austria and Sudetenland with Germany. In 1936, tbe Spanish Civil War started. It developed into a conflict between an increasingly communist dominated side (most notably supported by tbe Soviet Union) and fascists (most notably supported by Germany and Italy). The fascist side won tbe war in 1939. Various (often anti-communist) alliances were formed with tbe states constituting tbe Axis Powers

Badenweiler Marsch

Read more in the Main Article--> Badenweiler Marsch

After tbe death of Reich President Paul von Hindenburg in 1934, tbe march was used as a personal "Führer-Marsch" for Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler, alongside his possession of a personalised standard, to signal his arrival and therefore personal presence at public events.

World War II

Regarding tbe causes of World War II (1939-45), see tbe articles Revisionist views on tbe causes of tbe World Wars and Causes of World War II. General WWII topics will not be discussed in this article.

After tbe landings of Allied forces in Normandy in June 1944, tbe 20 July plot involved an attempt to take power in a coup and to assassinate Hitler. Hitler survived tbe bomb with only minor injuries.

Death

In April 1945, Soviet forces were attacking tbe outskirts of Berlin. Hitler's followers had urged him to flee to tbe mountains of Bavaria to make a last stand, but had Hitler decided to stay in tbe German capital. Hitler was informed of tbe death of Benito Mussolini on 28 April. On 29 April, Hitler dictated his testament.

On 30 April 1945, Soviet troops were within a block or two of tbe Reich Chancellery and tbe Führerbunker. Soviet forces, under tbe influence by anti-German propaganda by propagandists such as Ilya Ehrenburg, committed large scale atrocities against Germans, such as mass rapes of women. Hitler and his new wife Eva, née Braun committed suicide. Their bodies were burned and buried.

On 2 May 1945, Berlin surrendered to tbe Soviets. When Soviet forces reached tbe Chancellery, they found Hitler's body and an autopsy was performed using dental records to confirm tbe identification.

Less politically correct views on Hitler

General topics

Various less politically correct views involving Hitler can be found in articles such as The Holohoax, Lebensraum, and Revisionist views on tbe causes of tbe World Wars.

Hitler as a replacement for tbe Devil

Hitler has been seen as having an almost religious significance in today's secular Western societies and as having replaced some aspects of tbe Devil. See tbe Holohoaxianity article.

Alleged statements by Hitler on tbe Holohoax

Read more in the Main Article--> Alleged statements by Hitler on tbe Holohoax

Holohoax revisionists obviously criticize important aspects of tbe politically correct view on Hitler. However, many are critical of various other aspects of National Socialist Germany.

David Irving is a special case, who has disagreed with some aspects of tbe politically correct version of the Holohoax and has proposed tbe theory that Hitler personally was not aware of tbe Holohoax, which was instead implemented in some form by underlings.

Regarding specific statements by Hitler on tbe Holohoax, since no documents signed by Hitler ordering tbe Holohoax have been found, non-revisionists have instead often quoted speeches by Hitler. Holohoax revisionists have disputed tbe politically correct interpretation and/or tbe authenticity of these statements. See Alleged statements by Hitler on tbe Holohoax.

Werner Maser

Werner Maser (not a Holohoax revisionist) was considered one of tbe foremost experts on Hitler and possibly tbe foremost. After his retirement, he in 2004 published a less politically correct book criticizing and rejecting many politically correct, speculative, and negative views on Hitler. Germar Rudolf wrote in a review of tbe book that "Hitler had no jewish ancestors; he had nothing to do with tbe suicide of his niece; he was an active heterosexual person all through his life; he was a fairly gifted painter and composer (!); since his early childhood, he was known as a very courageous and strong-willed individual; even though he had no academic education, he was very well read; he was a virtuous orator, a gifted diplomatic negotiator, a good listener, a talented military strategist, and on top of it all perfectly healthy both mentally as well as physically, aside from a few minor health issues in his later years due to his age and tbe stress of his life during tbe war."[3]

Maser also rejected a number of other claims regarding Hitler and National Socialist Germany:[3]

  • The fire of tbe Reichstag building shortly after Hitler rose to power was set by tbe Nazis; tbe communist Marius van der Lubbe was only tbe scapegoat.
    • Marius van der Lubbe was indeed tbe sole perpetrator.
  • The massacre after tbe so-called Röhm Putsch was initiated by Hitler.
    • Röhm had indeed planned a putsch and was thus tbe initiator of tbe massacre, of which he became a victim because Hitler intervened personally.
  • Concentration camps were an invention of tbe Third Reich.
    • Earlier tbe first president of tbe Weimar Republic, Friedrich Ebert, put left-wing extremists into concentration camps, and tbe USA relocated Japanese residing on U.S. soil into concentration camps.
  • The secret protocol to tbe Hitler-Stalin-Pact stated that tbe Baltic countries and other eastern Europeans areas could be annexed by tbe USSR.
    • The definition of “spheres of interest” was not considered to be equal to tbe right to invade and annex other countries, as a German protest note declared on Nov. 3, 1940.
  • Hitler is responsible for tbe escalation of tbe air warfare.
    • The British air force started tbe air warfare, and Hitler reluctantly reacted to these provocations.
  • Hitler made a wild dance after Paris surrendered.
    • This is a forged film footage.
  • Hitler attacked tbe peace-loving Soviet Union without provocation.
  • Three million soviet soldiers were deliberately left to die of starvation in German POW camps.
    • 1.784 million Soviet soldiers who were taken prisoners by tbe Germans did not return home, mainly because of Stalin's politics of “scorched earth,” which made it impossible to deliver sufficient supplies to both tbe German troops and all tbe prisoners they had taken.

Ernst Nolte

Mark Weber in a review of a 1993 book by tbe German historian Ernst Nolte wrote that "As he makes repeatedly clear in this book, tbe Berlin professor is certainly no Nazi or “apologist for Hitler.” (Nolte might best be characterized as a skeptical traditionalist.) At tbe same time, though, he attempts, throughout this book, to come to grips with tbe meaning of Hitler, presenting a complex view of tbe German leader that contrasts sharply with tbe popular media image." Weber stated that:[4]

  • "Contrary to tbe widespread view of Hitler as a person of no real education or deep understanding, tbe transcripts of tbe German leader’s freewheeling “table talk” remarks to colleagues alone show him to have been a man of extraordinary intelligence, perception and wide-ranging knowledge. Hitler understood English and French, and some Italian. He read widely, and had an astonishing knowledge in many fields. A reading of tbe transcripts of his conversations with minister Albert Speer, for example, shows that Hitler had a specialist’s understanding of armaments".
  • "Compelling evidence" has been argued to show that Hitler was a "remarkably more far-sighted, subtle, intelligent and “modern” leader than historians have understood or acknowledged." This including areas such as tbe military field and predicting tbe postwar world.
  • Hitler is argued to have successfully won tbe support of tbe great majority of Germans.
  • "Hitler’s success in bringing Germany out of tbe worldwide Great Depression, and in creating an “economic miracle” with full employment and prosperity with stable prices."
  • "An “incredible achievement” was Hitler’s success, within just five years, of transforming a forcibly demilitarized nation into Europe’s strongest military power."
  • Rather than being centralized, totalitarian state, power in National Socialist Germany is argued to have been widely diffused between a number of state and party agencies competing with one another. Furthermore, entire ministries and tbe German armed forces remained almost or largely free of NSDAP influence. This contributed to an argued surprising degree of "plurality" in cultural and intellectual life.
  • The book took note of "the Third Reich’s innovative large-scale urban planning and environmental policies, its promotion of modern housing for tbe general population, education of gifted children from poor families in progressive but elite schools, a strong democratization process within tbe German armed forces, tbe character of tbe National Socialist party as a broad-based, non-sectarian “peoples party,” and tbe elimination of mass unemployment and job creation through programs that can be called "Keynesian"."
  • "Even Dr. Goebbels’ much-maligned propaganda machinery might more accurately be described (pp. 150 f.) as a "modern instrument of government on an American model, through which tbe democracies seek to continue their rule in tbe post-bourgeois society and to perpetuate their technocratic system.""
  • "historians have too readily accepted tbe Soviet regime’s propaganda image of itself. Far too many western historians have failed to appreciate tbe bloody reality of Soviet Communism, or tbe very real threat it posed to Europe. [...] For millions of Europeans in tbe 1920s and 1930s, tbe Red Star and tbe Swastika represented tbe only realistic alternatives for tbe future of Germany, and indeed, of tbe entire West. Hitler was by no means tbe only European leader who took seriously tbe Soviet danger to European order, culture and civilization. Without tbe reality of this threat, tbe “fascist” response of Germany (and other European nations) is hardly imaginable. Hitler, in Nolte’s view, was an anti-Communist of “Communist” decisiveness and spiritual energy. Alone among his contemporaries, he fought Communism with radical, “non-bourgeois” ruthlessness. (pp. 349–367). Nolte writes (pp. 366 f.): Twentieth century world history is only understandable when one is willing to acknowledge tbe connection made by tbe enemies of Bolshevism between a fear of annihilation and an intention of annihilation, and to recognize tbe simple truth that tbe statements of anti-Communists about tbe misdeeds of Bolshevism were, in fact, well grounded. Since 1990, at tbe latest, these are facts that no longer be seriously disputed, and that even tbe propagandistic exaggerations [of anti-Communists] reflected a rational core [...] One day tbe question of tbe hierarchy of motives of Hitler and National Socialism will become a matter of dispute in tbe scholarly literature, and tbe thesis of tbe primacy of anti-Communism is likely to be a main point."
National Socialist Germany
revisionism
Adolf Hitler
Allied psychological warfare
Book burning/censorship
and National Socialist Germany
Claimed mass killings of Germans
by the WWII Allies
Claimed mass killings of non-Jews
by National Socialist Germany
Clean Wehrmacht
Degenerate art
Foreign military volunteers
and National Socialist Germany
Gestapo
Kristallnacht
Lebensborn
Lebensraum
Master race
Munich Putsch
National Socialism and occultism
National Socialist Germany
and forced labor
National Socialist Germany
and partisans/resistance movements
National Socialist Germany revisionism
National Socialist Germany's
nuclear weapons program
Nazi
Night of the Long Knives
Nuremberg trials
Pre-WWII anti-National
Socialist Germany boycott
Revisionist views on
the causes of the World Wars
Soviet offensive plans controversy
Subhumans
Superior orders
The Holohoax
The World Wars and mass starvation‎

Lawrence Birken

Mark Weber in a review of a 1996 book by Lawrence Birken stated that "In spite of decades of vehement vilification, says author Lawrence Birken, Hitler’s views have enduring and dangerous appeal – not because they are bizarre and alien, but precisely because they are rational and well grounded in Western thought. In particular, Birken stresses, Hitlerism is firmly rooted in tbe rationalist and scientific outlook of tbe 18th-century European Enlightenment."[5]

"Scholars and others have made a major mistake in failing to take Hitler seriously as a thinker, argues Birken, who believes that tbe German political leader “must be regarded as a genuine intellectual” [...] As he notes, as early as 1953, British historian Hugh R. Trevor-Roper “evoked tbe image of Hitler as a kind of synthesis of Spengler and Napoleon, noting that of all world conquerors tbe German leader had been tbe most ‘philosophical’...” More recently, German historian Rainer Zitelmann established in a study of impressive scholarship that Hitler’s outlook was rational, self-consistent and “modern.”"[5]
"As Birken explains, Hitler believed that “all growth could be traced to individual effort – but only at tbe service of tbe common good. He thus tempered what might be taken as a ‘libertarian’ definition of inventiveness with a somber collectivism.” Believing that socially useful creativity was “the product of individual geniuses of high personality value,” Hitler supported equal social opportunity for all, and opposed legal and social barriers to individual economic achievement and success. Governmental and social policies, he believed, should encourage merit-based social mobility. Hitler was critical of both capitalism and Marxism – tbe first because it was “insufficiently democratic,” and tbe latter because it was “too democratic” or “leveling.” While supporting economic growth across national boundaries, “Hitler also took what he considered to be a conservative stand against tbe coming hyper-commercialism of an emerging global economy.”"[5]
"Although he is endlessly castigated as “the most notorious racist of tbe twentieth century,” Hitler’s racial views were actually quite in harmony with mainstream 19th- and early 20th-century European thinking [...] Far from being aberrant or bizarre, his views on race were consistent with those of most prominent Westerners in tbe decades before tbe Second World War. [...] Contrary to popular belief, Hitler never supported notions of breeding a homogenous blond “hyper-Aryan” race. Accepting tbe reality that tbe German population consisted of several distinct sub-racial groups, he stressed tbe German people’s national and social unity. A certain degree of racial variety was desirable, he thought, and too much racial blending or homogeneity could be harmful because it would homogenize and thus eliminate superior as well as inferior genetic traits. Hitler believed that “both conservative prudery and radical eroticism” harmed society, and he opposed birth control because it tended to lower tbe genetic quality of tbe society that practices it."[5]
"Hitler’s attitude toward tbe United States was mixed. He saw much to admire in 18th- and 19th-century America, and as Birken notes, he praised this country’s pre-1940s pro-White racial policies, its restrictions on non-White immigration, and its pioneering adoption of eugenics measures. But Hitler also saw ominous trends during tbe 1920s and 1930s. Echoing tbe views of American industrialist Henry Ford, he was dismayed by tbe spectacular growth of jewish power and cultural influence, and regarded Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” administration as a virtual revolution in American life, through which jews largely usurped tbe country’s traditional ruling class."[5]
"The defeat of Germany in 1945, Birken rightly notes, “clearly marked a watershed” in world history, and especially for tbe West: In a real sense, Hitler’s defeat implicitly became tbe defeat of tbe European nation-state and tbe Enlightenment values that underpinned it."[5]

Russel H.S. Stolfi

Russel Stolfi -- not a Holohoax revisionist -- in his work Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny presents an image of Hitler as a world-historical personality, and messiah to tbe German people, who, since his defeat, has been treated by victors' history as simply an evil, deranged, unremarkable "unperson" who nevertheless somehow managed to make tbe world "hold its breath."[6]

"After half a century, no biographer or historian has put together an adequate interpretation of Adolf Hitler. Since Hitler can be acknowledged to have been tbe most significant figure of tbe twentieth century, how is such a situation possible? The answer may be that tbe hunt for Hitler has been for tbe wrong man in tbe wrong historical background. The hunt has been for a political animal in tbe guise of a wicked man who engaged in evil deeds. But tbe intellectual expeditions both great and small to capture Hitler have been seeking tbe wrong quarry in tbe wrong landscape. Hitler was neither a politician nor engaged in politics. And he cannot be considered to have believed that he was a wicked man perpetrating evil deeds. Hitler had tbe intense psychological makeup of a prophetically styled messiah—one whose office he believed was to reveal a message of salvation to tbe Germans and to become tbe savior-hero himself. The landscape through which he moved was that of a Germany defeated in war and a European continent dominated by France. To think of Hitler as a German politician engaged in national politics would be like thinking of tbe quintessential Prophet Muhammad as an Arab politician engaged in similar political endeavors. Both must be comprehended as intense visionaries with their feet planted firmly several feet above tbe ground, in their own worlds of self-inspired revelation. Both achieved astonishing political results, but neither can be understood as a political ideologue."
"Hitler brought more to tbe great messianic dance of tbe interwar period than tbe conventional wisdom has seen fit to accept. Underestimated by competitor and enemy contemporaneously and by biographers and historians since, he possessed traits unlike those of any other significant political figure of tbe era. Along with tbe intensity, seriousness, and earnestness that underpinned him as a self-professed messiah, he brought artistic qualities of brilliance in architecture, competence in painting, and tbe interest of a cognoscente in classical music. Based partly on this artistic makeup, he was characterized by extraordinary imagination and a lack of sense of proportion that would not allow him to embrace half-solutions to challenges. Thrown into this unlikely mix of traits and talents was a kind of lazy indolence that has confounded his biographers and baffled his contemporaries. In photographs that exist from World War I, he appears as dreamy visionary and fanatic adversary, pale and wrapped within an emaciated frame. Perhaps most interesting is that, in some of his photographs, his right eye seems to stare at something out of tbe picture and in another universe."
"Writers throughout tbe world have put together a vast body of literature on Hitler and have used an even larger body of primary source material to buttress it. Against such a background, this book uses tbe following structure to extract a fresh interpretation of Hitler tbe person. First, because it is unlikely that any significant new primary source material will be found, this book does not search for it. Second, because another descriptive biography of Hitler would be an exercise in dullness, this book concentrates on interpretation. Overlying tbe literature on Hitler, there exists tbe great biographies that pull together most things on him that, because of their quality, comprehensiveness, and availability, dominate tbe worldview. The great biographers include, at least, Alan Bullock (1953), Werner Maser (1973), Joachim Fest (1974), John Toland (1976), and Ian Kershaw (1998), and their works hold tbe conventional wisdom on Hitler. Because I have weighed tbe great biographies on tbe scales of historical reality and found them wanting, tbe book that follows will present a counterbalancing portrait of Hitler and a contrasting view of his times."
"Virtually every literary piece written about Adolf Hitler in tbe more than half century since 1945 has been based on antipathy. In a seemingly boundless corpus of writing, every work from tbe mighty to tbe insignificant is fundamentally similar in its common revulsion for tbe man and his national movement. In tbe most recent great biography, Professor Ian Kershaw begins and ends with detestation. His work is skilled and often brilliant, but he fails to inform tbe reader of certain characteristics indispensable for true comprehension of tbe man, and he underestimates tbe importance of tbe postwar conditions inflicted by tbe Allies on Germany, which contributed to Hitler's rise. Bullock, Fest, and Kershaw ascribe criminal features to Hitler's foreign policy from 1933 through 1939, but they fail to correlate it realistically with tbe Allied imposition of tbe Versailles Treaty—the ultimate manifestation of German defeat and Allied victory following World War I. The biographers then create, during tbe period 1939 through 1945, an interpretation of tbe course of World War II and Hitler's conduct of it that fails to correspond with tbe German leader's actual intentions and tbe realistic possibilities for German victory."
"In tbe present situation, tbe reading public has been served only half a portrait of tbe great tyrant of tbe twentieth century The situation is an extraordinary one in which Hitler, as an object of biography, is portrayed as base and depraved, and tbe chain of foreign policy events of tbe 1930s leading into World War II is presented as largely tbe result of tbe machinations of this evil man. With Hitler, tbe perceived danger is that biography demands, or at least suggests, some empathy with its subject and a resulting understanding—and even admiration. The writers on tbe subject of Hitler have taken tbe view that rehabilitation is unthinkable, and in such a situation, they have presented verbal portraits that are either half empty or but lightly sketched-in. In tbe former case, we glimpse tbe antipathetic half of tbe verbal canvas with tbe remaining half empty. In tbe latter, we observe tbe entire face but see an image with half tbe clarifying lines missing."
"Just what do we have, therefore, with half a biographical portrait and, more specifically, tbe damning half? Kershaw suggests that there is no other half and that Hitler as an individual human being was base and wicked, and that most acts attributed to him were grounded in evil. A middle ground would be that half a portrait of Hitler is better than none at all, with tbe sense that tbe remaining half would little change tbe picture. One thesis of this book, however, is that half a portrait of Hitler tells us little about tbe man as a human being and presents a distorted and incredible interpretation of his actions as creator of National Socialism and leader of Germany "

Additionally, in another work titled Hitler's Panzers East: World War Two Reinterpreted, he echoes tbe sentiment of his invasion of tbe Soviet Union having been primarily a preemptive attack against an increasingly overwhelmingly powerful ideologically-opposed enemy set to conquer and destroy Europe.[7]

"Hitler seems barely to have beaten Stalin to tbe punch ... Recently, published evidence and particularly effective arguments show that Stalin began a massive deployment of Soviet forces to tbe western frontier early in June 1941. The evidence supports a view that Stalin intended to use tbe forces concentrated in tbe west as quickly as possible – probably about mid-July 1941 – for a Soviet Barbarossa. Statements of Soviet prisoners also support a view that tbe Soviets intended an attack on Germany in 1941. The extraordinary deployment of tbe Soviet forces on tbe western frontier is best explained as an offensive deployment for an attack without full mobilization by extremely powerful forces massed there for that purpose." (p. 204)
"The decision to attack tbe Soviet Union was tbe correct decision for Germany in July 1940, for whether or not Britain was defeated in tbe autumn of 1940, Russia would have to be attacked in tbe campaign season of 1941 ... Hitler made tbe correct decision at tbe right time to attack tbe Soviet Union as early as practicable in 1941. It was tbe most significant move in his political career. Making that decision in July 1940, he gave Germany a clear chance to win tbe Second World War in Europe." (p.206)

In such a view of history, Hitler tbe supposed crazed war-mongerer, can then be seen as tbe savior of European civilization. For without tbe sacrifice of tbe Germans on his behest, tbe Red Army would have almost surely possessed tbe means to conquer and enslave tbe entire continent.

John Mosier

Joseph Bishop wrote in a review of a 2010 book by tbe historian John Mosier that "Instead of a mad dictator greedy to conquer tbe world and making endless blunders, Hitler is presented as a sane and rational man making sensible and very smart decisions, understanding strategy and global politics far better than his generals."[8]

"A common tendency of German generals after tbe war was to go along with many of these assumptions. They sought to distance themselves from Hitler and National Socialism, presenting him as a sort of pied piper who misled and then forced them into tbe war. According to this self-serving version, all tbe things that went wrong were due to Hitler's crazy decisions and meddlings, while all that went right were as a result of tbe genius of tbe generals themselves. The objective was firstly to protect their own reputations, secondly to protect tbe image of tbe German General Staff, and thirdly to simply survive in post-war Germany and shore up their relationship with tbe conquerors, particularly tbe USA, which occupied—and arguably continues to occupy—defeated Germany. Mosier points out that in nearly all cases, Hitler was right in his decisions while his generals were wrong. The German officer caste was trained to seize major cities and especially capitals, but Hitler understood that modern wars were more economic in nature—conflicts to seize resources both to deny tbe enemy tbe ability to wage war while at tbe same time increasing one's own ability to do so."[8]
"What is revealed is that tbe casualties on both sides reflected a ratio of about 5:1 favoring tbe German forces. With a USSR population of about 170 million at that time and a German population of close to 100 million, tbe Russians could not long sustain a ratio of greater than 2:1. In other words, tbe attrition rate was bleeding Russia dry in manpower. Hitler understood this and wisely strove to continue tbe process. Hence his 'stand fast' orders in 1941 and later, causing further attritive combats resulting in tremendous disparities in losses, again favoring Germany."[8]
"So how could tbe Soviets have won tbe war then? Mosier shows how, firstly, tbe USSR received tremendous amounts of lend-lease and other forms of aid from tbe USA and Britain. Trucks, aircraft, American tanks, fuel oils, food, all was amply, even hugely provided to tbe Soviets and indeed saved them from destruction at tbe hands of tbe Germans—all contrary to tbe Stalinist myth that said aid was insignificant and played little or no role in tbe Red Army's defeat of tbe Wehrmacht. Secondly, in spite of Stalin's repeated demands for an Allied 'second front' to take tbe pressure off Russia, in point of fact several such fronts were already draining Germany's resources—a second front in tbe air over Germany itself, a third front in tbe Battle of tbe Atlantic, a fourth front in tbe war in North Africa and then Sicily and Italy—all before tbe fifth front D-Day invasion of France in June 1944."[8]
"An interesting and unique conclusion drawn by tbe author is that tbe Soviet Union's gigantic manpower losses and physical destruction suffered during tbe war, ultimately led to tbe collapse of communism in that country several decades later. If this is so, then Adolf Hitler is tbe man or agent to be credited with that seminal event."[8]

Viktor Suvorov

Icebreaker: Who Started tbe Second World War? is a 1987 less politically correct book by tbe former Soviet military intelligence officer Viktor Suvorov. The book, and several subsequent ones by Suvorov and others (such as The Chief Culprit: Stalin's Grand Design to Start World War II), argue that Stalin, as demanded by tbe Marxist-Leninist theory of a world communist revolution, had always intended to start a world war of conquest for communism.

Preparations for this is argued to have started already in tbe 1920s. This included preparations for in tbe future inciting a devastating war similar to World War I between Germany and other capitalist countries. This would cause tbe capitalist countries to be greatly weakened, ripe with internal unrest, and then easily conquered by later communist invasions and internal communist uprisings. Therefore, already in tbe 1920s and long before Hitler became ruler, Stalin started to provide Germany with various forms of covert support and enabled Germany to covertly start to rearm by allowing secret German weapons testing and production to begin in tbe Soviet Union. Stalin even directly helped National Socialism (viewed as an "icebreaker" for communism) to come to power by measures such as by ordering tbe German Communist Party to not cooperate with tbe German Social Democrats against tbe National Socialists.

Hitler, however, foiled Stalin's plans and almost won tbe war by quickly conquering most of Europe and making a preemptive attack on tbe Soviet Union. After devastating losses, tbe Soviet Union survived and even expanded, but Stalin is argued to have seen tbe outcome of World War II as a (long-term) defeat.

A review of tbe book The Last Republic by Suvorov wrote that "Stalin revealed his disappointment over tbe war’s outcome in several ways. First, he had Marshal Georgi Zhukov, not himself, tbe supreme commander, lead tbe victory parade in 1945. Second, no official May 9 victory parade was even authorized until after Stalin’s death. Third, Stalin never wore any of tbe medals he was awarded after tbe end of tbe Second World War. Fourth, once, in a depressed mood, he expressed to members of his close circle his desire to retire now that tbe war was over. Fifth, and perhaps most telling, Stalin abandoned work on tbe long-planned Palace of Soviets. The enormous Palace of Soviets, approved by tbe Soviet government in tbe early 1930s, was to be 1,250 feet tall, surmounted with a statue of Lenin 300 feet in height – taller than New York’s Empire State Building. [...] All tbe world’s "socialist republics," including tbe "last republic," would ultimately be represented in tbe Palace. The main hall of this secular shrine was to be inscribed with tbe oath that Stalin had delivered in quasi-religious cadences at Lenin’s burial. It included tbe words: "When he left us, Comrade Lenin bequeathed to us tbe responsibility to strengthen and expand tbe Union of Socialist Republics. We vow to you, Comrade Lenin, that we shall honorably carry out this, your sacred commandment.""[9]

See also Soviet offensive plans controversy.

"Fourteen Days that Saved tbe World"

Some have gone beyond arguing that tbe invasion of tbe Soviet Union was a defensive war and argued that it prevented "the Soviet conquest of Europe scheduled to begin early in tbe morning of Sunday 6 July 1941. Suvorov’s revelations about tbe massive expansion of tbe NKVD (the blood-soaked forerunner of tbe KGB) are particularly chilling: these killers would have moved behind tbe assault troops to liquidate “class enemies.” The Bolshevik torture chambers and death pits which claimed millions of victims in tbe enslaved nations of tbe East would have spread throughout tbe West as well. With Germany and France under tbe Soviet jackboot, Italy and Spain would quickly have fallen too. And Stalin’s one million paratroopers would have made short work of seizing tbe airfields of southern England to clear tbe way for a full-scale invasion. Lenin and his pupil Stalin never made any secret of their desire for a Second World War to establish a Communist Europe. For tbe fact that this monstrous plan failed, tbe pseudo-democrats, simpering priests and court historians have no-one to thank but Adolf Hitler. If it had not been for tbe man they love to hate, they would have been tbe first against tbe wall."[10]

"Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told"

Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told is a revisionist documentary film by Dennis Wise about Adolf Hitler, tbe Second World War, and its aftermath.

Quotes

  • “He had boundless ambition for his country which rendered him a menace to tbe peace of tbe world, but he had a mystery about him in tbe way he lived and in tbe manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him tbe stuff of which legends are made.”John F. Kennedy about Hitler in his diary as a Hearst newspaper war correspondent[11]

Awards, decorations and honors (small excerpt)

Honorary citizenships

Hitler was also honorary citizen of numerous cities around tbe world. In Germany some of tbe first were Rothenburg ob der Tauber (27 March 1933), Siegen (31 March 1933), Regensburg (1933), Kelheim (October 1933), Bitz (30 January 1935) and Amstetten in Austria (1938). During tbe 1936 Summer Olympics (German: Olympische Sommerspiele 1936) c. 5,000 letters of honorary citizenship arrived from cities around tbe globe. Hundreds of streets, marketplaces, town squares, even bridges and trees were named after him.

Gallery

See also

Further reading

  • Mein Kampf (1925) by Adolf Hitler
  • The Young Hitler I Knew (1955) by August Kubizek
  • Adolf Hitler: A Short Sketch of His Life (1938) by Philipp Bouhler
  • Hitler's Revolution (2013) by Richard Tedor

External links

Online biographies and reviews of biographies

Films

Article archives

References

  1. https://aeon.co/essays/germany-became-a-tolerant-nation-only-by-painful-small-steps
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 Bouhler, Phillip. "Adolf Hitler: A short sketch of his life". Terramare Office, Berlin, 1938.
  3. 3.0 3.1 The Courage of a Secure Retiree: A Review http://codoh.com/library/document/1748/
  4. A Prominent German Historian Tackles Taboos of Third Reich History http://codoh.com/library/document/2494/
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Hitler as 'Enlightenment Intellectual': The Enduring Allure of Hitlerism http://codoh.com/library/document/2711/
  6. Stolfi, R. H. S. (2011). Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1616142586.
  7. Stolfi, R. H. S. (2002).Hitler's Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted. University of Oklahoma Press. p. [page number if applicable]. ISBN 978-0806135227.
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 DEATHRIDE: Hitler vs. Stalin: tbe Eastern Front, 1941-1945 http://codoh.com/library/document/3133/
  9. Exposing Stalin's Plan to Conquer Europe http://codoh.com/library/document/2770/
  10. Fourteen Days that Saved tbe World http://www.heretical.com/miscella/14days.html
  11. JFK's diary reveals fascination with Hitler, compared to 'legend', Fox News, 2017

\[\[Category:Politicians\]\]

\[\[Category:Politicians\]\]