I would suggest watching The Greatest Story Never Told.
Right . . . Hitler's image needs some rehabilitation.
FFS, of course he was a human being. We are all capable of great evil, and attempts to rehabilitate his image come from the fear of realizing that yes, junior, you too are capable of the most unspeakably violent crimes if conditions are right and you have layers of sycophant bureaucrats to carry out your commands and a press to give them positive spin or bury their consequences. The more compartments, the more layers, the more PR flak-catchers, the more plausible the denials.
Have you considered the fact that Hitler wrote Mein Kampf as a PR piece?
My point is that Hitler's actions as Fuhrer outweigh those of his well-intended youth, and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable--the same with most if not all autobiographies of politicians.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable
But does that make anything he said wrong? Were any of the problems he was decrying complete falsehoods conjured from literal nothing? If so, were all of the Germans who came to follow him also just that stupid they believed outright lies based on nothing?
Or do you think journalists actually are people deserving of human rights? Because that's a bold position to take.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
Because your inability to see people saying "he said some stuff that I kinda get" without going screaming about how evil he is is the exact same as a TDS screaming about DRUMPH BAD. The kind of people who'd say Haiti isn't a shithole because he said it was, just because ORANGE BAD.
And because the guy you replied to outright said people's response to Trump is what made him reconsider Hitler, due to the similarities in the narratives surrounding them and people's emotional crying about them.
I'm sorry, I just cannot accept that "Hitler wasn't such a bad guy, he was just misunderstood."
And WW II ended nearly 80 years ago. I can see now, in real time, Trump being unfairly criticized, in fact persecuted, for all sorts of stupid reasons. My opinions of Adolph Hitler rely on what I have read in history, mainly Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."
Because Trump has been painted as the second Hitler and everything about him is maligned. His policies, his tweets, his haircut, how he eats his steak, his businesses, his kids, etc. He is probably the most maligned person in history behind Hitler and Jesus. So it's an apt case study comparison.
Right . . . Hitler's image needs some rehabilitation.
FFS, of course he was a human being. We are all capable of great evil, and attempts to rehabilitate his image come from the fear of realizing that yes, junior, you too are capable of the most unspeakably violent crimes if conditions are right and you have layers of sycophant bureaucrats to carry out your commands and a press to give them positive spin or bury their consequences. The more compartments, the more layers, the more PR flak-catchers, the more plausible the denials.
Have you considered the fact that Hitler wrote Mein Kampf as a PR piece?
And does that make what he is saying wrong? Do truthful statements become false because a No-no person says them?
Because it sounds like you'd argue the sky is green if Trump said it was blue.
My point is that Hitler's actions as Fuhrer outweigh those of his well-intended youth, and that his purpose in writing his autobiography was to present an image to the public that they would find favorable--the same with most if not all autobiographies of politicians.
What does Trump or my opinion of him have to do with any of this?
But does that make anything he said wrong? Were any of the problems he was decrying complete falsehoods conjured from literal nothing? If so, were all of the Germans who came to follow him also just that stupid they believed outright lies based on nothing?
Or do you think journalists actually are people deserving of human rights? Because that's a bold position to take.
Because your inability to see people saying "he said some stuff that I kinda get" without going screaming about how evil he is is the exact same as a TDS screaming about DRUMPH BAD. The kind of people who'd say Haiti isn't a shithole because he said it was, just because ORANGE BAD.
And because the guy you replied to outright said people's response to Trump is what made him reconsider Hitler, due to the similarities in the narratives surrounding them and people's emotional crying about them.
I'm sorry, I just cannot accept that "Hitler wasn't such a bad guy, he was just misunderstood."
And WW II ended nearly 80 years ago. I can see now, in real time, Trump being unfairly criticized, in fact persecuted, for all sorts of stupid reasons. My opinions of Adolph Hitler rely on what I have read in history, mainly Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."
Because Trump has been painted as the second Hitler and everything about him is maligned. His policies, his tweets, his haircut, how he eats his steak, his businesses, his kids, etc. He is probably the most maligned person in history behind Hitler and Jesus. So it's an apt case study comparison.
But Trump has not begun a world war or given orders to exterminate entire populations of the country.
Trump is unfairly criticized; comparing him to Hitler is idiotic and simple-minded. In what ways has Hitler been unfairly criticized?