Hitler's genocide of the Jews and other minorities wasn't even among the worst of the atrocities committed during World War 2. Just look at what Japan did to women and within their own concentration camps (they killed 4 million more people than Nazi Germany) to their own minorities, and then there's the US turning millions of innocents into ash through one of the most dishonorable methods of warfare ever invented - those who lived through the initial atomic bomb dropping suffered burns, radiation poisoning, and since nothing was fully understood about nuclear radiation, people's deaths were slower and the death toll was higher than it needed to be :c
He may of technically been a leader, but he acted as a dictator. I voted no because he doesn't deserve the term leader.
In my opinion, he was. To convince people of what he had said and take the country to war must have required some sort of leadership. He wasn't a good one, but I consider him as one.
Nutty, Delusional, High on Drugs, Hypocrite. He was able to convince people to follow him. So yes, he was a leader (dictator)
Hitler was qualified as a leader. Just a Mussolini, very wicked man, was counted as a leader Adolf Hitler, the Jewish boy from Austria-Hungary [ found that funny ], is a leader. People do only look at his bad side and its because I don't remember a good one. He led his nation is deception and it worked, but yes... he was a leader.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely... Of course he was a leader. If you take a look at Germany after the first world war and at Germany at the start of the second then there's no denying that he and his followers did manage to get the country elevated where finance, infrastructure and all that were concerned. They basically turned Germany from a poor, beaten down, country into what we now refer to as the Third Reich. Its one thing to convince people to follow your lead and ideals, but if you're leading a country which is on the verge of bankruptcy where poverty and starvation are a common thing, then good luck getting any followers. I think its good to question the whole thing because you can learn a lot by looking at history, at the very least to try and not make the same mistakes over. In case of post-war Germany I think its safe to say that one thing which other countries learned was that in case of a post-war situation its usually wiser not to leave countries in a state of decay. A loaded subject for sure, but a good example in history - in my opinion - would be post-war Europe as well as Japan. I'm now of course referring to the Marshall plan, set into action after World War II. Basically allowing countries to undo the damage and recover on their own account (to a certain extend) without the risk of attracting maniacs who'd appeal to the masses and use the poverty and general state of the country for nothing more but working out their own hidden agendas. So yes, he was a leader. And he should also not be forgotten because he taught the world a very valuable lesson on how things can go downhill really quick. With that in mind I think its a very good thing that you're diving into all this. Things like these aren't as simple as "He was a madman so we'd best forget all about it". If you do that, with all due respect, then all you do is risk to end up making the same mistakes again.
Just because you are not a good person, doesn't mean you aren't a "leader." This seems more like a grammar question lol
The initial casualties from the blast were 60-80k. The final estimate with long term deaths in account was 135k. The estimated AMERICAN casualties for a land invasion of Japan were around 1 million. The Japanese tactics, and their plan to force civilians to fight on the home islands would have added millions more. The bombings with these estimates now seem very justified. In fact, the bombs most likely SAVED lives because if there was a land invasion, the Japanese might not have surrendered tell Tokyo and Kyoto fell. On the main topic, Hitler qualifies in many aspects as a leader. If it wasn't for the war Germany would most likely be an even bigger economic powerhouse, as the wall never would have been put up and no reunification would have had to take place.
No. He is a delusional power hungry man. He did horrible things to innocent people. All because he felt like it?
There is no debate that he was not a leader. We are agreeing on whether he had leadership qualites or not; we are not debating the fundamentals of Nazism. Hitler worked his way up in society, lead millions, and while he did terrible things, he was a leader. The morals of Nazi's are irrelevant here.
Just finished a unit on this in school myself, and wrote a research paper on the topic of resistance to the Nazi regime. Undoubtedly, he was a leader, and genuinely very popular with many Germans, at least initially. Most didn't like the Weimar Republic (the government before Hitler), so they were glad for a stronger, more centrally focused government like during the days of the Kaiser. Hitler had charisma and knew how to rally people to his cause; by blaming already unpopular, minority groups for problems. Though he was an incredibly misguided, racist, anti-Semitic, and mentally unstable mass-murderer, Hitler was an exceptionally intelligent man who knew what made people tick and lead his country successfully for years.
You say he wasn't a leader, and then you called him a dictator - which completely contradicts your earlier statement. And yes, Hitler was a fan of parties and... paths? ._.
Of course Hitler was a leader How did the discussion go? What did the teacher have to say? I'm not sure if I misunderstand the question or if the question is just a bit odd to discuss about.
Personally, Hitler was very smart, cunning and tactically minded. Now before he went 'insane', he was actually a great leader. He bought Germany out of a deep recession/hyperinflation and rallied up his troops like no other leader could. Then once he started taking other countries, he did so quickly and with ease. While the rest of Europe failed to ever beat each other through the many years of fighting, Hitler took a lot of Europe, very quickly. Leader = dictator, monarch, president etc etc etc. A king and queen is a leader, but they're a monarch. There are many reasons why Hitler apparently hated Jewish people: Got rejected by a Jewish girl Got declined into art school by a Jewish man He was a Christian and the story that Judas betrayed Jesus was the Jewish religion betraying Christianity
I did a few units on Hitler during my Modern History course in High School, he was a pretty amazing leader. He just had the wrong ideas ... There really is no denying his great leadership as he completely transformed a poverty stricken Germany (originally the weimar Republic) into an economical powerhouse in under 2 decades. His policies were great, and they worked. If he didn't fo any of those horrific things, that I'm sure you all know about so i won't go into detail, he may even have been classed as one of the greatest leaders of the modern age due to the accomplishments he achieved. (I'm not in any way defending hitler, just stating that he was a good leader )
