View Full Version : Hitler does not hate Jewish People
Sinclair
September 20th, 2008, 12:51 AM
When Hitler still 12 years old, he's traveliing down the road to go to another village. Then suddenly a group of naughty boys attack him, one young Jew boy help him althought it cost that Jew boy lives.
In the next few years, Hitler is one of the most important political figure... What will happen next?
Trotsky
September 20th, 2008, 09:42 AM
When Hitler still 12 years old, he's traveliing down the road to go to another village. Then suddenly a group of naughty boys attack him, one young Jew boy help him althought it cost that Jew boy lives.
In the next few years, Hitler is one of the most important political figure... What will happen next?
He joins the German Army to fight in WWI, comes out of it embittered and driven. Hitler joins a political party, makes it his own, and once the Depression hits comes to power and makes Germany his. He leads it down a path toward self-destruction, and while losing the greatest war in history and overseeing the mass-murder of millions of Jews and other "undesirables" he kills himself at his command post as his empire collapses into oblivion.
Seriously, I don't think this incident as you describe would change much in his worldview. IIRC there were a couple other instances where Jews helped or tried to help him, and he still hated them.
HJ Tulp
September 20th, 2008, 01:45 PM
Goering was saved by Jews after the Beerhall Putsch. Didn't change a thing.
oberdada
September 20th, 2008, 04:58 PM
The Shoa wasn't personell.
LylyCSM2
September 20th, 2008, 05:02 PM
The point is not that Hitler hated Jews. Hitler hated anyone and anything not "Germanic", and would have eliminated all else had he been given his way. The Jews were simply the most readily accessible victim at the time, he would have moved on to the next most vulnerable group after he had eliminated as many Jews as he could.
Draco
September 20th, 2008, 05:39 PM
Goering was saved by Jews after the Beerhall Putsch. Didn't change a thing.
Göring’s anti-semitism seems to have been motivated more by potential profit and politics than any true hatred of Jews.
Dungeon Dwelling Dragon
September 20th, 2008, 06:11 PM
I don't see why you couldn't have a Hitler who didn't hate Jews for some reason or another. But, as far as Nazi / Fascist Germany goes I think you're going to have some level of anti-semitism. On the other hand, just because people dislike a group doesn't mean they automatically try to esterminate them. So I don't see why you couldn't have a Nazi Germany that was no more anti-semetic then, say, Imperial Germany, or perhaps even went so far as to institute segregation / aparthied / ect. but didn't build deathcamps.
Rex Britanniae
September 20th, 2008, 06:33 PM
The fact of the matter is, if he didn't hate Jews specifically, that doesn't make much of a difference. He still hated all groups not seen as Germanic. Even if, for the reason you described, he likes Jews, and miraculously they are spared (highly unlikely), you seem to forget that they weren't the only ones killed. In fact, they weren't even the first group of people killed.
So, what happens is about 6,000,000 survive, maybe in ghettos, maybe not. But the Holocaust is still a Holocaust, and it is no less terrible. The only difference is that modern day videos and groups which emphasize the Holocaust would not focus on the Jews, but other groups, perhaps the Gypsies, as they had the second highest number of deaths.
Draco
September 20th, 2008, 06:36 PM
Your Hasidic Jews are probably still going to be openly persecuted in any kind of nationalistic Germany. However I think its entirely possible to have a fascists Germany were those Jews that have adopted German names and live and act like any other good little Germans could avoid any anti-Semitism worse than that found in other Western nations at the time.
Mark E.
September 20th, 2008, 07:39 PM
You would probably need to get Hitler admitted to the Vienna Art Academy and keep him out of politics.
Trotsky
September 20th, 2008, 07:58 PM
I don't see why you couldn't have a Hitler who didn't hate Jews for some reason or another.
While true, the OP suggests that it could be done with an isolated incident before the true extent of his hate gets released by the aftermath of the Great War.
Jomazi
September 20th, 2008, 08:12 PM
IIRC in "Mein Kampf" Hitler remembers how at first he didn't understand why the Jews were blamed for the misfortunes of Germany and the German people, but then he slowly came to realize that behind everything bad, degenerated and harmful there was a Jew pulling the strings.
Now kids draw a line to "the protocols of the elders of Zion" and you're there!
Hitler will always be antisemitic, question is how much.
Admiral Canaris
September 20th, 2008, 08:19 PM
The fact of the matter is, if he didn't hate Jews specifically, that doesn't make much of a difference. He still hated all groups not seen as Germanic. Even if, for the reason you described, he likes Jews, and miraculously they are spared (highly unlikely), you seem to forget that they weren't the only ones killed. In fact, they weren't even the first group of people killed.
Actually, Yiddish-speaking Jews in Eastern Europe were usually thought to be "ethnically German", and Germans often supported them over the local Slavs. Ludendorff wanted to use them as part of his plan to Germanise the Baltic lands, for example. I don't see why, with the right POD, you couldn't have Hitler thinking similarly.
So, what happens is about 6,000,000 survive, maybe in ghettos, maybe not. But the Holocaust is still a Holocaust, and it is no less terrible. The only difference is that modern day videos and groups which emphasize the Holocaust would not focus on the Jews, but other groups, perhaps the Gypsies, as they had the second highest number of deaths.
Sorry, no. It was the very deliberate and arbitrary killing of the Jews that got the spotlight, that and that they had (frankly) a better spin and more media influence than, say, the 20+ million Slavs that were killed. Without Jews, no gas chambers, just GULag-style camps for Communists, Gypsies and POWs. And those wouldn't be half as well remembered.
General Zod
September 20th, 2008, 08:49 PM
Sorry, no. It was the very deliberate and arbitrary killing of the Jews that got the spotlight, that and that they had (frankly) a better spin and more media influence than, say, the 20+ million Slavs that were killed. Without Jews, no gas chambers, just GULag-style camps for Communists, Gypsies and POWs. And those wouldn't be half as well remembered.
Sadly, I have to concur. Without the Jews, any organized genocide of Nazism against any other ethnic group (say the Roms, or the Slavs) will get at best as much long-term cultural attention as the even more bloodiest genocide of Ukrainians, various minorities, and political opponents by Stalin, or Armenians by the Ottomans. That is, historically known, but no cause celebre in popular culture.
Heck, in my country, Gypsies are the target of a racist moral panic happily fueled by media owned by our tycoon PM and the (somewhat far) rightist party coalition at power this very moment, but even our dear little neo-fascists (very loosely speaking) in charge would never ever daresay anything anti-semitic. No mainstream politician would dare (well, except the loony far left, but apparently they have the licence to say anything, as long as it has the anti-imperialistic excuse). Such is the difference between the cultural legacy of the Jew Holocaust and the one of the other minorities.
Sinclair
September 20th, 2008, 10:07 PM
If Germany didn't lost and had such great depression, Hitler maybe will never show off his hate to Jews, only personal view.
Communist Wizard
September 20th, 2008, 10:11 PM
Sadly, I have to concur. Without the Jews, any organized genocide of Nazism against any other ethnic group (say the Roms, or the Slavs) will get at best as much long-term cultural attention as the even more bloodiest genocide of Ukrainians, various minorities, and political opponents by Stalin, or Armenians by the Ottomans. That is, historically known, but no cause celebre in popular culture.
Heck, in my country, Gypsies are the target of a racist moral panic happily fueled by media owned by our tycoon PM and the (somewhat far) rightist party coalition at power this very moment, but even our dear little neo-fascists (very loosely speaking) in charge would never ever daresay anything anti-semitic. No mainstream politician would dare (well, except the loony far left, but apparently they have the licence to say anything, as long as it has the anti-imperialistic excuse). Such is the difference between the cultural legacy of the Jew Holocaust and the one of the other minorities.
Are you Austrian, Hungarian, Romanian, or similar?
General Zod
September 20th, 2008, 10:50 PM
Are you Austrian, Hungarian, Romanian, or similar?
Italian. What part of media tycoon Prime Minister escaped your notice ? :)
I really doubt any other European or major democratic nation is presently burdened with the disgrace of a megalomanic, crook, incompetent media tycoon with Napoleonic tendencies only matched by his ineptitude, no democratic instinct to speak of, and a wholly subservient party coalition of neo-fascists, racist tax-cheater separatists, crypto mob sympathizers, and assorted crook yes-men, in charge. :(:mad:
IIRC only Thailand had someone similar in charge, but even they had the good grace to oust him. :rolleyes:
Sadly the political body of my nation is nothing but thorough in his mistakes. He already impoverished us and made us the laugh and shame of Europe, and we put him in charge thrice, again with the promise of tax cuts for the cheaters and being tough on the (illegal) aliens and street crime by the same, which was wildly overblown by the tycoon's media (which happen to be half of our national broadcasts and several influential newspapers) in the electoral campaign.
Gypsies were the minority whose members' criminal behavior was overblown worse of all, to the proportions of a moral panic (according to his media before the election, you could scarcely have a walk without tripping on an illegal alien robber, rapist, burglar, or all of the three, Gypsies being the worst). That's why I can testify that anti-Gypsy racism is very alive and well in Europe, at least in my country. There is no specific taboo against anti-Gypsy racism, at least among those who do not have one against racism per se. Very few care of or remember the Gypsy Holocaust (or the Slav one, or the homosexual one), whereas the Jew Holocaust is very present in popular consciousness and even far right mainstream politicians are very careful to distance themselves from anti-semitism (which if anything, is skirted by the loony far left, in their fanatical anti-sionist stance).
Therefore, I'm quite persuaded that without the sacrifice of the Jews, the Holocaust would have been a minor footone, in popular consciousness.
Ridwan Asher
September 21st, 2008, 04:14 AM
.... or Armenians by the Ottomans.
More like, Armenians and Ottomans were genociding each other....
King Thomas
September 21st, 2008, 04:15 AM
So am I, the other groups that Hitler killed were often disliked by some of the non-Nazis. Such as Gypsies (seen as a pest back then and by some people now) homosexuals (illegal back then in the UK until the 1960's) mentally ill people, and petty criminals. Or whilst not disliked (Slavs) they would not have been remembered because of the Iron Curtain.
The Jewish people were often fully assimilated, and many came from Western countries.
Slamet
September 21st, 2008, 04:33 AM
IIRC only Thailand had someone similar in charge, but even they had the good grace to oust him. :rolleyes:
What about Myamnar/Burma?
Ofaloaf
September 21st, 2008, 04:45 AM
What about Myamnar/Burma?
We made a film where Rambo blew up the bad guys. That counts.
General Zod
September 21st, 2008, 05:30 AM
What about Myamnar/Burma?
Only democratically elected Presidents/Prime Ministers count. Well, on second thoughts, I suppose that makes GWB (well he stole the first election but won an honest victory in the second, regrettable choice as it may be), Putin (very questionable elections but probably he would have won without riggings anyway) and Chavez (ditto). Anyway, we still did worse than everybody else: in unquestionably free elections, even if the Americans or the other EU members would have been rightly horrified to see Mr. Murdoch use FoxNews to buy himself the Presidency, we did elect our megalomanic doofus thrice, Americans only twice (well, once. 2000 doesn't really count).
Grimm Reaper
September 21st, 2008, 06:58 AM
General Zod, with all respect, only the ignorant continue to pretend that Bush didn't win the 2000 election. Why not study how the American political system works instead of embarrassing yourself?
ZaphodBeeblebrox
September 21st, 2008, 07:15 AM
General Zod, with all respect, only the ignorant continue to pretend that Bush didn't win the 2000 election. Why not study how the American political system works instead of embarrassing yourself?
But he DIDN'T Win, At Least Not Legally ...
Heck if I were Bush ...
I'd Present that Line of Argument, And See if I could Turn it into an Attempt at a Real Third Term!
:p
Inferus
September 21st, 2008, 07:57 AM
There is quite a bit of psychological evidence that Hitler used the Jews as a surrogate for deep seated problems in his own life as well as scape-goats for the failure of Germany to win WWI (this included a grandfather he could not account for).
If Hitler had managed to overcome these psychological problems in his assumption of power, the US would have lost a great deal of technological supremacy (many Jews who would aid in America's tech lead, especially the Manhattan Project, came from Europe due to Hitler's violent program against their people). Not attacking the Jews would have also helped the educational programs of the Reich. Many scholars have pointed out the failures of a generation that came up during the Dreit Reich with an arrogant superiority complex without the teachers to establish it, many professors either ending up in the camps or abroad.
Most importantly, who is to say Hitler wouldn't instill all his hatred for socialism/communism leading to a venomous rage for the USSR that he wouldn't focus his entire life to the collapse of Marxism? There was the claim that Jews supported and initiated Marxism to achieve power. If the Jews are removed from the equation, then Hitler's rage can only focus on the communists. With such rage, who is to say that Hitler wouldn't focus solely on those who nearly ripped Germany apart after the loss of WWI.
rast
September 21st, 2008, 09:08 AM
The young Hitler that moved from Vienna to Munich pre WW1 did not yet show any signs of violent antisemitism. In Vienna, he had lived together with Jews and cooperated with some. He was a somewhat peculiar character but in no way the man that was to be the "Führer" of later years.
It must have been the WW1 experience that changed his character and the experience immediately after WW1 that shaped his antisemitism.
Almost all the major leaders of the extreme left were Jews, and Hitler was a firm believer of the "stab in the back". Jew and Bolshevist were synonyms for Hitler.
To conceive a Hitler that is not antisemitic, a strong right-wing Jew would be required as someone who guids and coaches him in the early 1920ies.
Milarqui
September 21st, 2008, 11:28 PM
Italian. What part of media tycoon Prime Minister escaped your notice ? :)
I really doubt any other European or major democratic nation is presently burdened with the disgrace of a megalomanic, crook, incompetent media tycoon with Napoleonic tendencies only matched by his ineptitude, no democratic instinct to speak of, and a wholly subservient party coalition of neo-fascists, racist tax-cheater separatists, crypto mob sympathizers, and assorted crook yes-men, in charge. :(:mad:
IIRC only Thailand had someone similar in charge, but even they had the good grace to oust him. :rolleyes:
Sadly the political body of my nation is nothing but thorough in his mistakes. He already impoverished us and made us the laugh and shame of Europe, and we put him in charge thrice, again with the promise of tax cuts for the cheaters and being tough on the (illegal) aliens and street crime by the same, which was wildly overblown by the tycoon's media (which happen to be half of our national broadcasts and several influential newspapers) in the electoral campaign.
Gypsies were the minority whose members' criminal behavior was overblown worse of all, to the proportions of a moral panic (according to his media before the election, you could scarcely have a walk without tripping on an illegal alien robber, rapist, burglar, or all of the three, Gypsies being the worst). That's why I can testify that anti-Gypsy racism is very alive and well in Europe, at least in my country. There is no specific taboo against anti-Gypsy racism, at least among those who do not have one against racism per se. Very few care of or remember the Gypsy Holocaust (or the Slav one, or the homosexual one), whereas the Jew Holocaust is very present in popular consciousness and even far right mainstream politicians are very careful to distance themselves from anti-semitism (which if anything, is skirted by the loony far left, in their fanatical anti-sionist stance).
Therefore, I'm quite persuaded that without the sacrifice of the Jews, the Holocaust would have been a minor footone, in popular consciousness.
Zod, I still don't understand how could Berlusconi be elected AGAIN when everybody knows he is a bast***. My aunt (she lives in Italy) positively loathes him because of all those things. You really need to kick him out and put someone like Di Pietro up there!
Dungeon Dwelling Dragon
September 22nd, 2008, 04:25 AM
The young Hitler that moved from Vienna to Munich pre WW1 did not yet show any signs of violent antisemitism. In Vienna, he had lived together with Jews and cooperated with some. He was a somewhat peculiar character but in no way the man that was to be the "Führer" of later years.
It must have been the WW1 experience that changed his character and the experience immediately after WW1 that shaped his antisemitism.
Almost all the major leaders of the extreme left were Jews, and Hitler was a firm believer of the "stab in the back". Jew and Bolshevist were synonyms for Hitler.
To conceive a Hitler that is not antisemitic, a strong right-wing Jew would be required as someone who guids and coaches him in the early 1920ies.
Well, they say all is fair in love and war. Hitler wouldn't be the first or last man to go all crusader, no remorse during a war. But if his war experiences left him driven and brutal, and the post-WWI experiences left him looking for a scapegoat, it's why not introduce another emotion /irrationalty breeding factor into his life - love.
I don't know if a Jew saving his life would help. But let's say he fell in love with a Jewish, or at least half-Jewish girl. That might be enough to tone him down a bit.
Churchill
September 22nd, 2008, 04:06 PM
Living as a poor man in Vienna and seeing Jewish pimps with their German prostitutes and Jewish gangsters living it up had an effect on Hitler as it did many other Austrians.
zeitenschmiede
September 22nd, 2008, 05:40 PM
Hurray for early 20th century clichés!
yourworstnightmare
September 23rd, 2008, 10:22 AM
There is anti- semitism and there is anti- semitism. While I don't think Hitler could ever like Jews, he might just decide to not try to exterminate them if things had been different.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.