How to Make Adolf Hitler Less of a Bigot/Symbol of Evil?

[V-J]

At no stage did Hitler have sufficient popular support in the Nazi Party to govern, nor was he ever able to form a political coalition that would have provided him with a legitimate basis to govern.

I'm sorry, what? Hitler came first, easily first, in both seats and the popular vote, by a clear plurality in both. He was then - eventually, after Hindenburg and Papen had exhausted their other options, which generally involved co-opting the Nazis in a secondary role - invited by the President to form a government. This is how things work in Parliamentary systems. It was certainly a hell of a lot more conventional in the manner of its formation and more popularly-based than the 'presidential cabinets' of Papen and von Schleicher which had governed for the previous few years.

Did the Nazis get a majority of the seats in the Reichstag, or a majority of the popular vote? - in both cases, no, but then it is utterly exceptional in Parliamentary systems for parties to gain either. And by multi-party Weimar standards, the Nazis' thirty-three percent of the vote in November '32 was actually pretty substantial for a party coming first. I'm not actually sure the SPD ever achieved that under Weimar.

 

[Arafeel]

If Bavaud is successful in his assassination attempt, Hitler could become National Socialism`s Lenin.

 

[Alien and Sedition Bat]

What he [Hitler] did during Barbarossa was unavoidable given the sad state of German Logistics and general behavior. And the war he had planned, just the war, would have killed millions, this is true. But thats war. Its horrible.

Strategos, listen to yourself. Are you aware of what you're implying here?

But it might be possible to convince him to not engage in whole slaughter of Russian Jews and Slavs. Especially if there is no need to rob the people he conquers as he goes along.

Just how would it be possible? We're talking about a Hitler who's already in power and already geared up to conquer the world. We're talking about a Nazi Party and SS steeped in the worst form of race supremacism and hate to ever appear on this planet. Just who is going to "convince" him? Hitler was a malignant narcissist; he was following his own game plan laid out in Mein Kampf. He thought he was smarter than anyone else and hence always right. Everyone, whether friend or foe, was seen as an extension of his own ego. Convincing Hitler the dictator to become a "nice" version of himself belongs in the ASB section of this forum.

Of course, if you create a POD before World War One (like Hitler getting a ticket to the United States circa 1912, going to art school, becoming a pulp magazine illustrator or an ad agency artist) then you butterfly away the Nazi Party and the particular type of World War Two that it caused. But you'd still have to factor in Hitler's narcissistic personality disorder that might cause him to become the leader of some kind of small-time extremist group in New York or the guru of a New Age cult in California.

 

[Strategos]

Strategos, listen to yourself. Are you aware of what you're implying here?

Yes, war is horrifying and on the scale of WWII, millions dying in a major war between Industrialized powers, assuming it last more than a year, is unavoidable. And a Hitler who doesnt go to war with the USSR at all is a nearly unrecognizable Hitler.

Just how would it be possible? We're talking about a Hitler who's already in power and already geared up to conquer the world. Were's talking about a Nazi Party and SS steeped in the worst form of race supremacism and hate to ever appear on this planet. Just who is going to "convince" him? Hitler was a malignant narcissist; he was following his own game plan laid out in Mein Kampf. He thought he was smarter than anyone else and hence always right. Everyone, whether friend or foe, was seen as an extension of his own ego. Convincing Hitler the dictator to become a "nice" version of himself belongs in the ASB section of this forum.

Of course, if you create a POD before World War One (like Hitler getting a ticket to the United States circa 1912, going to art school, becoming a pulp magazine illustrator or an ad agency artist) then you butterfly away the Nazi Party and the particular type of World War Two that it caused. But you'd still have to factor in Hitler's narcissistic personality disorder that might cause him to become the leader of some kind of small-time extremist group in New York or a New Age cult leader in California.

No to the bolded. Thats just retarded. His most grandiose plans were Continental Europe to the Urals, North Africa and maybe parts of the Caucuses and a bit of the Middle East. Not the entire world.


How would it be possible to moderate his opinions? Maybe his generals or someone else convince him to hold off on slaughtering them until the war is over and then once it is Speer or somebody else reminds him that somebody needs to grow the food...cue a chunk of Russia being reserved for the Russian Slavs to some degree. Just enough moderation that he lets them live.

Maybe not...nicely...but still. He might even try to steal/marry off Slavic women with sufficiently Aryan features to German/Polish men who cant find a wife at home. Still horrible but not quite as bad as OTL.


Look. The goal isnt to make Hitler a good guy, just lessen him from Ultimate Evil that some beleive him to be.

 

[Alien and Sedition Bat]

Originally Posted by Strategos
What he [Hitler] did during Barbarossa was unavoidable given the sad state of German Logistics and general behavior. And the war he had planned, just the war, would have killed millions, this is true. But thats war. Its horrible.

This is like saying, what he [Stalin] did during the Ukrainian famine was unavoidable given the sad state of Soviet agronomy.

 

[Colin]

My intent when I created this thread was not for it to evolve (or, more appropriately, devolve) to this degree. My sincerest apologies to those who have visited it and witnessed this catastrophe/train wreck.

EDIT: My original theory (or question) was: was pluralism or open acceptance of minority cultures compatible with European fascism/national socialism in the 1940s?

I think that the very title of your thread inevitably has attracted the sort of posters that you have received, if your real question was as above then it would have been better to have named the thread something like is fascism ever compatible with acceptance of minority cultures.

Personally my view on this is a very firm no. Fascism/National Socialism as expressed in the 30's was very much about the glorification of the Nationalistic norm. It always required an enemy and minorities provided that enemy.

 

[Mr.J]

I think that the very title of your thread inevitably has attracted the sort of posters that you have received, if your real question was as above then it would have been better to have named the thread something like is fascism ever compatible with acceptance of minority cultures.

Personally my view on this is a very firm no. Fascism/National Socialism as expressed in the 30's was very much about the glorification of the Nationalistic norm. It always required an enemy and minorities provided that enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_Integralism

I don't know how possible this is outside of Brazil (though some people say Salazar in Portugal and the fascists in Ireland were similar), and parts of the movement were quite anti-Semitic, but it's a start.

 

[BBadolato]

The problem with the premise if I remember right is that Hitler's antisemitism was one of the things that helped the nazi's as far as support went. At the most you could either make his antisemitism less extreme to the point wanting to exterminate the jews but still consider deporting them? Even if we went with him being anti-communist to the point of wanting to kill only the communists of the USSR and not make him as racist as he was it would be tough to formulate the new "nazi" ideological and probably lead to a more cautious USSR.

 

[Enigmajones]

In my timeline, Hitler is remembered a young radical. Hitler T-Shirts become very popular in the West after the Second World War as a symbol of mild teenage rebellion. Ala Che Guevara.

This pic by the way.

 

[Alien and Sedition Bat]

The picture you chose fits well with the Che-style idealization scenario. Hitler's round head is turned into a long, lean aristocratic one, with an almost beak-like nose. Remove the moustache and the characteristic Hitler haircut, and who do you have? Senator John Kerry? Gary Cooper? Sean Penn? Daniel Day Lewis? I dunno but it's surely not the real life Adolf.

 

[Enigmajones]

The picture you chose fits well with the Che-style idealization scenario. Hitler's round head is turned into a long, lean aristocratic one, with an almost beak-like nose. Remove the moustache and the characteristic Hitler haircut, and who do you have? Senator John Kerry? Gary Cooper? Sean Penn? Daniel Day Lewis? I dunno but it's surely not the real life Adolf.

Well the mustache stays and never loses the limited popularity it held IOTL. And that was an illustration circa 1923, about a month before his death in my timeline.

 

[Strategos]

This is like saying, what he [Stalin] did during the Ukrainian famine was unavoidable given the sad state of Soviet agronomy.

No, it was logistics. The Nazi had a choice between shipping weapons and clothing or food. So they just stole food from the locals and shot all who resisted. Which led to problems.

The problem with the premise if I remember right is that Hitler's antisemitism was one of the things that helped the nazi's as far as support went. At the most you could either make his antisemitism less extreme to the point wanting to exterminate the jews but still consider deporting them? Even if we went with him being anti-communist to the point of wanting to kill only the communists of the USSR and not make him as racist as he was it would be tough to formulate the new "nazi" ideological and probably lead to a more cautious USSR.

He DID try to expell them en masse. But America refused to take then and Britain refused to ship them somewhere in the Empire. So concentration camps for slave labor and then extermination later on.

The picture you chose fits well with the Che-style idealization scenario. Hitler's round head is turned into a long, lean aristocratic one, with an almost beak-like nose. Remove the moustache and the characteristic Hitler haircut, and who do you have? Senator John Kerry? Gary Cooper? Sean Penn? Daniel Day Lewis? I dunno but it's surely not the real life Adolf.

Have you seen the picture of Hitler standing there, with the view from his right side? There is an editted one where they take away his moustache. He looks eerily respectable.

 

[Shaby]

No, it was logistics. The Nazi had a choice between shipping weapons and clothing or food. So they just stole food from the locals and shot all who resisted. Which led to problems.

Oh, and Einsatzgruppen were there just to make sure handover went nicely and without problem...

The entire food requisitioning was just a tiny part of the problem. That alone would be bad enough. However the Nazi Ostplan consisted of something much worse and more deliberate. it envisioned a radical and complete change of population structure in the East. Literally 10s of millions of people were to be displaced, either through hunger, slave labor, outright elimination (or vernichtung) or driving them to the East towards Urals. This was done in order to free the land for German settlers who would live off the work of Slavs who remained and were 'domesticated' for slaves. The strugle against Jews and Communism was just a mask for a plan to make the East what the West was for Americans in 19th century.

This plan was very specific. It was developed in Mein Kampf. Many people didn't take it literally in that time, but this frightening vision almost came to fruition.

And yeah. Failing to expell the Jews from Germany gave them every excuse to KILL them? Really? This is what it seems to me you are saying. It also seems to me you are trying to diminish the atrocities by making them seem an unfortunate part of the war when it clearly was not, but an integral part of an orchestrated, deliberate and approved on the highest level campaign of extermination of the population that was in the way of Hitler's plan.

 

[Ian the Admin]

What he did during Barbarossa was unavoidable given the sad state of German Logistics and general behavior. And the war he had planned, just the war, would have killed millions, this is true. But thats war. Its horrible.

No, it was logistics. The Nazi had a choice between shipping weapons and clothing or food. So they just stole food from the locals and shot all who resisted. Which led to problems.

Right, Hitler and the Nazis didn't set out to exterminate or enslave anyone in Eastern Europe, they didn't do anything that any other random conqueror starting a big war would do. And it's perfectly reasonable and normal for someone to go on about how Hitler was just doing things out of expediency and thus all those people talking about the Nazi extermination groups must be full of it.

Wait, this is OTL.

Banned for genocide denial and support of Nazism.

 

[King Thomas]

Have him die at the start of 1939. He has not at that time done the Holocaust or had vast numbers of people killed, and the ones he has killed are generally his own people rather then those abroad. At least a few of those have committed (unautherized) murder which was a capital offence even in some democracies at the time, or were genuine spies. He is popular with a lot of the German people, and has made Germany respected abroad. The T4 program has started but that is top secret at the time and many other countries treat the disabled very badly as well anyway. He has annexed Austria without a fight-very impressive.

Then you have to a) have his successor not start a war and b) not have the Nazi ecomony totally implode. Perhaps like Spain, 30 or more years later Germany becomes democratic once more.

 

[Enigmajones]

Have him die at the start of 1939. He has not at that time done the Holocaust or had vast numbers of people killed, and the ones he has killed are generally his own people rather then those abroad.

He'll be remembered like Trujillo. A horrible dictator and murderer, but a local one.

 

[Shaby]

Have him die at the start of 1939.

The funny thing was, at that precise moment, Hitler could still get entirely disassociated from those crimes and his successor, if he is clever enough could pinpoint the blame on the out of control radical elements and use it to eliminate certain individuals. He would do this not because he disagreed with the aforementioned policies, but just to get rid of nasty competition and as for T4 program, once it leaked it actually caused an outrage among those who got to know about it and were not high ranking Nazis.

Most of those outraged people actually believed it was being done without Hitler's knowledge and tried to make him aware of this by writing, but of course to no avail. So if Hitler's is offed sometime in 1939, he would avoid being blamed for the crimes the Nazi committed. The truth would probably come out after the Nazi regime in Germany collapses and honest historical account is made and probably someone would figure out the doctrine of 'Working towards Fuehrer' and so on. But still as horrible as they were, those crimes wouldn't be considered really utterly evil as those perpetrated in 1942-44 timeframe and collectively known as the Holocaust and Ostplan.

 

[EternalCynic]

If Hitler died as late as autumn 1941, leading to an implosion of Nazi Germany, history would have remembered him as a dangerous psychopath, but not the personification of pure evil. He was still vastly popular among ordinary Germans, wartime rationing was not in effect, and people even sent petitions to the Fuhrer asking him to rein in the Gestapo. He was seen as a genius for conquering all of Europe within eighteen months. The ensuing civil war might even paralyze the Nazi bureaucracy to prevent the worst of the crimes.

In post-war Germany, the western allies may be willing to co-opt Goring, Himmler, and Goebbels to serve the new government, since the "Final Solution" was still a hypothetical which could be swept under the rug. I'm sure FDR and Churchill are dirty enough to do this.

 

[Ian Hathaway]

I'm sure FDR and Churchill are dirty enough to do this.

FDR wouldn't have had a say in '41 as the USA had no involvement militarily. The war with the USSR was in full swing by this time leaving the Germans to try to negotiate terms with the UK who, even if they agreed peace terms, would not be able to demand anything of the Germans or who would govern the new look Nazi party without Hitler.

My guess is that by this time things had already started to unfold and the atrocities would have happened regardless of who was in charge. But the blame would no longer sit with Hitler ... he might even be hailed as the man who kept his subordinates in check who, once Hitler was gone, had free reign to commit any evil that they wanted.

 

[modelcitizen]

Prevent his brother Edmund from dying of measles.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Childhood_and_education ,

The death of his younger brother, Edmund, from measles on 2 February 1900 deeply affected Hitler. He changed from being confident and outgoing and an excellent student, to a morose, detached, and sullen boy who constantly fought with his father and teachers.

Edit: Read that excerpt and then think of the miserable asshole in the Downfall bunker scene. That sums it up to a T.