AHC: Hitler, Germany's great loss

We all know Hitler was at base a nut, for whatever reason(s). Nonetheless, he was competent and charismatic, as proved by his becoming Fuhrer and creating a nationwide cult of personality about himself. So I occasionally wonder: was there a point in his career at which, had he died immediately thereafter, he would been remembered as a great leader rather than one of history's greatest villains?

This is not any kind of Hitler apologia. The man more than earned the loathing and revulsion that has been heaped upon him. I won't claim otherwise for an instant. My question is only about possible AH perceptions of him.
 

Ryan

Donor
After Munich (but before annexation of czechoslovakia) he'd be seen as a great German statesman who unified the German people and made Germany great again.

After the fall of France he'd be seen as a German napoleon probably.
 

jahenders

Banned
Those are good points.

Another option might be after annexing Czechoslovakia but before making demands for Danzig (which led to France and UK guaranteeing Polish independence) and the dissolution of various treaties.

I think the point at which he might be considered 'greatest' (but NOT nice) would be right after the Fall of France. If he had died then and someone else got smoothly into power, they might have been able to make peace with the UK and Commonwealth with Germany making serious gains and avoiding the Battle of Britain, Invasion of Russia, etc.

After Munich (but before annexation of czechoslovakia) he'd be seen as a great German statesman who unified the German people and made Germany great again.

After the fall of France he'd be seen as a German napoleon probably.
 
After the fall of France he'd be seen as a German napoleon probably.
Except Napoleon actually carried out many morally justifiable policies, whereas even the few "good" policies of Hitler were driven by an extremely bigoted ideology (ie smoking restrictions were tied to racial hygiene).
 

Ryan

Donor
Except Napoleon actually carried out many morally justifiable policies, whereas even the few "good" policies of Hitler were driven by an extremely bigoted ideology (ie smoking restrictions were tied to racial hygiene).

I thought that it was only late in the war that Hitler's evil was actually uncovered?

and therefore if he died immediately after the fall of France his bad points would be aggressive conqueror and treaty breaker rather than genocidal maniac.
 
I thought that it was only late in the war that Hitler's evil was actually uncovered?

and therefore if he died immediately after the fall of France his bad points would be aggressive conqueror and treaty breaker rather than genocidal maniac.

Proof of his evil acts still existed. If Germany was rapidly defeated, it would be uncovered.
 
After Munich (but before annexation of czechoslovakia) he'd be seen as a great German statesman who unified the German people and made Germany great again.

After the fall of France he'd be seen as a German napoleon probably.

The fall of France is your best bet. The fact of the matter is that without a war in 1939 (and hell, without annexing the rest of Czechoslovakia), the German economy would have collapsed. An analogy I've heard, which isn't perfect but it's close, is that Hitler put the entire German economy on the credit card and then went to war with the credit card company.

There are people here who can explain this much better than I can, so I'll let them do so.
 

Perkeo

Banned
The best moment to throw him under a bus would be between the Munich agreement and the November Progroms: Germany has every territory it could reasonably claim (expect Danzig, but that is going to be settled in the long term). The discrimination of Jews and political opposition is already undeniable, but no real genocide yet, and no WWII.

In other words: The crines he has committed so far can be played down as a necessary evil and small compared to his virtues.

I must emphasize: This is not my opinion - I personally think that Germany needed no salvation from the Weimar republic, nor from what little remained from the TOV in 1933. I just think this opinion is very populer ITTL.
 

Perkeo

Banned
The fall of France is your best bet. The fact of the matter is that without a war in 1939 (and hell, without annexing the rest of Czechoslovakia), the German economy would have collapsed. An analogy I've heard, which isn't perfect but it's close, is that Hitler put the entire German economy on the credit card and then went to war with the credit card company.

There are people here who can explain this much better than I can, so I'll let them do so.

The fall of France is too late. The Holocaust and WWII already begun, the Nazis have shown their real face and no one who gives a damn about human rights will admire him.
 
The fall of France is too late. The Holocaust and WWII already begun, the Nazis have shown their real face and no one who gives a damn about human rights will admire him.
Lots of leaders who have done Bad Things are admired. They just have to be associated with other, less repugnant, stuff as well. Otherwise H's entire reign would be regarded as bad from even before it started.
 
The fall of France is too late. The Holocaust and WWII already begun, the Nazis have shown their real face and no one who gives a damn about human rights will admire him.
Even as an intentionalist, it's difficult to describe the persecution of Jews and Poles pre-Wannsee as what we recognise as "The Holocaust", but if word gets leaked of the purges of the intelligentsia in German-occupied Poland, I suppose that would be a considerable black mark against his image.
 
Top