Hitler converts to Islam

Are they all talking about the same person? There's plenty of written evidence that Robin Hood existed.

At this point you'd be better served meandering over to a conspiracy website. It's an uncontroversial truth a historic figure named Jesus was running around 1st Century Palestine, and if your only goal here is to spread your opinion that one didn't exist you don't have anything to contribute to the discussion at hand.

Move along or at least stop trying to derail the thread.
 
However, if Hitler were to convert to Islam at some point in his early life (he really couldn't do it after becoming Fuhrer) he would never have been in the position to take over Germany. This is basically changing him so much that he's unrecognizable to us, and we're basically postulating an idea that Hitler is irrelevant.

Now if someone like Himmler converted to Islam while in the hierarchy of the Nazi Party that would be something...
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
Roughly-contemporary evidence, analogous to the written evidence for other historical people of his time, in sober history books?

Bronze age folklore.

Who is this 'Chrestus' guy, anyway?

Christians don't need any pesky evidence to prove their Jesus existed, they have the Bible, and that's enough.
 
Last edited:
Bronze age folklore.

Who is this 'Chrestus' guy, anyway?

You can say the same thing about many other figures of Antiquity. Jesus happens to be held up to some strangely high standard which his contemporaries are not. To accept Jesus's existence doesn't mean to accept the New Testament as fact, it simply means you accept the absolute certain evidence that some Aramaic-speaking Jewish guy named Yeshua bar Yosef went around preaching a radical version of Judaism in 1st century Judea.

However, if Hitler were to convert to Islam at some point in his early life (he really couldn't do it after becoming Fuhrer) he would never have been in the position to take over Germany. This is basically changing him so much that he's unrecognizable to us, and we're basically postulating an idea that Hitler is irrelevant.

Now if someone like Himmler converted to Islam while in the hierarchy of the Nazi Party that would be something...

Himmler already had his strange neopagan thing, Islamic Himmler would find Hitler's thoughts on Islam reassuring, but otherwise the religious views would still be considered fringe.
 
Himmler already had his strange neopagan thing, Islamic Himmler would find Hitler's thoughts on Islam reassuring, but otherwise the religious views would still be considered fringe.

True, but he might have then been more fervent in hoping to inspire resistance to the British/Soviets in Palestine and Iran by sending arms and advisers. Tiny changes, but potentially interesting.
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
Warning
It's an uncontroversial truth a historic figure named Jesus was running around 1st Century Palestine

And lots of people, Mohammed and Hitler included, have used him confirm their irrational beliefs.

Isa bin Mariam is an Islamic prophet, too - just not the important one.
 
And lots of people, Mohammed and Hitler included, have used him confirm their irrational beliefs.

Isa bin Mariam is an Islamic prophet, too - just not the important one.


It's pretty clear after a page of this that you're more interested in antagonizing people than in discussing what the thread is actually about. Don't troll.
 
Back on topic. Why is it assumed Hitler let alone other Nazis who may also be sympathetic to Islam would publicly reveal their ATL conversion?

Granted if someone or some group / foreign government is able to leak information regarding Hitler's or another Nazi's ATL conversion earlier enough to potentially threaten their rise to power that is another matter, yet had it happened in ATL and was leaked decades later would for better or worse likely have roughly the same historical significance as Hitler's possible monorchism or Johann von Leers and other Nazis post-war conversions.
 
Last edited:
Prior to the Nazis winning power , a Muslim Hitler becomes an odd historical footnote. However, after the nazis seize power it becomes more possible. The Nazis were reportedly planning on eventually destroying Christianity as a Jewish offshoot after they finishhed the Final solution for the Jews. Most of that focused on neopagan and occultism. But perhaps Der Furher has a private conversion with Al - husseini who he then sends back to the Middle east. Al Husseini then spreads the story of the secret revert to Islam, Hitler, to the muslim Brotherhood and other Arab nationalists. Perhaps the revolts in Iraq and the mandate become more successful. The Egyptians were considering changing sides as Rommel seemed nearly invincible. A story going around about a secret imam controlling what was considered the most powerful empire on earth fighting the godless communists, perfidious albion and the zionists could inflame the arab masses. Might bring the shia along as the secret imam from the end of days.
 
An openly Muslim Hitler would definitely be the odd man out in Austrian or German politics. If he manages to attract political followers, they would be rather different followers than IOTL, and there most likely would be a lot less of them.
A Muslim Hitler cannot win an election or build a coalition. Even converting before 1943 would highly compromise him. Roman Catholics were able to nix the killing of Germany's imbeciles. So, Muslim Hitler ain't going to work, even in a totalitarian country the Catholics had enough power to oppose the Nazis in OTL.
 
A Muslim Hitler cannot win an election or build a coalition. Even converting before 1943 would highly compromise him.

Yes, certainly.

Roman Catholics were able to nix the killing of Germany's imbeciles. So, Muslim Hitler ain't going to work, even in a totalitarian country the Catholics had enough power to oppose the Nazis in OTL.

Actually key Lutheran bishops and pastors publicly protested first, and were no less opposed to the policy than the Catholic clergy. Naturally, Lutherans, too, would find it very weird to vote for a German party led by an avowed Muslim.
 
He never gets anywhere near power. It is often underestimated just how much Nazism depended on traditional German anti-Semitism (NOT just anti-Semitism of the kind the Mufti of Jerusalem knew and espoused, but a particularly German form of it) and anti-Slavism that dated back to the Teutonic Knights and Holy Roman Empire in order to gain popular appeal.

The elite Nazi party member in June 1941 thought he was marching east to destroy Judeo-Bolshevism in its nest and allow a German racially pure autarky to form. The average German soldier in June 1941 thought that he was fighting for German Christian civilization against the barbarians of the east. There was a real difference in that, but the Nazis could taper over that. Muslim Nazis would not be able to.
 
Yes, certainly.



Actually key Lutheran bishops and pastors publicly protested first, and were no less opposed to the policy than the Catholic clergy. Naturally, Lutherans, too, would find it very weird to vote for a German party led by an avowed Muslim.
I was going by memory, so same difference.
 
Top