Was Hitler a great leader?

[Lantairu]

This is something I've been discussing with my friends recently and I want to know what you think. We can all agree that Adolf Hitler is one of the more evil people to exist, having killed over 6 million jews and taking away the homes and possesions of many more. However, as bad as his actiona may have been, he was a major influence to his people at the time. Not only was he able to help Germany recover from the first World War, but he also got a lot of one country to agree with him.

[MrRayan123]

Do you want the /pol/ answer or a serious answer. If it's the latter than honestly it depends on if the good effects are still there since 3rd Reich.

Edited November 26, 2015 by MrRayan123

[Crysta]

I can't recall him being particularly skilled at anything, except maybe speeches and manipulating national angst.

The latter of which doesn't need great leadership skills.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

His domestic policy and rhetoric were impressive.

Germany (Deutsches Reich) was down and out after the loss of WW I.

"Thanks" to denying the requirements of Treaty of Versailles it was only possible to rebuild the German economy.

Almost each German got work and the infrastructure developed well. Motorways were built (which was very handy for the tanks in the war later).

He did an excellent job to bring the German citizens on his side for his "ideology" with his confident and aggressive rhetoric style.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Mister IceTeaPeach

[Topazd]

Well, yes, if you exclude both women AND Jews from the statistics and introduce programs of outrageous military spending, you can get a significant drop in the unemployment figures. Germany did see economic growth under Hitler, but unethical policies and distorted figures need to be seen as such.

[Water Mage]

It's not to say he was a great leader, but he was definitely a charismatic one, but charisma is only one of the things you need to be a great leader, there's a lot more.

That being said if you read his backstory, you'll find him suprisingly...pathetic.

Seriously, it was dissapointing to learn that one of the world's most hated men to have been such a cowardly opportunist.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Water Mage

[blah the Prussian]

Short answer: no.

Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Seriously, he was a terrible leader. His economic policies, while at first successful, were unsustainable without war, which was one of the reasons he started WWII. His successes on the battlefield were largely due to the brilliance of his generals, and indeed Hitler often held the army's progress back. In terms of foreign policy, he squandered an alliance with the USSR and his successes with appeasement were solely due to British and French incompetence. Being able to convince commoners of anything is no great achievement. Finally, there was the ways he shot himself in the foot during the Russia campaign that I will get into later. So yeah, not a great leader by any means.

[Admiral "Bull" Halsey]

Is this topic gonna end up being one of those flame wars?

[Magical Glace]

He was a good propagandist. He did sway a large faction of the German population to his side through propaganda, you have to give him credit for that.

Beyond that.... no, not really.

[Topazd]

The 'credit' for that would belong to Goebbels, though.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Topazd

[blah the Prussian]

Nah, Hitler was a great speaker too. Geobbels, though, was the creator of the Fuhrer cult, and Himmler wanted to worship him as a god.

[Water Mage]

Nah, Hitler was a great speaker too. Geobbels, though, was the creator of the Fuhrer cult, and Himmler wanted to worship him as a god.

He did view himself as a messiah didn't he?

Him viewing himself like a messiah, Hitler's obssesion with creating a perfect and pure human race, the Aryan, followers that worpshipped him as a god, and his belief that the strong must subdue the weak...

Is it just me, or does Hitler's actions makes him very similar to JRPG villain?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Water Mage

[blah the Prussian]

Well actually Hitler himself didn't believe that, it's just that Himmler wanted to revive Norse Paganism with Hitler as the high priest of Odin. Hitler didn't want to do that, thou, because it would go over horribly with the Germans, so yeah. And Hitler was eviler than any jrpg villain. Incidentally, wait till Life sees this thread.

[Water Mage]

Well actually Hitler himself didn't believe that, it's just that Himmler wanted to revive Norse Paganism with Hitler as the high priest of Odin. Hitler didn't want to do that, thou, because it would go over horribly with the Germans, so yeah. And Hitler was eviler than any jrpg villain. Incidentally, wait till Life sees this thread.

Really? I always though that Hitler was the one most into the whole purification of humanity thing, then again Goebbels and his wife were really gung-ho about it too, and I've heard that Goebbels's wife really worshipped Hitler.

Also, I knew that the Nazis had interest in mythology, but I never knew it went as far as actually wanting to make Hitler a high priest of Odin.

Bu thinking about it, Hitler frankly didn't care about Germany, didn't he?

Or rather, he believed in the Germany he made up in his mind.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Water Mage

[blah the Prussian]

Well, Himmler wanted to do that, but no one else actually did. Hitler was more into the purification of the Aryan's and the conversion of everyone else into a slave race. Could you explain what you mean by that last bit?

[Tryhard]

He got people to agree with because of the destitute state that Germany was in following the First World War, and people will easily turn to extremism when in a dire situation, which Germany certainly was. While he did have some sort of charisma in terms of his speaking ability, I feel as though the former was more influential in why he gained power. He played on people's resentment of losing the First World War and having to pay reparations as per the Treaty of Versailles in order to rile them up.

He did attack Russia during the Winter, which is not the smartest move to say the least.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Tryhard

[Crysta]

To be perfectly honest, while it could just be a difference in culture or language or something, I found him to be a distracting spaz when he was giving his speeches and I have a hard time even giving him that in spite of the observable effects it had.

But you can never underestimate the impressionability of desperate poor people.

EDIT: I don't know German so that could be it lol.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Crysta

[Topazd]

Inadequate winter preparations certainly didn't help in the long run, but there were other poor decisions on Hitler's part that led to the outcome of the campaign. IIRC it's a somewhat popular account among historians that had Hitler focused on getting to Moscow right from the get-go instead of obsessing over other objectives, he would have had a good chance of actually succeeding. After that point, his apparent delusions about the circumstances of the front and his refusal to listen to his generals further exacerbated matters.

Though most of what I remember (or have been led to believe) comes from Beevor's Stalingrad and it's been a while since I read that, so blah could probably go into greater detail wrt this.

[blah the Prussian]

Okay, my as requested analysis of Operation Barbarossa: it is true that Hitler could have taken Moscow if he had struck towards it in August. It is also true that to do so would have been a mistake. Instead of striking towards Moscow, Hitler attacked the Ukraine, which was a. where a huge amount of Red Army divisions were surrounded and destroyed, b. essentially a checkpoint in terms of supplies; the farmlands of Ukraine were absolutely vital to making sure the Wehrmacht didn't starve, and c. home to a people who had every reason to want Stalin dead. To not take the Ukraine would have left the flank of the army taking Moscow vulnerable to attack and diasaster. Hitler failed to capitalize on the fact that the Ukrainians hated Stalin by showing them that he would make Stalin look like Jesus Christ himself, but even then there were a good deal of Ukrainian recruits into the SS. So I would say that not going for Moscow in August actually was the right move. Of course, Barbarossa itself was a stupid decision, because Stalin had every intention of leaving Europe to Hitler and taking Asia, but I digress. Barbarossa itself was held back by two factors. Firstly, Hitler had to pull Mussolini's ass out of the fire after he got bitchslapped by the Greeks, which delayed Barbarossa from May until June. If Hitler had invaded in May it is quite possible he could have taken Moscow. Of course, that would also have given the British a foothold in Europe, which was with good reason unacceptable. Secondly, Hitler made no real effort to capitalize on the fact that everyone fucking hated Stalin. At the beginning of the war, the average RedArmy soldier ran away from the Germans because he felt no need to die for Stalin. By 1942, Hitler had made clear that the Red Army wasn't fighting for Stalin or even Communism, they were fighting for the survival of the Russian race. Literally all Hitler had to do was practice what he preached about liberating people from Bolshevism, and he would have won Barbarossa easily. He had to go and be a Nazi, though, and the thought of an Aryan working with inferior Ukranians and Estonians was too much to bear. Despite all of the ways in which Hitler could have won Barbarossa, though, the only winning move remains not to play, as Stalin was quite receptive to the idea of joining the Axis, and even if Hitler won in Russia the cost to the Wehrmacht would have been so great they wouldn't have been able to beat the Western Allies. So there you have it; why Hitler was almost as shitty at being a strategist as he was shitty at being a good person.

[Water Mage]

Well, Himmler wanted to do that, but no one else actually did. Hitler was more into the purification of the Aryan's and the conversion of everyone else into a slave race. Could you explain what you mean by that last bit?

It's that Hitler constantly talked about restoring Germany, which got the people support him in the first place, and to be frank, it was because the germans lost a lot in the first world war, so a charismatic leader like Hitler came just in the right time , but in truth all really cared was the "pure" Germany" he dreamed of, not the actual Germany or it's people.

And I once heard, that he honestly thought that Germany betrayed him by losing the war, and if he was going down, the Germany was going down with him.

Also, that Operation Barbarossa analysis was interesting, but my god, was Hitler a cocky and stupid bastard, he really didn't think of the minor details of things.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Water Mage

[CyborgZeta]

The Nazis under Hitler did bring Germany out of depression and re-established a strong military. Nazi Germany also had a surprisingly strong anti-smoking movement.

However, as a military leader, Hitler wasn't that great. As I understand, he frequently clashed with his military leaders, which served only to hinder Germany's war efforts.

Edited November 26, 2015 by CyborgZeta

[blah the Prussian]

It's that Hitler constantly talked about restoring Germany, which got the people support him in the first place, and to be frank, it was because the germans lost a lot in the first world war, so a charismatic leader like Hitler came just in the right time , but in truth all really cared was the "pure" Germany" he dreamed of, not the actual Germany or it's people.

And I once heard, that he honestly thought that Germany betrayed him by losing the war, and if he was going down, the Germany was going down with him.

Also, that Operation Barbarossa analysis was interesting, but my god, was Hitler a cocky and stupid bastard, he really didn't think of the minor details of things.

The German people seemed to agree with him about the ideal level of pureness. And yeah, he wrote something to the effect of "the Russians must be the true master race if they beat us" in 1945. Hitler got militarily cocky because he thought that because he won the France campaign he was a military genius. Also in all fairness he handled the Soviet counteroffensive of 1941 quite well. But yeah, he wanted to be the second coming of Napoleon but forgot to bring the talent, likeability, or charisma.

[Alazen]

The Nazis under Hitler did bring Germany out of depression and re-established a strong military. Nazi Germany also had a surprisingly strong anti-smoking movement.

This junk again? Read Adam Tooze, Sally Marks, Zara Steiner, and Mark Harrison.

Anyway, Hitler was a great leader going from how Germany's rubble business was booming during WW2.

Edited November 27, 2015 by Alazen

[Ansem]

America also came out its depression by waging a war. This must just be a weak correlation.

[blah the Prussian]

This junk again? Read Adam Tooze, Sally Marks, Zara Steiner, and Mark Harrison.

Anyway, Hitler was a great leader going from how Germany's rubble business was booming during WW2.

Can I quote that?

America also came out its depression by waging a war. This must just be a weak correlation.

To be fair we consider FDR to be a great leader.