Term papers writing service


A short history of hitlers evil deeds

Rosenfeld wrote these words in his study of how the Nazi past has become a recurring theme in contemporary culture — to the point of almost becoming trivial.

  • A short history of hitlers evil deeds We could have a hundred;
  • Loesch describes the current state of American society in almost apocalyptic terms, with ominous background music and blurry pictures of street fighting helping her to make her point.

What is especially interesting is that he had already reached that conclusion a year before Donald Trump was elected to be the 45th president of the United States. This is perhaps no surprise, given his unbridled attacks against his political opponents and the mainstream presshis singling out of minority groups as scapegoats for the challenges that American society faces, and his populist, demagogic style more generally.

As a historian of modern Germany, I have spent many years exploring the crimes that Hitler and his followers committed. When people make facile comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis, they are trying, usually in good faith, to warn us about the dangers of ignoring history and its supposed lessons.

But it is my very familiarity with that history that makes me highly skeptical about the inflationary use of such comparisons. They do more to confuse than clarify the urgent issues at stake.

By now, this seems to apply not just to the virtual world of chat rooms, but also to living rooms across America. Comparing politicians to Hitler is nothing new, of course. We live in an age where George W.

The Trump presidency has made use of the Hitler card even more pronounced. Such comparisons have not just increased in frequency and intensity, however. Serious ones are now even being made by leading experts on Nazi Germany.

A short history of hitlers evil deeds

The British historian Jane Caplan, for example, wrote an analysis in November 2016 directly addressing the question of whether or not Trump was a fascist. In short, she feels that America is in a vulnerable position right now — one that radical forces can use to their advantage. Respectable warning voices like these, engaging in historical analysis grounded in empirical scholarship, give the lie to any fears that Hitler is somehow being trivialized.

In fact, such experts are well equipped to communicate to a broader public the potential value of historical analogies. When paying close attention to historical context, analogies can become useful tools — ones that help us understand our present, and perhaps even shape it for the better. Unfortunately, considered analysis on par with that of Caplan or Snyder is the exception, not the rule.

False equivalency risks trivializing evil The Hitler comparison has, for many, become nothing more than a cudgel for branding someone or something as morally wrong or evil, for making what the Germans call a Totschlagargument: I believe there are several reasons why conversations tend to end at this point. For one, few people wish to trivialize Hitler.

  1. Latest breaking news, including politics, crime and celebrity.
  2. It seems that people are having a hard time understanding how the deception works when it comes to jews and their agents.
  3. In hindsight, historians agree that the appeasement policies of the 1930s were a failure and that forceful means were the only way to have stopped Hitler. Erwin Rommel 15 November 1891 — 14 October 1944 was a German general and military theorist.
  4. False equivalency risks trivializing evil The Hitler comparison has, for many, become nothing more than a cudgel for branding someone or something as morally wrong or evil, for making what the Germans call a Totschlagargument.
  5. It seems that people are having a hard time understanding how the deception works when it comes to jews and their agents.

When such accusations are made, those on the receiving end are understandably upset about the comparison. False comparisons to Hitler risk trivializing the horror he unleashed. Here, the entrance to the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in 1945.

  • What is especially interesting is that he had already reached that conclusion a year before Donald Trump was elected to be the 45th president of the United States;
  • In fact, such experts are well equipped to communicate to a broader public the potential value of historical analogies;
  • Serious ones are now even being made by leading experts on Nazi Germany;
  • Let us be clear;
  • Latest breaking news, including politics, crime and celebrity.

Loesch describes the current state of American society in almost apocalyptic terms, with ominous background music and blurry pictures of street fighting helping her to make her point. The United States is presented in the ad as a country coming apart at the seams because of liberal protesters. What is especially interesting here is how Loesch begins her rant: They use schools to teach children that their president is another Hitler!

Let us be clear: Hitler unleashed a war aimed at achieving global domination that resulted in the deaths of tens of millions. But the magnitude of their crimes still pales in comparison. And whatever one may think of Donald Trump, he has — although the jury is still out on this one — remained within the bounds of constitutional legality. And clearly he has not been responsible for mass death. Another aspect of our shared cultural knowledge of Hitler is that negotiating with him was futile.

In hindsight, historians agree that the appeasement policies of the 1930s were a failure and that forceful means were the only way to have stopped Hitler. No matter how many concessions were made to the German dictator over the course of the 1930s, he wanted more — and he wanted war.

This is why, as a historian of the Nazi period, I find inflated contemporary comparisons and analogies problematic. False equivalencies not only risk trivializing Hitler and the horrors he unleashed. They also prevent people from engaging with the actual issues at hand — ones that urgently require our attention: There is an ultimate reason why the Hitler comparison should not be used as lightly as it often is nowadays.

  • There is an ultimate reason why the Hitler comparison should not be used as lightly as it often is nowadays;
  • When people make facile comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis, they are trying, usually in good faith, to warn us about the dangers of ignoring history and its supposed lessons;
  • Another aspect of our shared cultural knowledge of Hitler is that negotiating with him was futile;
  • Respectable warning voices like these, engaging in historical analysis grounded in empirical scholarship, give the lie to any fears that Hitler is somehow being trivialized;
  • Erwin Rommel 15 November 1891 — 14 October 1944 was a German general and military theorist.

Whenever we apply that political or moral comparison, we set the bar for inhumanity as high as possible. Should the abyss of World War II and the Holocaust really be the main measure for all things political? The danger here is that policies only become worthy of moral outrage if they lead to genocidal violence.

One would hope that in the 21st century, our society would have developed higher — or perhaps lower — standards than these.