A perspective on Hitler's motivations

[Smitty-48]

Its that kind of moral relativism that is part of the issue. The mass killings done by Stalin, Mao, and Hitler are so enormous in such a short time period it would give anyone pause I'd think.

Well, there are causes and circumstances, where I would be willing to kill on that scale, in a much shorter period of time, not for Communism nor National Socialism, but perhaps in collective and individual self defense against, it would give me pause, but depends on how much time I had to make the call, if it was launch on warning, I could make the decision in reasonably short order.

[StCapps]

To be fair to most people, they don't even know about the genocides that went on in Russia or China, hence why they underrate how evil Stalin and Mao are, while on the other hand everyone knows about the Holocaust.

[Smitty-48]

To be fair to most people, they don't even know about the genocides that went on in Russia or China, hence why they underrate how evil Stalin and Mao are.

I think Communism gets a pass, since about FDR, because the populist left, starting with the New Dealers, were and are Communist sympathizers at heart.

[StCapps]

To be fair to most people, they don't even know about the genocides that went on in Russia or China, hence why they underrate how evil Stalin and Mao are.

I think Communism gets a pass, since about FDR, because the populist left, starting with the New Dealers, were and are Communist sympathizers at heart.

That's part of it too, but historical ignorance of the general populace is an even better explanation, most of the time anyway. Most of folks giving communism a pass are doing so because they ignorant of all the bad shit done in the name of communism, or they are playing the no true scotsman game like a libertarian.

[GloryofGreece]

To be fair to most people, they don't even know about the genocides that went on in Russia or China, hence why they underrate how evil Stalin and Mao are, while on the other hand everyone knows about the Holocaust.

I see the point on Stalin (and the reasons "they" are less aware are more up for debate I think) However, I do believe that Asian history is generally a huge unknown to the West across the board for all aspects of Asia culture, religion, achievements, conflicts etc. And it kind of makes sense in a reasonable non nefarious sort of way. The ignorance that is. Chinese don't know much about Western civilization history and vice versa. Far far away and closed off for so long etc.

[StCapps]

Chinese don't know much about Western civilization history and vice versa. Far far away and closed off for so long etc.

True, however, I'm pretty sure the Chinese are far more aware of the shit that Hitler did, than Americans are aware of shit that Mao did.

Americans ignorance of nations whose history isn't that closely linked to their own is truly in a league of it's own. If it wasn't some big European war or a some big European revolution, and it didn't happen in the US, then Americans probably know fuck all about it.

[Smitty-48]

If I was forced to pick from the three, for the sake of argument, then I would go with Stalin, he was the most diabolical, who killed with the least purpose, truly a psychopath, he killed simply out of paranoia, and for pleasure. There was no rhyme nor reason to it, he killed people simply for the sake of killing people.

In terms of scale, he's in the same class as Mao, in terms of motivation, he was simply a murderous gangster who was out to take vengeance upon his own people for some perceived slight, he didn't care if they were Jews, or Ukrainians, or Russians, or Georgians, didn't matter, there was no grand scheme, there was no higher purpose, he was just on a killing spree, for his own self gratification.

And it wasn't just detached killing neither, even at the personal level, I mean, if Hitler knew you and trusted you, you were in no danger, Hitler treated his confidants well, if anything Hitler was too trusting and naive, for Hitler, loyalty mattered above all else, but with Stalin, supposed loyalty was merely suspicious, if you were close to him, you were in the most danger of all.

Evil is a function of lack of adherence to some sort of morality code, to some sort of purpose greater than yourself, and for all his ruthlessness, Hitler still had a moral compass, whereas Stalin, not so much.

[GloryofGreece]

What were Mao's "motivations" really?

[Smitty-48]

What were Mao's "motivations" really?

I think Mao was a true believer, he was similar to Hitler, he thought he was working against the clock, desperate times call for desperate measures, he didn't think the revolution could survive without the Great Leap Forward, they were pressed for time, they were under siege, they needed to entrench the revolution lest it slip away from them, it was forced progress at the end of a gun, emergency war measures, with both the Americans and the Soviets at the gates.

[TheReal_ND]

To prove the communist five year plans could work. Tbf he was frequently lied to about their failures.