NationStates Jolt Archive

Will Smith Says Hitler 'Set Out To Do What He Thought Was Good'

Will Smith has stunned the world by declaring that even Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was essentially a "good" person. The star, 39, is determined to see the best in people and is convinced the former German leader did not fully understand the extent of the pain and suffering his actions would cause during his time in power in the 1930s and '40s.

He says, "Even Hitler didn't wake up going, 'Let me do the most evil thing I can do today.' I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good.' Stuff like that just needs reprogramming."

Hitler's totalitarian leadership as Fuhrer during 1934 until his eventual suicide in 1945 resulted in the persecution of an estimated six million Jews in the Holocaust, and his invasion of Poland in 1939 led to the start of the Second World War.
Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

In a way he is right, Hitler did believer what he was doing was for the greater good, I am not sure what this comment is so shocking.

I think he fully understood what he was doing and thought it was the right thing. Some people think torture is good. Some think it is bad. Will Smith is absoutely correct.

I defy you to find a person who ever did something that they believed to be a totally unjustifiable wrong. They always think it's right, or justifiable, or the rules don't apply to them or God wants them too or something like that. I'm sure Hitler was no exception. The Jews were untermensch, so who cares about killing them, geddit?

no I'm sorry I refuse to beleive Will Smith has intelligence, even if he is essentially right if only his wording is wrong

publicity stunts FTW!

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

I think that he thought it was the right thing to do. (Sources: Little bits I've read of Mein Kampf)

The fact that Hitler thought what he was doing was "good" doesn't make him less evil.

If anything, the fact that he thought racist and nationalist mass slaughter was "good" makes him more evil, not less.

I defy you to find a person who ever did something that they believed to be a totally unjustifiable wrong.

So you've never done anything you thought was wrong? Really?

The fact that Hitler thought what he was doing was "good" doesn't make him less evil.

If anything, the fact that he thought racist and nationalist mass slaughter was "good" makes him more evil, not less.

Nobody is suggesting otherwise.

Yo, killing Emo kiddies is good in my mind! To the chambers!

HISTORY WILL EXOLERATE MY SO-CALLED CRIMES!

Will is actually correct. Much as we like to think Hilter was eating baby kittens alive and raping babies; he was actually a likable guy.

My great-aunt met him and said he was very personable.

So you've never done anything you thought was wrong? Really?

Did something I thought beforehand to be an unjustifiable wrong? I don't believe so. Do you think Hitler thought that the whole Final Solution thing was evil and wrong and unjustifiable?

Smith has a point, but I don't think intent is the only thing that determines what is right and wrong. If that were true, only "good" people could do "bad" things (because they'd be the only ones to feel guilt).

geez hitler was restoring germany to what it would have been if the evil jews hadnt conspired to ruin it.

IN HIS MIND

of course he thought he was doing good. world leaders hurt some to help the majority all the time.

I think Will Smith has been misrepresented here by claiming he said Hitler was a "good" person. He didn't say Hitler was a "good guy", or said Hitler believed himself to be good. The two are very different things - one claims Nazism is good, the other claims people do what they believe is good. Will Smith was going for the latter, hence his comment that Hitler "set out to do what he thought was 'good.'"

That non-controversial statement has simply been blown out of proportion. There is nothing shocking about claiming Hitler believed he was doing good (for the German people).

I defy you to find a person who ever did something that they believed to be a totally unjustifiable wrong.
Yo.

Nobody is suggesting otherwise.

The title of this thread is.

Edit: Anyway, the point is that there's a difference between being mistaken about what is right ("a good guy who was confused") and actually being evil, and Hitler fits in the second category, not the first... the simple fact that the fact that he thought what he did was "good" makes no difference.

Did something I thought beforehand to be an unjustifiable wrong? I don't believe so.

What does "unjustifiable" mean? Do you mean "severe and unmitigated"? I don't. I've been thinking of it just as "without justification"--that is, wrong.

Have you ever done something you thought was wrong? Told a lie for bad reasons? Stole something? Behaved selfishly instead of helping someone who should have been helped?

Do you think Hitler thought that the whole Final Solution thing was evil and wrong and unjustifiable?

No.

There are only 3 ways somone can say Hitler was good and belive it.
1. They are totally dugged or drunk.
2. They are a Nazi.
3. They are a blind optimist.

I think the worst you can say about it is that it seems to be a pretty inane distinction.

Shock horror, someone believes that Hitler was doing what he thought was right! :eek:

Is there a story in this?

The title of this thread is.

Edit: Anyway, the point is that there's a difference between being mistaken about what is right ("a good guy who was confused") and actually being evil, and Hitler fits in the second category, not the first... the simple fact that the fact that he thought what he did was "good" makes no difference.
Of course, but even evil people don't knowingly set out to do evil. And I figured that was Smith's point. Though why he felt the need to say that is beyond me.



What does "unjustifiable" mean? Do you mean "severe and unmitigated"? I don't. I've been thinking of it just as "without justification"--that is, wrong.
I mean without any attempt at justification. As in doing something wrong without even attempting to claim it to be for the greater good, or for your own enjoyment or benfit.
Have you ever done something you thought was wrong? Told a lie for bad reasons? Stole something? Behaved selfishly instead of helping someone who should have been helped?
I've done things that I later thought were wrong, but I can't recall ever doing something wrong intentionally.

Shock horror, someone believes that Hitler was doing what he thought was right! :eek:

Is there a story in this?

Someone famous said it!

Someone famous said it!

Of course! It makes so much sense now! ;)

Here's my opinion:

- Do I think that Hitler was a good person? No.

- Do I think Will Smith is right? Yes.

If you think about it, Hitler was doing what he thought was right. Everyone does. It's, however, what other people judge the person as to whether the person was right or not. Hitler was wrong, but what he thought was right? Yes, Hitler DID feel it was right, even though it was brutally wrong.

I'm confused why this is even up for discussion...hell, I'm only even posting because I already spent the energy reading the thread so I might as well get some kind of ego-stroking satisfaction in the form of seeing my own font on display. It isn't much of a controversial thing to say and is, um, common sense.

I'm off to go do something that I feel is completely wrong with every fiber of my being. I have the last living baby seal but now I need to find an orphan baby to club to death with it. =\

I mean without any attempt at justification. As in doing something wrong without even attempting to claim it to be for the greater good, or for your own enjoyment or benfit.

What is "for your own enjoyment or benefit" isn't necessarily justified.

I've done things that I later thought were wrong, but I can't recall ever doing something wrong intentionally.

Because you didn't think about it beforehand? Or did you think about it and come to the wrong conclusion?

Hitler was doing what he thought was right. I thik the "not realizing the pain and suffering he was causing" bit was a stretch, but like Will Smith said, who actually wakes up in the morning and thinks "I think I'll do the most evil thing that pops into my mind." Hitler did think that he was doing everything for the good of the Germans, and really didn't care what the Jews or anyoen else thought of him.

So you've never done anything you thought was wrong? Really?

allegedly Hitler enjoyed chocolate deserts yes, however Hitler never went about consuming everything chocolate in sight (despite being German) even then we would just pity him for being a filthy chocolate whore because you see evil doesn't exist apart from wizards in bedtime stories

I once stole cookie or two

Smith has a point, but I don't think intent is the only thing that determines what is right and wrong. If that were true, only "good" people could do "bad" things (because they'd be the only ones to feel guilt).

what I'd like to know is why he said it in the first place:confused:

There are only 3 ways somone can say Hitler was good and belive it.
1. They are totally dugged or drunk.
2. They are a Nazi.
3. They are a blind optimist.

so by your reasoning your evil *walks off without giving any reason why you are so evil*

Hitler was doing what he thought was right. I thik the "not realizing the pain and suffering he was causing" bit was a stretch, but like Will Smith said, who actually wakes up in the morning and thinks "I think I'll do the most evil thing that pops into my mind." Hitler did think that he was doing everything for the good of the Germans, and really didn't care what the Jews or anyoen else thought of him.

which is odd for a politician to do I think you will agree :p

Duh,... EVERYONE's doing what they thought is right.

... but is it morally acceptable by the rest of society, that's another question.

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

There is a world of difference between the statement "Hitler was basically a good guy" and "Hitler did what he thought was a good thing."

Contrary to popular belief, Hitler didn't personally go in and drag Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, and political dissidents to death camps. He didn't even come up with the idea. It was one or another of his subordinates, and he agreed to it; I guess because he thought it would act as a deterrent and provide an outlet for the conquered Poles, Czechs and so on by having them kill undesirables instead of Germans. Well, that and he did believe them to be inferior races, so he didn't think killing them off would have as much of an impact.

I'm sure Hitler thought what he actually did do -- take over a functioning democracy and transform it into a totalitarian state, then wage war against most of Western Europe -- was perfectly right and justifiable. According to the more radical believers in authoritarian nationalism, it is; just because he killed people in a systematic manner doesn't make him particularly evil. Most people, of varying ideologies, support some form of organised taking of life: whether that be the death penalty, or abortion, or general warfare, or even prison for that matter (prisons being basically scaled-down death camps with the possibility of release).

Well my argument against Hitler is purely that his crimes were done against all progressive segments of German society at the time. Hitler himself was not remarkable unless viewed in the position that the German elite felt themselves in at the time. The Great Depression was at it's height, the Communists were gaining ground and threatened with expropriation, Hitler and his party represented the most degenerate and reactionary backlash in Germany society and indeed all over Europe as indicated by the rise of fascism - essentially an arm of the Catholic far-right. Faced with the collapse of the traditional hierarchical system after the failing of the German Empire and the Weimar Republic, Hitler was a reaction to restore to perceived or actual conditions of ancien regime Germany, and the perceived 'greatness' of it. Of course in the case of all right-wing reactions, the period in which they 'regress' is always 'great', so in that way the peddling of myths and conspiracy theories always replaces objective historicism.

i have said this many times before in the past. if only i was a famous black man this thread would be about me.

I defy you to find a person who ever did something that they believed to be a totally unjustifiable wrong. They always think it's right, or justifiable, or the rules don't apply to them or God wants them too or something like that. I'm sure Hitler was no exception. The Jews were untermensch, so who cares about killing them, geddit?

WRONG! I do things that I know are wrong all the time, everybody does. Do you think that people who shoplift don't know it's wrong? Please.

Will is right.

Hitler, in many ways, delivered the German people from the problems that arose from the first world war, and broke the depression.

I mean come on people; this isn't the Bible, things are black and white with one side being 'good' and the other side being 'bad'; such things are relative.

I love how Wilgrove pulled a Drudge with the thread title when the article itself clearly cites Will Smith never thought of Hitler as a Good Guy in the first place.

Will Smith's actual statement elicits nothing more shocking than a "duh." No one except for Richard III ever decides "So, I think I'll be a villain!" What else is new?

(Incidentally, I don't mind letting Hitler off the hook at least a wee bit, seeing as the fairly extensive reading I've done about him and his cronies really rather strongly suggests that he was a paranoid schizophrenic and therefore not entirely compos mentis. That doesn't mean he gets a free pass or is a nice guy or anything - it just places a bit more of the blame on the German people for letting themselves be ruled by a megalomaniacal paranoid schizophenic in the first place.)

there are no 'good' or 'bad' persons. the only good and bad are what people do.

there is doing more or less profoundly of one then another though.

it really doesn't matter what 'kind of a person' someone historicly was,
its what they did to the kind of world we all have to live in,
and to real people, places and things in it, that matters.

so if you can relate to someone, well that's one thing,
but what they've done is not made more or less or other then what it was by doing so.

you know, all convicted murderers are 'good' people. they just happen to be 'good' people who have killed someone, or some many as the case may be.

so to say some murderous tyrant was a 'good person' is really kind of meaningless.

yah, he was a sensitive abused kid who wanted to paint roses or something,
well if anything, that should stand as a parable against heavy handed parenting.

=^^=
.../\...

Duh,... EVERYONE's doing what they thought is right.

How about faux-vampires and gangstas?

Against all the progressives of German society?

Communists were/are the regressive scum of humanity. Gassing people for religious purposes and executing political dissidents are entirely different things.

How about faux-vampires and gangstas?

Have you asked them?

I don't see from their perspective to give an answer.

Have you asked them?In a way, i am. This is teh interwebz, after all, so i've got maybe half of my audience there.

I don't see from their perspective to give an answer.For consideration, of course. It could be that there's posters here who did have that perspective at one time or another, non?

I don't see what the big deal is. Almost every horrible, maniacal dictator in history thought they were doing good. The problem is that their actions are usually only good in their own demented heads.

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.I am not so sure about that. Although Hitler wanted all the destruction and suffering he never was able to look at the actual implementation. He has never personally been to a concentration camp and he never personally saw the destroyed cities and even when he had to drive through a destroyed city he had the windows of his car blackened. You should view the interviews given by Traudl Junge (http://www.google.com/search?q=Traudl%20Junge&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&num=100&newwindow=1&filter=0).

And remember: nothing is evil in the beginning, even Sauron was not so.

There is a world of difference between the statement "Hitler was basically a good guy" and "Hitler did what he thought was a good thing."All a question of perspective. Hitler really wanted to improve Germany, but of course he overdid it.

What a biased article.

What a biased article.
And a stupid thread title.

As with most people in this thread, I agree with Mr. Smith's sentiment; Hitler thought he was doing good, thought he was improving humanity.

That's why I find the idea of a 'truly evil' person so hard to grasp. They only exist in fairy tales and films.

That's why I find the idea of a 'truly evil' person so hard to grasp. They only exist in fairy tales and films.
...and vice presidencies.
http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/photos/TheGuardian/stories/WhiteHouse.jpg

The problem is that their actions are usually only good in their own demented heads.

Usually, maybe...

However in case of Hitler the people in general were more than willing to go along with Hitler's leadership - And there are still ehv1l naz15 around so Hitler's personal perception of good was, and perhaps more worryingly is, in no way confined to Hitler himself.

Regardless, people are capable of doing what would normally be perceived evil, elsewhere and elsewhen, as long as there are charismatic leaders, peer pressure, religion, ignorance, faulty upbringing and/or twisted social norms involved - Perfectly normal people are capable of being horrible bastards in right, or wrong, circumstances.

Contrary to popular belief, Hitler didn't personally go in and drag Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, and political dissidents to death camps. He didn't even come up with the idea. It was one or another of his subordinates, and he agreed to it; I guess because he thought it would act as a deterrent and provide an outlet for the conquered Poles, Czechs and so on by having them kill undesirables instead of Germans. Well, that and he did believe them to be inferior races, so he didn't think killing them off would have as much of an impact.

I'm sure Hitler thought what he actually did do -- take over a functioning democracy and transform it into a totalitarian state, then wage war against most of Western Europe -- was perfectly right and justifiable. According to the more radical believers in authoritarian nationalism, it is; just because he killed people in a systematic manner doesn't make him particularly evil. Most people, of varying ideologies, support some form of organised taking of life: whether that be the death penalty, or abortion, or general warfare, or even prison for that matter (prisons being basically scaled-down death camps with the possibility of release).

Finally someone pointed that out.

I was reading through this thread and I found comments along the lines of "Hitler killed and Hitler maimed" very tiresome. Yes Hitler was spouting all this crap since the days of 1918, but it is arguable if he even knew about the final solution or its exact nature. The Holocaust was Himmler's baby, which other than the fact that was clinically more mentally disturbed, also had an obsessive compulsive personality and a real talent for management. Hitler couldn't even have dreamt the Holocaust up, whereas Himmler and the gang, in doing what they believed was towards the will of the fuhrer (aka whatever they interpreted through goggles of dementia what another madman was spouting), actually implemented it.

That and the fact there is not one piece of factual evidence linking Hitler to the Holocaust.

Against all the progressives of German society?

Communists were/are the regressive scum of humanity. Gassing people for religious purposes and executing political dissidents are entirely different things.


Kill yourself.


Please.

Will is actually correct. Much as we like to think Hilter was eating baby kittens alive and raping babies; he was actually a likable guy.

My great-aunt met him and said he was very personable.

really your great aunt met him, from what iread and saw on the biographies, it seemed he kept ranting usually

I once stole cookie or two


:eek:, you must be punished for crimes against humanity

Kill yourself.
None of that, now.

No need to stoop to his level.

None of that, now.

No need to stoop to his level.

He is a racist peice if shit who does not deserve respect. Fuck him.

He is a racist peice if shit who does not deserve respect. Fuck him.
He's a pathetically obvious troll who gets off on people like yourself blowing a casket, flaming, then potentially getting in trouble.

Advocating death of a poster, even if the gesture was no meant to be taking literally is against the Rules (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=410573).

Ignore him; don't rise to him.

Against all the progressives of German society?Trying to bring a country into the stone age isn't exactly "pro" gressive.

None of that, now.

No need to stoop to his level.
Vaklavia is just as bad as Eric, you know.

Will is right.

Hitler, in many ways, delivered the German people from the problems that arose from the first world war, and broke the depression.

I mean come on people; this isn't the Bible, things are black and white with one side being 'good' and the other side being 'bad'; such things are relative.

And you'd never say this if it were your relatives that were rendered into soap and lampshades.

Vaklavia is just as bad as Eric, you know.
I didn't.

Can't recall any of his expressed opinions up until now, and I have a perhaps unwise patience with n00blets.

And you'd never say this if it were your relatives that were rendered into soap and lampshades.
Yeah, there's a difference between noting the implausibility of absolute evil and arguing that Hitler was a force for good.

He is a racist peice if shit who does not deserve respect. Fuck him.

Take this as gospel: you need to calm down and stop flaming.

I didn't.

Can't recall any of his expressed opinions up until now, and I have a perhaps unwise patience with n00blets.The only two times I can remember "debating" with Vaklavia was the two times they called me racist.

I was reading through this thread and I found comments along the lines of "Hitler killed and Hitler maimed" very tiresome. Yes Hitler was spouting all this crap since the days of 1918, but it is arguable if he even knew about the final solution or its exact nature. The Holocaust was Himmler's baby, which other than the fact that was clinically more mentally disturbed, also had an obsessive compulsive personality and a real talent for management.
Which would be totally contrary to the idea of leadership that was so central to Nazi (and fascist) thought. It's a pyramid principle, and even though delegation is a huge part of it, the flow of information within such a system necessitate that Hitler be told what is going on at least in general terms.

There is factual evidence of Himmler knowing precisely what was going on. Himmler was ultimately responsible for domestic security and the future of the Nazi vision. Given how Hitler wrote of the Jews in Mein Kampf, well before he was in power, it's also likely that he'd have an interest in finding out how about this mortal enemy of his people is being dealt with.

So it seems extremely unrealistic to presume that Hitler would never have asked a question, especially given that occasionally there were people in his close surroundings asking for exceptions and pardons being given to family members. And if you're going to believe that Hitler didn't know, that means saying that Himmler would have lied to him - without having a valid reason for doing so.

Yes, the Nazi leadership was very careful about evidence linking anything to Hitler, since they were very good at PR management. But to think that there was no informal flow of information is to make some pretty big assumptions about the system and the actors within it...and for what reason?

Someone famous said it!
There is a world of difference between the statement "Hitler was basically a good guy" and "Hitler did what he thought was a good thing."
And a stupid thread title.
That should cover this thread.

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying stupid things because he's
a) Black,
b) Liberal,
c) an Actor,
d) all of the above.

Does anyone besides me think that the tone of this thread would have been completely different if Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or GWB had been the one that was quoted saying Hitler "did what he thought was good"? That he just needed a little "reprogramming". Don't we call people sociopaths when they lack a conscience or the ability to tell right from wrong?

Or did someone brighter and faster catch that discrepancy already?


And Merry Christmas everyone!

http://www.clubvibes.com/images/members/23283.jpg

The road to hell Is paved with Good intentions. ©12000BC-2007

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying (Hitler had good intentions) because he's right.

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying stupid things because he's
a) Black,
b) Liberal,
c) an Actor,
d) all of the above.
e) right
It's obvious, so there was no point in him saying it
Does anyone besides me think that the tone of this thread would have been completely different if Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or GWB had been the one that was quoted saying Hitler "did what he thought was good"? That he just needed a little "reprogramming". Don't we call people sociopaths when they lack a conscience or the ability to tell right from wrong?
Probably
Or did someone brighter and faster catch that discrepancy already?
What discrepancy?

And Merry Christmas everyone!
Merry Christmas to you to :)

It's obvious...seconded.

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying stupid things because he's
a) Black,
b) Liberal,
c) an Actor,
d) all of the above.
No, we're agreeing with Smith that Hitler probably thought he was doing positive things. I'd say there would be some disagreement over whether folks thought Hitler could be 'saved'.

But do you disagree? Do you think Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot et al didn't think their 'missions' were right and correct?

Does anyone besides me think that the tone of this thread would have been completely different if Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or GWB had been the one that was quoted saying Hitler "did what he thought was good"? That he just needed a little "reprogramming".
Probably not. I certainly wouldn't.

Don't we call people sociopaths when they lack a conscience or the ability to tell right from wrong?
Yes, no-one would be denying this; re-read the posts in the thread.

I haven't seen anyone claiming Hitler was doing good acts, just saying that he probably thought his acts were good.

Once again, for those of you with poor reading comprehension: there's a big difference between noting the implausibility of absolute evil and arguing that Hitler was a force for good.

Communists were/are the regressive scum of humanity.You have been over exposed to propaganda. (or maybe you are just a simpleton)
.
Gassing people for religious purposes and executing political dissidents are entirely different things.When the Gov kills/jails you -Not for what you've done- but for what you believe = the Gov is criminal.

Which would be totally contrary to the idea of leadership that was so central to Nazi (and fascist) thought. It's a pyramid principle, and even though delegation is a huge part of it, the flow of information within such a system necessitate that Hitler be told what is going on at least in general terms.

There is factual evidence of Himmler knowing precisely what was going on. Himmler was ultimately responsible for domestic security and the future of the Nazi vision. Given how Hitler wrote of the Jews in Mein Kampf, well before he was in power, it's also likely that he'd have an interest in finding out how about this mortal enemy of his people is being dealt with.

So it seems extremely unrealistic to presume that Hitler would never have asked a question, especially given that occasionally there were people in his close surroundings asking for exceptions and pardons being given to family members. And if you're going to believe that Hitler didn't know, that means saying that Himmler would have lied to him - without having a valid reason for doing so.

Yes, the Nazi leadership was very careful about evidence linking anything to Hitler, since they were very good at PR management. But to think that there was no informal flow of information is to make some pretty big assumptions about the system and the actors within it...and for what reason?

I'm not saying that he definitely didn't know. I'm saying that you could argue that was the case. I mean really if you were in his position sure you might have an idea of what's happening but would YOU want to know the details? I really see no reason to want to know more than "the Jewish problem as understood in Mein Kampf is being addressed Herr Fuhrer". And based on the evidence it is a reasonable, even if likely false, position to take.

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying stupid things because...

Was it really stupid?

Here's the original quote that causes so much hullaballooh:

Smart, friendly and funny, you have to wonder if anything ever upsets Will Smith's good nature.

"Well, if I understand the problem then I don't get annoyed," he explained. "People driving past in the car and giving me the finger annoys my wife but it's because they think you did something to them.

"They think you're driving too slow and keeping them from getting to their daughter's birthday party, or you cut them off and didn't see."

Remarkably, Will believes everyone is basically good.

"Even Hitler didn't wake up going, 'let me do the most evil thing I can do today'," said Will. "I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good'. Stuff like that just needs reprogramming.

"I wake up every day full of hope, positive that every day is going to be better than yesterday. And I'm looking to infect people with my positivity. I think I can start an epidemic."
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity-interviews/2007/12/22/will-smith-my-work-ethic-will-make-me-a-legend-86908-20262460/

Is that really such a stupid statement?

No, we're agreeing with Smith that Hitler probably thought he was doing positive things. I'd say there would be some disagreement over whether folks thought Hitler could be 'saved'.

But do you disagree? Do you think Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot et al didn't think their 'missions' were right and correct?

Yes I do disagree. I disagree that they had the capacity to determine what is right or correct. Anyone that orders or approves mass murder on the scale of what happened during Hitler's watch does not have ability to judge rightness or correctness. They can certainly make decisions based on expediency or to give themselves an advantage, but in no way can this be construed as deciding to do something because it is the "right" thing to do.

I contend that the decisions were made because it was the "selfish" thing to do. It benefited only the decider, or clearly caused so much agony as to eliminate any consideration of whether it was thought of as "right".

Anyone that orders or approves mass murder on the scale of what ....Scale has nothing to do with it.

When a Gov Jails/kills 12000 or 2Millions -for their beliefs- Its a criminal Gov.

A murderer is a murderer on his first murder, not on his 100Millionth murder.

They can certainly make decisions based on expediency or to give themselves an advantage, but in no way can this be construed as deciding to do something because it is the "right" thing to do.
Not having the ability to determine right from wrong doesn't mean one can't believe one is acting rightly.

In fact, it seems that many sociopaths and psychopaths believe(d) fervently that what they were doing was the right thing, the 'true path' for themselves or society at large, often given to them by a god or other higher power.

I contend that the decisions were made because it was the "selfish" thing to do. It benefited only the decider, or clearly caused so much agony as to eliminate any consideration of whether it was thought of as "right".
Again, you seem to be confusing reality with a sociopath's worldview; which is what we're discussing here. It certainly seems that Hitler and other dictators responsible for mass-murder believed what they were doing was 'improving' or 'saving' the human species. In Hitler's case, he was 'purifying' humanity from elements that he thought of as destructive or harmful.

Quite obviously, he was convinced of the rightness of his actions.

Anyway, getting away from second-guessing Hitler's motives, do you see now how Smith's comments may not have been as 'stupid' as you originally thought?

So if someone determines that he himself is good, that qualifies him as being good? Since the fuck when?

Does anyone besides me think that the tone of this thread would have been completely different if Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or GWB had been the one that was quoted saying Hitler "did what he thought was good"? That he just needed a little "reprogramming". Don't we call people sociopaths when they lack a conscience or the ability to tell right from wrong?

If someone with notions of presidency rolling around in his head made such a mundane and unremarkable comment and it got this kind of coverage, I'd be more concerned about that. And what does calling something sociopathy have to do with anything? We call people with disconnects from reality schizophrenics, and the condition schizophrenia....what observing the medical condition that leads to such things is meant to imply, I'm not quite sure.

Was it really stupid?

Here's the original quote that causes so much hullaballooh:


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity-interviews/2007/12/22/will-smith-my-work-ethic-will-make-me-a-legend-86908-20262460/

Is that really such a stupid statement?

I think people are trying to make him look the fool because he's a famous actor.

Hitler did have a powerful voice; he inspired millions of Germans.

All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people.
-Hitler.

Words build bridges into unexplored regions.
-Hitler.


And the ironic thing:

Whoever lights the torch of war in Europe can wish for nothing but chaos.
-Hitler.

Anyway, getting away from second-guessing Hitler's motives, do you see now how Smith's comments may not have been as 'stupid' as you originally thought?
Yes.

To limit the discussion to what is "right" and what is "wrong" relative to one's own opinion is to ignore civilization and society. For someone to consider his actions -- let's be specific, we're talking about genocide -- "right", when the history of civilized society is in contradiction, is to trivialize the meaning of "right".

I don't care if Hitler did wake up every day, planning to do what he thought best and good. What he did was bad and wrong. For anyone to make the argument that he's like everyone else, because he thought it was right, is absolute nonsense and demeans those that actually try to do good things for society.

Anyhow, you asked my opinion, you got it. Now, it's time to do Christmas things... Like buy some booze and some more eggs for the eggnog.

See y'all after the New Year.

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

Definitely. I think the question is, did he realise it was evil he was doing?
From what I can tell, he regarded it as a necessary act...

Yes I do disagree. I disagree that they had the capacity to determine what is right or correct. Anyone that orders or approves mass murder on the scale of what happened during Hitler's watch does not have ability to judge rightness or correctness. They can certainly make decisions based on expediency or to give themselves an advantage, but in no way can this be construed as deciding to do something because it is the "right" thing to do. What exactly do you mean? You sound like you're agreeing with Will Smith, only you say that you aren't.

I think there's a world of difference between an actor and a Presidential candidate when it comes to making a statement that requires nuance to comprehend.

When you deal in terms of "good" and "evil", you're dealing in absolutes, and for humanity, the vast majority of asolutes simply do not work.

It doesn't matter how easy the nuance is to see, a mass audience is never going to walk that tightrope with you across the pit of absolutes to your goal of understanding. That's why nobody who ever wants to get elected would touch he notion of any potential positive aspects of Hitler's existence with a ten foot pole. Too much room for misinterpretation (deliberate or not, and both sides of the political spectrum excel at deliberate misinterpretation).

My high school history teacher taught us that Hitler rescued Germany from the harsh iniquities of the Treaty of Versailles. He then fostered a sense of deserved revenge for those iniquities and coupled that with the fear of foreign influences and ideologies from Judaism to communism to homosexuality. I cant remember the famous quote from the Nazi inner circle about leading the people into war, but it involved ratcheting up the fear and mistrust of the intended enemy and a concomitant dehumanization of them as well.

As a horrific means to an end justifiable in the persecuted minds of the Nazi psyche, the Final Solution and other Nazi atrocities were easily understandable. HOWEVER, virtually no one thinks they were acceptable.

In short: this whole topic is far too complex and has far deeper origins to ever write off with a pithy phrase or simplistic categorization. Actors can get away with such attempts because what they say does not have the potential to become policy.

You know Hitler can't be all bad because:

"Anyone who sees and paints a sky green and pastures blue ought to be sterilized" - Adolf Hitler

You know Hitler can't be all bad because:

"Anyone who sees and paints a sky green and pastures blue ought to be sterilized" - Adolf Hitler

Haha... whee... I remember that, and the counter argument :

"That's because he's a no talent hack without any imagination!" referring to his earlier artist days.

If Hitler is a good guy then Ghandi is a bad guy, and John Lennon is a warmongerer.

Hitler did bad things, he essentially had bad thoughts thoughts that were not nice, he did inhumane things, he did also save Germany from the complete oblivion of economic collapse, if he'd done that and not the other nasty things with the death and stuff he'd be viewed differently sadly he was a bit a git as Nazis usually are, or Nationalists of any kind really Socialist or otherwise.

If Hitler is a good guy then Ghandi is a bad guy, and John Lennon is a warmongerer.utter rubbish

Smith wasn't saying that Hitler was a good guy, just that he thought what he was doing was right. I'm sure Hiter thought he was doing what was right. I'm also sure that many totalitarian leaders thought that. I think it's interesting in the way that even plenty of mainstream politicians say the same. Let's look at Blair and the war in Iraq. He defends to this day his decision to take Britain into the war just by saying "I did what I thought was right", as if that is any kind of defence. Wether or not he thought what he did was right is irrelevant. As the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

If Hitler is a good guy then Ghandi is a bad guy, and John Lennon is a warmongerer.

Ghandi was quite the racist, you know.

I don't care if Hitler did wake up every day, planning to do what he thought best and good. What he did was bad and wrong. For anyone to make the argument that he's like everyone else, because he thought it was right, is absolute nonsense and demeans those that actually try to do good things for society.
I'm sorry, you seem to be pulling arguments out of thin air.

Once again Myrm, the only thing being said is that Hitler probably thought that what he was doing was right.

No-one's saying he was right.

No-one's saying what he did wasn't a bad thing.

No-one's saying his actions, and the actions of the Nazis in general, were excusable.

But we're (well I am) not also saying that he was some inhuman monster, totally evil and completely different from you or I. That would be to shy away from the fact that he was a human being, and that we, as human beings too, are potentially capable of terrible acts just like Hitler. We must face this uncomfortable act if we are to prevent acts like the Holocaust, the Cambodian Killing Fields, etc., happening again.

Before you get all hot and heavy, note that he above isn't an excuse for genocide, but a recognition that it was a human being, and not some fictional, one-dimensional monster who perpetrated it. I personally think that's a very important fact.

Anyhow, you asked my opinion, you got it. Now, it's time to do Christmas things... Like buy some booze and some more eggs for the eggnog.

See y'all after the New Year.
All the best, have a good festive season.

Before you get all hot and heavy, note that he above isn't an excuse for genocide, but a recognition that it was a human being, and not some fictional, one-dimensional monster who perpetrated it. I personally think that's a very important fact.And what the case of Hitler clearly demonstrates is that it could be anybody. Most people demonize Hitler exactly because they don't want to face the question what they would do if they had such absolute power.

And what the case of Hitler clearly demonstrates is that it could be anybody. Most people demonize Hitler exactly because they don't want to face the question what they would do if they had such absolute power.
Or if they were trying to change humanity for the better.

Anyhoo, I'm away to get pished.

Merry Chrimbo, NS:G!!

.. For anyone to make the argument that Hitler is like everyone else..
Hitler is not like everyone else, he is a Politician. who made it all the way to the top.
.
...demeans those that actually try to do good things for society.That is the whole point of FreshPrince, he was trying to do good for society.
.
...is to ignore civilization and society.I can do that if I want.

Or if they were trying to change humanity for the better.ask the current us president... :rolleyes:

Ghandi was quite the racist, you know.

BTW, it's spelled Gandhi. And that's directed at Greston, too. [/nitpick]

BTW, it's spelled Gandhi. And that's directed at Greston, too. [/nitpick]

Whatever, he was a racist. And I think he had a wierd thing about giving girls enemas.

And I think he had a wierd thing about giving girls enemas.

Doesn't everyone?

............................

Damn and i'd managed to stay off the naughty list for so long. So close

Disclaimer : These views are not factual in any way

Whatever, he was a racist. And I think he had a wierd thing about giving girls enemas.

Eh? As far as I know, he had no qualms with white people?

Eh? As far as I know, he had no qualms with white people?

As I understand it, it was African Blacks(because I know someone would say that Indians are black too. I know you too well, NSG) he wasn't fond of. Figured they were all lazy bastards, and wanted everyone to know that he and everyone else in India were not blacks.

he had a wierd thing about giving girls enemas.http://orejuelas.blogia.com/upload/20060307033110-enema.jpg

I searched -at Google Image- for "gandhi giving girls enemas" and this ^ is what I got.

Whatever, he was a racist. And I think he had a wierd thing about giving girls enemas.Eh? As far as I know, he had no qualms with white people?:confused: so.. he didnt have the enema thing for the white girls?

Haha... whee... I remember that, and the counter argument :

"That's because he's a no talent hack without any imagination!" referring to his earlier artist days.

Yeah, but that's what they say about everyone that doesn't find anything appealing about very poor art work being called abstract.

He was pretty average:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/artist/Cullis/AH_1913_11x16cm.jpg

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/artist/Cullis/Wien_1912_17x22.jpg

http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/explorers_history/Adolf_Hitler_watercolor_painting_artist.jpg

Yeah, but that's what they say about everyone that doesn't find anything appealing about very poor art work being called abstract.

Pshaw, we call them "mundanes", "peasants", "phillistines", "barbarians", and so on and so on.

Reminds me of Cacofonix.

Sounds like it. People who think that paint being thrown at a canvas by an "artist" is garbage are peasants. Interesting.

Personally, I think art is supposed to enhance a room and that's it. I wouldn't hang the Mona Lisa or most of the other famous paintings in my basement based on sheer artistic value. They are just terrible pictures with a lot of hype from the real mundanes.

I can find a bathroom painting for $5 at any local store that looks more appealing than the Mona Lisa.

Sounds like it. People who think that paint being thrown at a canvas by an "artist" is garbage are peasants. Interesting.

Personally, I think art is supposed to enhance a room and that's it. I wouldn't hang the Mona Lisa or most of the other famous paintings in my basement based on sheer artistic value. They are just terrible pictures with a lot of hype from the real mundanes.

I can find a bathroom painting for $5 at any local store that looks more appealing than the Mona Lisa.

No, no.:D

You misinterpreted me, I meant, we called they who doesn't have the open mind to accept those forms of arts ... yadda yadda yadda.

By the way, what are you worried about anyways, it's not like you're the one's who're spending... oh wait,... taxes for museums... gotcha.

Will is actually correct. Much as we like to think Hilter was eating baby kittens alive and raping babies; he was actually a likable guy.

My great-aunt met him and said he was very personable.She is right, during the Great War he was a hard fighter and a person you could easily like.

She is right, during the Great War he was a hard fighter and a person you could easily like.

Hard fighter, my arse. He was a messenger. A brave job, yes, but hardly a fighter in any sense of the word. He just hyped up his participation in the Great War once he was elected to power.

The fact that Hitler thought what he was doing was "good" doesn't make him less evil.

If anything, the fact that he thought racist and nationalist mass slaughter was "good" makes him more evil, not less.

This dude is completely right. Hitler was a piece of shit son of a bitchy whore. Anyone who says other wise can kiss his fucking dead ass.

Goddamn, where all are the Neo-Nazis trying to defend Hitler?

There used to be loads of them up for a good debate*.




*Well, I say 'debate', I mean shouting match, but it was still entertaining.

Pshaw, we call them "mundanes", "peasants", "phillistines", "barbarians", and so on and so on.

Reminds me of Cacofonix.why philistines??

Will is actually correct. Much as we like to think Hilter was eating baby kittens alive and raping babies; he was actually a likable guy.

My great-aunt met him and said he was very personable.As I said, you folks should watch the interviews that Traudl Junge (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOOmjQUI3Ys) gave a few years before her death. She was Hitler's secretary and she gave a very impressive picture of the man as a soft-spoken person of great politeness (in a private environment).
Especially parts 2 + 3 are interesting.

As I said, you folks should watch the interviews that Traudl Junge (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOOmjQUI3Ys) gave a few years before her death. She was Hitler's secretary and she gave a very impressive picture of the man as a soft-spoken person of great politeness (in a private environment).

So was Stalin. There's a piece I read about Stalin welcoming his old Priest and sharing tea and dinner with him for a day.

Goddamn, where all are the Neo-Nazis trying to defend Hitler?

There used to be loads of them up for a good debate*.




*Well, I say 'debate', I mean shouting match, but it was still entertaining.

A plague recently hit, targeting the Neo-Nazi community. It's called centrisitis.

So was Stalin. There's a piece I read about Stalin welcoming his old Priest and sharing tea and dinner with him for a day.

John Wayne Gacy used to dress up as a clown and entertain children when he wasn't raping and murdering people..

http://orejuelas.blogia.com/upload/20060307033110-enema.jpg

I searched -at Google Image- for "gandhi giving girls enemas" and this ^ is what I got.

Where I got all this from (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=18021644)

John Wayne Gacy used to dress up as a clown and entertain children when he wasn't raping and murdering people..

Satan was an avid musician, an eloquent speaker, and friendly and inviting in person. In other words, these arguments get us nowhere.

Wow, now that is an example of "extreme reframing." Talk about your optimists! On a side note, I wonder if he will ever curse in a song? It's starting to get to me.

Satan was an avid musician, an eloquent speaker, and friendly and inviting in person. In other words, these arguments get us nowhere.Satan was jewish.

As I understand it, it was African Blacks(because I know someone would say that Indians are black too. I know you too well, NSG) he wasn't fond of. Figured they were all lazy bastards, and wanted everyone to know that he and everyone else in India were not blacks.

Oh. Didn't know that. Probably during his "good servant of the Empire" phase, though.

:confused: so.. he didnt have the enema thing for the white girls?

Eh? What's with the enema thing?

Satan was jewish.

So was Jesus.

Satan was jewish.

Nah, technically, he was Anglican. That's provided God is British, mind you; if God were Russian, he'd be Buddhist.

Are we giving Will Smith a pass on saying stupid things because he's
a) Black,
b) Liberal,
c) an Actor,
d) all of the above.

Does anyone besides me think that the tone of this thread would have been completely different if Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or GWB had been the one that was quoted saying Hitler "did what he thought was good"? That he just needed a little "reprogramming". Don't we call people sociopaths when they lack a conscience or the ability to tell right from wrong?

Or did someone brighter and faster catch that discrepancy already?

And Merry Christmas everyone!

Ok.

What about you and your actions in Viet Nam?

Merry Christmas to you too!

Who had an enema?

"Famous actor states the obvious; world still recovering."

"Famous actor states the obvious; world still recovering."

The appropriate catchphrase may be "Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalissimo_Francisco_Franco_is_still_dead)"

Who had an enema?

Little indian girls.

I defy you to find a person who ever did something that they believed to be a totally unjustifiable wrong.

Uh, Iago?

why philistines??

Good point. Turns out that was another big lie in history, eh?

Good point. Turns out that was another big lie in history, eh?

I got that from reading Asterix comics.

Good point. Turns out that was another big lie in history, eh?Philistines were of the same stock as Anakim/Pelasgians/Minoans and socio-culturally lightyears ahead of any Hebrew/Israelite tribe at the time. So using "philistines" to designate underdeveloped folks is rather ironic.

(Sorry if this is controversial to you. I just express my political view. You can call me a Neo-Nazi or anything. I don't care.)
Depends whether it's Extreme Sarcasm or not.

Hoi!
The things that Hitler done is (of course) good for the people of Germany!
and don't eat the propaganda the Jew gave to you! All great people become corrupted because people behind their back! Example : Soekarno (his political advisor is the one that make he fall), Soeharto (his children make he corrupted)
Hitler (his Nazi friends). Bush (His Jews and Freemasonic friends of course!) And there are many-many more! Oh, and Naby Isa Almasih lose and near executed by the Roman because of 1 of his student!

(Sorry if this is controversial to you. I just express my political view. You can call me a Neo-Nazi or anything. I don't care.)

First let me say this: actors need to stick to reading scripts and not forming opinions without first consulting said script.

I do feel that Smith's comment has some believable viable basis to it. Sure Hitler was trying to what he thought was best for his people....so did Vlad Drakula in Romania, Stalin in Russia, and the white land owners in America's southern states during the civil war (i.e. slave owners). No matter what Hitler's intentions were, good or bad, the actions he chose is what history has judged him by. Same could be said about every contraversional leader including George W. (friggin Texans :D)

Update on the non-story:

The Jewish Defence League has... well... reacted.

The Defense League has labeled the comments “ignorant, detestable, and offensive.” They add that Smith, “spit on the memory of every person murdered by the Nazis. His disgusting words stick a knife in the back of every veteran who fought (and sometimes died) to save the world from the intentions of Adolf Hitler.”

The group also wants Smith’s new film ‘I Am Legend’ pulled from theaters.
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=31346&cat=2

In my view, a huge overreaction, making them look rather silly.

And apparently since this thread isn't the only one who's (ab)using the headline (Which is not a direct quote) for all it's worth, Smith has released a statement:

"It is an awful and disgusting lie," Smith said in a statement Monday provided by his publicist. "It speaks to the dangerous power of an ignorant person with a pen. I am incensed and infuriated to have to respond to such ludicrous misinterpretation."

"Adolf Hitler was a vile, heinous vicious killer responsible for one of the greatest acts of evil committed on this planet," read the statement.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlc94tbWgxe5R-2CZ2pkbCN3PILwD8TO83GG0

Update on the non-story:

The Jewish Defence League has... well... reacted.

The Defense League has labeled the comments “ignorant, detestable, and offensive.” They add that Smith, “spit on the memory of every person murdered by the Nazis. His disgusting words stick a knife in the back of every veteran who fought (and sometimes died) to save the world from the intentions of Adolf Hitler.”

The group also wants Smith’s new film ‘I Am Legend’ pulled from theaters.
The Jewish Defence League ??
In hindsight, maybe Smith had a point...

Update on the non-story:

The Jewish Defence League has... well... reacted.


http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=31346&cat=2

In my view, a huge overreaction, making them look rather silly.

And apparently since this thread isn't the only one who's (ab)using the headline (Which is not a direct quote) for all it's worth, Smith has released a statement:


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlc94tbWgxe5R-2CZ2pkbCN3PILwD8TO83GG0

At least the Anti-Defamation League so far has had the brains to not overreact out of its ass like this. I bet its members know Smith said "Hitler thought he was being good," not "Hitler was being good."

Anyone else have this feeling the Jewish Defense League is trying to pull a PETA with opportunistic attention-whoring? In any case, I think they need their "defend and represent the Jewish People" license revoked.

Considering what God did to the Jews in many events noted in the Bible maybe Hitler was just one of Gods tools to clean up the Jews as they were forgetting who they were trying to become Gods themselves so he used Hitler to punish them and knock them back down to their proper level in this lifetime and world...

He did have some great ideas to advance the German nation but it was his methods to do this that turned bad.. Also he had a lot of help that were probably just as accountable for certain actions as he was.. Just he was the main man so like today the US President gets the blame for US problems while some 438 others many who have been in a position to creat those problems sit back and point finger at him forget that for one pointed at someone three point out the real problem.

Bush seems to think what he's doing is a good thing while the rest of world thinks otherwise. It's in our nature to think we're better than others, that we're right and they're wrong, we're good and they're evil.

Actually the US is responsible for more innocent deaths than Nazi Germany.

Of course. It's amazing how incredibly peaceful the world was before the US was formed in the late 18th century.

At least the Anti-Defamation League so far has had the brains to not overreact out of its ass like this. I bet its members know Smith said "Hitler thought he was being good," not "Hitler was being good."

Anyone else have this feeling the Jewish Defense League is trying to pull a PETA with opportunistic attention-whoring? In any case, I think they need their "defend and represent the Jewish People" license revoked.

PETA=People Eat Tasty Animals.

My goodness....I am so thankful I'm essentially a nobody who doesn't get any media attention and doesn't have to not only watch my words, but pay attention to how my words are completely and utterly twisted out of context.

I mean...my words are offensive enough...

Jewish Defense League, lol.

Jewish Defense League, lol.

Are you picturing something like this (http://www.fantomcomics.com/NOV060279_hi_AMERICAN_WAY_TP.jpg)? Cuz I am. Only with those fantastic jew fros.

Are you picturing something like this (http://www.fantomcomics.com/NOV060279_hi_AMERICAN_WAY_TP.jpg)? Cuz I am. Only with those fantastic jew fros.

And better suits....

And better suits....

Now that's just buying into stereotypes. omg racist!

Now that's just buying into stereotypes. omg racist!

it's not a stereotype if it's true..

*lovingly caresses money*

it's not a stereotype if it's true..

*lovingly caresses money*

Are you smelling it with your quivering nose as well? And scurrying about in a rat-like manner?

"It's not a stereotype if it's true..."

All the racists say the same thing. Especially the self-hating ones :P

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

I hate to do anything in his defense, but I must. In Hitlers defense, he WAS trying to do what he thought was right, he was just so high out of his mind on speed he didn't realize just how foolish the way he went about it was. After all, Hitler himself was a Jew(many people don't know this).
Another thing is, he was ALMOST right. Not in the sense that white people are the perfect race, but in the sense that some people are simply genetically superior. I think however that the way to create this "Perfect Race" would be through gene therapy over hundreds of years. Only through this can human kind reach it's full potential.
I once saw a movie called Hero. If you've watched the movie, then you know that in it, a powerful King conquers nation after nation, seeming to be a terrible and evil warlord. However, when the hero arrives to kill him, the man says one thing that saves his life. "All under One". The point was that under one government, there is no more war. If there's no one to war against, then there is no war, and thus peace reigns. The way he went about making peace was to do what he knew how to do. To make war.
Hitler's mind was limited and drugged. He was being actively manipulated by the Nazi party, and lets face it. He was basically crazy to begin with. So he started with a dream in which there was only one group of people in the world. He saw the human race reaching a potential we can't imagine. The problem wasn't his vision, but rather the way he went about obtaining that vision. Human kind is not limited by Nationality or race, and even the healthiest and most genetically perfect person in the world can grow sick or injure themselves.
Anyway, thats all I have to say. I'm sure that a lot of this is going to cause all sorts of shouts of outrage, but who cares. I'm not the type to be apologetic to anyone about what I believe.

Are you picturing something like this (http://www.fantomcomics.com/NOV060279_hi_AMERICAN_WAY_TP.jpg)? Cuz I am. Only with those fantastic jew fros.

moar moneybags

I like how the quote mentioned states that Will thought that Hitler was "doing what he thought was 'good,'" instead of Will mentioning that Hitler was "good," which Will never really said in the first place but, seeing as his quote was following the pretext of the author saying that Will thinks that anyone is "good," instead of taking the statement for face value and read the portion of the quote that says "backwards logic," we should all jump to a conclusion that, in fact, Will Smith thinks that Adolf Hitler was a good man.

Just like saying "I think Hitler was one of the best speakers of the 21st Century" means "I think Hitler was good."

Calling this a strawman doesn't do it enough justice.

Actually the US is responsible for more innocent deaths than Nazi Germany.

Prove this. You can't, because it's not true, but please try. I'd like to see figures, and I'd also like verification that each death was, in fact, "innocent". Again, you can't do that, but I'd love to watch you try.

Actually, I can already see members of SAG getting together right now, saying:

"Alright, fellas... from here on in, any mention of "Hitler" with any kind of pretexted statement including, but not limited to, words like "good," "think," or any kind of twistable adjective will result in a hefty fine from us. So, y'know, we can teach all of you a lesson in dabbling in the affairs of such touchy issues. Got it? Good."

I feel sorry for Will Smith- his words have already been taken way out of context and it's going to ruin what should have been a quality and highly productive career. Then again, reading the article, it seems he got carried away in talking about his optimism and somehow got to talking about Adolf Hitler and thus probably should have used more restraint, especially with the press. He's got no one to blame but himself for what happened.

As far as what he said, as others have said it's not all that bad. Not that it would make him or his actions any less evil, but Hitler honestly believed he was doing what was best for Germany and he did do some things that actually benefitted Germany- Hitler improved Germany's economy (hire everyone into the army) and he is responsible for Volkswagen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kdf-Wagen#.22The_People.27s_Car.22). He undid any goodwill he could have fostered with the Holocaust, where he very clearly went way too far in his plans.

He's also a product of his time- this was the time of hyper-nationalism, where the entirely sensible idea (which began to be established with the Napoleonic adventure across Europe) of establishing a common identity and union for a people who share the same language and culture morphed into a hideous monster where "only our nation is right and everyone else is our slaves (or simply dead, whichever worked)". Anti-Semitism, also, wasn't just confined to Hitler and the Nazis- it was everywhere, as the Jews were the really unfortunate ones caught in the evil web of "national purification", the "easy targets" as they "went against the grain" in not practising the overwhelmingly dominant religion of Christianity (the form of which depended on the nation). The Holocaust saw nationalism's ugly peak, where the world saw, once and for all, just how dangerous it can be if extremists are allowed to run rampant. It's one of those cases where we just sat and stared in disbelief, knowing we'd gone too far and vowed never to do it again.

I honestly think had it not been for the Holocaust we wouldn't even have had things like the Civil Rights Movement. For something like that to happen, the population would need to have the concept of xenophobia thoroughly destroyed, and that didn't happen until we finally found out the truth of the Holocaust (which, by the way, during WWII was known as a well-travelled rumour).

Not that any of our defences of Smith is ultimately going to matter...all the public will hear is "Smith said Hitler was good" and unfairly denounce him instead of seeing what Smith actually said...*sigh*

Prove this. You can't, because it's not true, but please try. I'd like to see figures, and I'd also like verification that each death was, in fact, "innocent". Again, you can't do that, but I'd love to watch you try.

They can't. But you know for a damn good fact that, whatever evidence you present and whatever circumstancial or trivial evidence they present, neither of you will win because the other will start a flame war and demand proof. So... yeah. I'd stop while I'm ahead, if I were you.

They can't. But you know for a damn good fact that, whatever evidence you present and whatever circumstancial or trivial evidence they present, neither of you will win because the other will start a flame war and demand proof. So... yeah. I'd stop while I'm ahead, if I were you.

Understood -- however, I'm not the one making the insne assertion, so the burden of proof is not on me. I never start flame wars...goin' on three years in NSG has finally inured me to that particular temptation. If he comes back with horseshit, I'll label it thus and get on with life.

His point has that no one sets out to be evil and that we need to be on the constant watch for where our life is going.

Instead of taking something and blowing it the fuck out of proportion. Take a moment, think about who this is. It's Will fucking Smith. Mr nice guy. You've just tarnished a good man's name for nothing.

Anyone with a minimal amount of intact brain cells has all ready figured out this hasn't done jack shit to Will Smith's career. The only idiots who'll buy into this shit and believe he's a Nazi sympathizer probably takes FOXNews at face value and thinks O.J. didn't do it either.

Anyone with a minimal amount of intact brain cells has all ready figured out this hasn't done jack shit to Will Smith's career. The only idiots who'll buy into this shit and believe he's a Nazi sympathizer probably takes FOXNews at face value and thinks O.J. didn't do it either.Who the fuck is Will Smith??

Who the fuck is Will Smith??

Research,... research,... research.

Or as they say on ze internets,... lurk moar.

What's really sad is that the very process of how Smith's observation got twisted into some Neo-Nazi propaganda has a remarkable similarity to quite a few This Modern World strips. I wouldn't be surprised if Tom Tomorrow is drawing one about this brouhaha even as we speak.

I rather mean, what significance does this dude have? He's just a boring actor.

Trying to win the Fass Impersonation Award, are you?

Research,... research,... research.

Or as they say on ze internets,... lurk moar.I rather mean, what significance does this dude have? He's just a boring actor.

Trying to win the Fass Impersonation Award, are you?
See, I don't watch tv and I really don't care who or what Will Smith is or what he does. I wonder why he makes comments about Hitler in the first place and why that would matter to anyone in the media. And he really isn't as present as other actors. What's his significance? Does he make important movies, does he run charities, does he run for a political office? He just entertains people.

Trying to win the Fass Impersonation Award, are you?
To be fair, Smith is a pretty boring actor.

According to the morning news, (find it yourself, its everywhere) Mr. Smith is pissed becuase he was quoted out of context.

Wow. Big surprise.

I rather mean, what significance does this dude have? He's just a boring actor.

Apparently,... being an actor (boring or not) is enough to garner attention.

His point has that no one sets out to be evil and that we need to be on the constant watch for where our life is going.

Instead of taking something and blowing it the fuck out of proportion. Take a moment, think about who this is. It's Will fucking Smith. Mr nice guy. You've just tarnished a good man's name for nothing.
Indeed, my thoughts exactly.
I rather mean, what significance does this dude have? He's just a boring actor.
That's part of what makes this story a non-story in my mind: He's just an actor.

And it's not a blatantly offensive statement either, nor a direct quote, like Michael Richards when he self-destructed on stage - or the admitted anti-Semitic drunken ramblings of Mel Gibson, which conveniently followed the Passion of the Christ, a movie accused of strengthening and promoting anti-semitism.
According to the morning news, (find it yourself, its everywhere) Mr. Smith is pissed becuase he was quoted out of context.

Wow. Big surprise.
I've linked to it a few pages back ;)

Apparently,... being an actor (boring or not) is enough to garner attention.Someone who isn't an attention whore doesn't become an actor, you know.

Will Smith has stunned the world

Not really. Didn't hear it over here... And I highly doubt that the BBC or something is making a big deal out of it. But then again, 'America', as far as you can generalise that place, is easily shocked, isn't it?

Not really. Didn't hear it over here... And I highly doubt that the BBC or something is making a big deal out of it. But then again, 'America', as far as you can generalise that place, is easily shocked, isn't it?

Yeah, generally it is

Someone who isn't an attention whore doesn't become an actor, you know.

Well, you've answered your initial question yourself ;)

Trying to win the Fass Impersonation Award, are you?

He lacks the vocabulary.

And wit.

I have been reading this then after a while I was thinking, how the hell did this come up in a conversation. What the hell was he talking about when he decided to say what he thought about Hitler. Is it a regular question in interviews now to ask what's your position on Hitler?

He lacks the vocabulary.

And wit.
It's hard matching Fass for vocab though, considering how many languages he knows =(

In fairness to Hitler, he did do one wonderful thing for the world.








He killed himself. :)

It's hard matching Fass for vocab though, considering how many languages he knows =(

I think the issue of wit rather is the real nail in the coffin of a Fass impersonator around here.

Not really. Didn't hear it over here... And I highly doubt that the BBC or something is making a big deal out of it. But then again, 'America', as far as you can generalise that place, is easily shocked, isn't it?

The only thing I'll argue with on your comment is the generalization part. Myself, along with many others who have a brain of their own and are not sheep following the media's influence, tend to be less shocked than stupified that a person, especially an actor, would make such a comment. I have a feeling that before long there are going to be friggin protestors outside of movie theaters when Smith releases any future films. I'll reserve my feelings about protestors until I find the proper forum......but I would like a few to be chimically castrated to prevent any future protestors being spawned

The only thing I'll argue with on your comment is the generalization part. Myself, along with many others who have a brain of their own and are not sheep following the media's influence, tend to be less shocked than stupified that a person, especially an actor, would make such a comment. I have a feeling that before long there are going to be friggin protestors outside of movie theaters when Smith releases any future films. I'll reserve my feelings about protestors until I find the proper forum......but I would like a few to be chimically castrated to prevent any future protestors being spawned

Ahh Trolly.

Guess you missed that Freedom of Expression lesson......

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

Yes, except that the "good thing" he was doing was a "good thing" for himself. No Hitler did not wake up in the morning wanting to do evil, in fact, if only for reputation sake, he probably would do good if the other course of action would serve him no better, but he did what he did for himself. It's no coincidence that the ethnic group he decided to kill off was also the wealthiest ethnic group in Germany, while the countries he took over gave him more to plunder, more to enslave, and more to glorify himself with in the eyes of the German people. He did good things, but he did them for himself, like advancing technology to improve his armies, improving infrastructure to improve the economy, creating a middle class to create harmony at home, these were all for number one.

You can't act as brilliantly as Hitler did with the German people if you don't have a very powerful sense of empathy and human nature, so to claim that you understand pain and suffering, or any other emotion, better then a Hitler does is very immodest at best.

Originally Posted by Inaccurate America
Not really. Didn't hear it over here... And I highly doubt that the BBC or something is making a big deal out of it. But then again, 'America', as far as you can generalise that place, is easily shocked, isn't it?

It is, but in this case, I didn't hear about it from anyone.

Link (http://www.hiphop-elements.com/article/read/4/12500/1/)

Yea, I can see where Will is coming from, in Hitler's mind, what he was doing was a "good" thing, but to say that he didn't know what he was doing, the pain and suffering that he caused, that's a bit of a stretch for me. I think Hitler fully understood what he was doing with the Concentration and Death camps.

Hitler was not an evil person - he was a person who did evil (or, better, hellish) things. I don't think evil men really to exist, exactly as good men: there are men who act well and men who act badly, and men who do both things.

But I think Will Smith is trying to self-destroy his own public image.

Yes, except that the "good thing" he was doing was a "good thing" for himself.

I don't know if I'd go as far as you and say that Hitler was solely acting out of selfish interests- Hitler did what he did in an ingrained belief that what he was doing was bettering Germany (going about it the wrong way), and he is representative (albeit extreme) of his time. In 1930s Germany, there probably wasn't a soul who disagreed with Hitler's belief that the powers of Europe were holding down the country and that Germany should rise from the ashes to become the world's pre-eminent power; and in the age where nationalism was at its peak, ideas such as ethnic cleansing and genocide were probably not as uncommon as they are now. The unfortunate part in all this is that someone with those ideas got to implement them, but the horrors it brought on brought down nationalism- and, with it, opened the door for anti-racism movements to finally gain a proper footing and forum in society.

I have been reading this then after a while I was thinking, how the hell did this come up in a conversation. What the hell was he talking about when he decided to say what he thought about Hitler. Is it a regular question in interviews now to ask what's your position on Hitler?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity-interviews/2007/12/22/will-smith-my-work-ethic-will-make-me-a-legend-86908-20262460/

^ Reading that, it appears Smith got on the topic of how little things faze him and seemed to get carried away- he rationalized that everyone, even Hitler, has good (or at least reasonable) intentions behind their actions, even if said actions are as far away from good or reasonable as they could be.

Ahh Trolly.

Guess you missed that Freedom of Expression lesson......

No, I was there for it, heard it, understood it, and agree (for the most part) with it. Some protesters, like those who rally around the burial of a fallen US soldier and make signs that say "God Bless IED's" and such should have their procreation privileges perminantly removed. The peacful protestors not using God as an excuse to protest something are far less annoying.

But I think Will Smith is trying to self-destroy his own public image.

I don't see that at all.

No, I was there for it, heard it, understood it, and agree (for the most part) with it. Some protesters, like those who rally around the burial of a fallen US soldier and make signs that say "God Bless IED's" and such should have their procreation privileges perminantly removed. The peacful protestors not using God as an excuse to protest something are far less annoying.

Sorry are you saying that you are against protesting?

so let me get this right because he thought he was doing the right thing thats what counts, everyones good inside, rubbish. sadham husain...was he good inside 2. terroists think they're doing the right thing to so when we shot them down does that make us bad...no because you dont think twice about it.

hitler was not a good person, he knew excatly what he was doing and he did it for himself, not for the good of humanity.

so let me get this right because he thought he was doing the right thing thats what counts,....

I don't think anybody actually said that.

hitler was not a good person,
And no-one, ex-MIB agent or no, is arguing that he was.

he knew excatly what he was doing
Most probably.

and he did it for himself, not for the good of humanity.
On the contrary, Hitler believed what he was doing was 'purifying' and 'saving' humanity from peoples that he saw as destructive and dangerous.

Just read Mein Kampf or his later speeches to see this trend.

Relevant new update that's not worth a new thread!

Will Smith wins libel pay out after Hitler slur

LONDON (AFP) — Hollywood actor Will Smith won a public apology and damages in London's High Court Friday over a false allegation that he had described the former Nazi leader Adolf Hitler as a "good person".

His lawyer Rachel Atkins told judge David Eady the "deeply distressing" libellous allegation by World Entertainment News Network Limited (WENN) had caused her client "acute embarrassment".

The claim arose after London-based WENN, which provides entertainment news and photographs around the world, published an article on December 23 last year entitled "Smith: Hitler Was A Good Person", the court was told.

Atkins said the article "wholly misrepresents" an interview her client gave to a Scottish newspaper and in fact he considered Hitler to be a "vile and heinous man".

"The allegation that he could think otherwise is deeply distressing to the claimant and has caused him acute embarrassment," she said.

The action was brought because the article was picked up worldwide but despite an apology and retraction from the defendant, "the libel remains at large", she added.

WENN, whose lawyer apologised again in court, agreed to pay an unspecified amount in damages to the actor, who would then donate the money to charity, she added.
Link (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hDQmobr9VT7iAL235IfTABs8qCkQ)

So this should settle it once and for all. An apology has been made, a settlement has been paid, and the title of this thread was as wrong as the headline of the original article.

Done and done.

Done and done.So, basically, we could lock the thread now? :p

Done and done.
You say Will Smith thinks Hitler was an all-round cool guy?!

Thread War!!!!!!!

upon leaving the courtroom Mr Smith Saluted the glorious Comrade Stalin

if only :p

hitler was not a good person, he knew excatly what he was doing and he did it for himself, not for the good of humanity.persons who worked with hitler say otherwise.

Traudl Junge interview
pt 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOOmjQUI3Ys
pt 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLiNTyDFAvQ
pt 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj9gRnBrpf0

If this kind of logic is used and accepted, than no one can really be responsible for their own actions. It's all their upbringing or some mental defect that led them to do bad things. Morals would essentially become useless.

If this kind of logic is used and accepted, than no one can really be responsible for their own actions. It's all their upbringing or some mental defect that led them to do bad things. Morals would essentially become useless.

you mean peoples actions will be explained with science!?!

thats heresy that

From Hitler's perspective, he WAS good. However, under our morality, he was the monster we hold him to be.

oddly all Napoleon got from History was the small treatment

persons who worked with hitler say otherwise.

Agreed. They believed Hitler was the greatest man who ever lived. As did he.

From Hitler's perspective, he WAS good. However, under our morality, he was the monster we hold him to be.

So, basically, we could lock the thread now? :p

Yes, now it can be locked or just fall of the page and disappear -_-



:p

Agreed. They believed Hitler was the greatest man who ever lived. As did he.That's not accurate at all. In the inner circle he was rather a friendly soft-spoken polite old man (Mrs Junge calls him a paternal figure). They did not follow any kind of personality cult like the rest of the country. It seems the persons working very close to Hitler were in the calm eye of the storm. The demonization that folks like you pursue does not reflect how things really were, because what the real story says is that even a normal man can be a genocidal maniac. It says "It could be you" and under the wrong circumstances it will be you.

That's not accurate at all. In the inner circle he was rather a friendly soft-spoken polite old man (Mrs Junge calls him a paternal figure). They did not follow any kind of personality cult like the rest of the country. It seems the persons working very close to Hitler were in the calm eye of the storm. The demonization that folks like you pursue does not reflect how things really were, because what the real story says is that even a normal man can be a genocidal maniac. It says "It could be you" and under the wrong circumstances it will be you.

I agree. It could be you.

3. They are a blind optimist.

REDUNDANT ALERT!

Eh?:confused:
Hitler was a Lunatic (and not the nice sort), why Will Smith said this is beyond me.:confused:
Hitler was good at manipulating people, however he was absolutly shit at diplomacy.
Nice guy? What like creating propaganda and the Hitler youth?
Creating false promises to his people?
Nicking vast amounts of artwork (expensive), yeah right a good guy.
So nothing about the frankly retarted philosophy he followed affects his being a 'good guy'?
He was a power hungry bastard, i fail to see how he was a good guy.

Eh?:confused:
Hitler was a Lunatic (and not the nice sort), why Will Smith said this is beyond me.:confused:
Hitler was good at manipulating people, however he was absolutly shit at diplomacy.
Nice guy? What like creating propaganda and the Hitler youth?
Creating false promises to his people?
Nicking vast amounts of artwork (expensive), yeah right a good guy.
So nothing about the frankly retarted philosophy he followed affects his being a 'good guy'?
He was a power hungry bastard, i fail to see how he was a good guy.

Reading comprehension is staggeringly high nowadays. Sigh.

Will Smith never said Hitler was good. Will Smith said Hitler thought he was good. None of the most horrible human beings in the world, Hitler included, were cartoons villains who woke up every morning going "Nyah ha haaa... I think I will do something Extra Eeee-vil today!" The worst things in the world usually happen because someone thought they were doing a significant good in the world.

That's not accurate at all. In the inner circle he was rather a friendly soft-spoken polite old man (Mrs Junge calls him a paternal figure). They did not follow any kind of personality cult like the rest of the country. It seems the persons working very close to Hitler were in the calm eye of the storm. The demonization that folks like you pursue does not reflect how things really were, because what the real story says is that even a normal man can be a genocidal maniac. It says "It could be you" and under the wrong circumstances it will be you.

I dunno. The biographies I've read on Hitler say he was a loner for much of his life, a rather off-ish radical. As the Fuhrer, his generals commented that he either did all of the talking or all of the listening. Not one for much conversation.

Reading comprehension is staggeringly high nowadays. Sigh.

Will Smith never said Hitler was good. Will Smith said Hitler thought he was good. None of the most horrible human beings in the world, Hitler included, were cartoons villains who woke up every morning going "Nyah ha haaa... I think I will do something Extra Eeee-vil today!" The worst things in the world usually happen because someone thought they were doing a significant good in the world.

oh, so What Will Smith said was, that Hitler wanted to do good things.
Still a dumb thing to say, very easy to jump the gun with things about Hitler.
Still a nutter though.

"The worst things happen because someone thought they were doing a significant good in the world":confused:
Does this apply to people like Martin Luther King, and Mahatma Ghandi?
I really don't understand this statement.

I think Will Smith has a good point. People don't set out to do something evil, they set out to do something that fits into their own definition of just. Unfortunately some people's definition of just involves killing people they consider evil. That's why it may be a good idea to stop thinking of anybody as being pure evil.

I think Will Smith has a good point. People don't set out to do something evil, they set out to do something that fits into their own definition of just. Unfortunately some people's definition of just involves killing people they consider evil. That's why it may be a good idea to stop thinking of anybody as being pure evil.

What?
I hope you don't mind me criticising your statement, as i disagree with it.

P1) People don't set out to do something evil
P2) They set out to do something that fits into their own definition of just
P3) Unfortunately some people's definition of just involves killing people they
consider evil
C) That is why it may be a good idea to stop thinking of anybody as being pure evil

You assume people aren't born evil.

Your argument is inductive, as your conclusion relies on probability "may".

As you haven't met all people in the world you don't know for a fact that some people do set out to do evil, so your first premise is false.

I don't see how your 3rd premise and your conclusion work. Therefore your argument doesn't work together well at all, and is unsound, invalid and a poor inductive argument.

Hitler's anti-semitism was around long before he got into power, this could be considered a poor trait, therefore Hitler was not a good guy.

if only :p

upon leaving the courtroom Mr. Smith saluted the alien overlord, Xenu

if only :p

You don't seem to understand what the phrase "personal perspective" means.

so what does it mean?

What am i missing? I don't see how Hitler was a good guy, or even trying to be a good guy.

oh, so What Will Smith said was, that Hitler wanted to do good things.
Still a dumb thing to say, very easy to jump the gun with things about Hitler.
Still a nutter though.

"The worst things happen because someone thought they were doing a significant good in the world":confused:
Does this apply to people like Martin Luther King, and Mahatma Ghandi?
I really don't understand this statement.You don't seem to understand what the phrase "personal perspective" means.

then meditate on it.

so how can i meditate on it if i don't understand it?

What?
I hope you don't mind me criticising your statement, as i disagree with it.

P1) People don't set out to do something evil
P2) They set out to do something that fits into their own definition of just
P3) Unfortunately some people's definition of just involves killing people they
consider evil
C) That is why it may be a good idea to stop thinking of anybody as being pure evil

You assume people aren't born evil.

Your argument is inductive, as your conclusion relies on probability "may".

As you haven't met all people in the world you don't know for a fact that some people do set out to do evil, so your first premise is false.

I don't see how your 3rd premise and your conclusion work. Therefore your argument doesn't work together well at all, and is unsound, invalid and a poor inductive argument.

Hitler's anti-semitism was around long before he got into power, this could be considered a poor trait, therefore Hitler was not a good guy.My point is that Hitler considered Jews evil and he thought he would be doing the right thing by getting rid of them. From his point of view his actions where not evil.

This is speculation since I have never been Hitler and I don't know what he was thinking. It's also speculation to say that anybody sets out to do something evil. Meeting all the people in the world is irrelevant. Meeting somebody does not mean you have any foolproof way to analyze their intentions.

so what does it mean?

What am i missing? I don't see how Hitler was a good guy, or even trying to be a good guy.then meditate on it.

so what does it mean?

What am i missing? I don't see how Hitler was a good guy, or even trying to be a good guy.

What's difficult with the idea that Hitler was simply an ordinary man with the powers of the state who believed he was doing good for the world?

[QUOTE=VietnamSounds;13474167]My point is that Hitler considered Jews evil and he thought he would be doing the right thing by getting rid of them. From his point of view his actions where not evil.
But he knew about those Jews and many other types of people dying, if anything he was evil, but was relying on the "end justifies the means" philosophy, which in this case is evil.


This is speculation since I have never been Hitler and I don't know what he was thinking. It's also speculation to say that anybody sets out to do something evil. Meeting all the people in the world is irrelevant. Meeting somebody does not mean you have any foolproof way to analyze their intentions.
Perhaps, but we can make up a good idea of roughly what he was thinking. And we have accounts from various politicians/journalists/people who say Hitler was a nasty piece of work.

Therefore some people are evil by nature, if you cannot verify that all people will stick to doing morally good things.

What's difficult with the idea that Hitler was simply an ordinary man with the powers of the state who believed he was doing good for the world?

Because what he actually did had devastating consequences for many people.
I doubt Hitler was an ordinary man, he murdered many people, and specifically ordered the murder of his political opponents, trying to claim power for himself.
Hitler was not ordinary.

[QUOTE]
But he knew about those Jews and many other types of people dying, if anything he was evil, but was relying on the "end justifies the means" philosophy, which in this case is evil.



Perhaps, but we can make up a good idea of roughly what he was thinking. And we have accounts from various politicians/journalists/people who say Hitler was a nasty piece of work.

Therefore some people are evil by nature, if you cannot verify that all people will stick to doing morally good things.I'm aware that from your point of view, and from the point of view of most people, Hitler's actions are evil. I'm talking about Hitler's point of view. Morals are subjective and some people have a moral code that considers killing people good.

Most people consider it ok to kill somebody under certain circumstances. Personally I believe there is nothing wrong with killing in self defense. Hitler may have thought the same thing, and incorrectly thought he needed to be defended against the Jews. I'm not saying his actions can be justified, but from his point of view his actions may not have been evil.

[QUOTE]
And we have accounts from various politicians/journalists/people who say Hitler was a nasty piece of work.

Therefore some people are evil by nature, if you cannot verify that all people will stick to doing morally good things.

A nasty piece of work? Accounts? History is written by the victorious. If somebody says that someone/something is evil that doesn't prove that some people are evil by nature.

True but we have accounts of some of Hitlers personal advisors, and some propaganda footage that the Nazi party made, and Mein Kamf as well.
Not with Hitler, he should have known what he was doing, if he was moral and normal therefore Hitler was not a nice guy.

[QUOTE=VietnamSounds;13474216]I'm aware that from your point of view, and from the point of view of most people, Hitler's actions are evil. I'm talking about Hitler's point of view. Morals are subjective and some people have a moral code that considers killing people good.

Most people consider it ok to kill somebody under certain circumstances. Personally I believe there is nothing wrong with killing in self defense. Hitler may have thought the same thing, and incorrectly thought he needed to be defended against the Jews. I'm not saying his actions can be justified, but from his point of view his actions may not have been evil.

I'd like to think Morals are objective.
Perhaps it is okay to kill another person under dire circumstances, but Hitler and Hitler alone got him in his situation, so he is responsible for his actions, and as his actions were morally poor, Hitler was not a nice guy.

Hell Hitler wasn't even consistent with his yelling and complaining about getting other Germans to be safe in Europe, (take for example the South Tyrol under Mussolini's rule, they were brutally oppressed with many Germans yet Hitler ignored them).
If Hitler had wanted to help Germans he would have at least figured out that killing million's of people is not the way to do it.
I doubt even from Hitlers warped point of view he thought his actions were moral, he merely ignored them.
Hitler was not a nice man by any account, from his actions, from the consequences, from his intentions, he was dictator.

[QUOTE=Upper Thule;13474217]
True but we have accounts of some of Hitlers personal advisors, and some propaganda footage that the Nazi party made, and Mein Kamf as well.
Not with Hitler, he should have known what he was doing, if he was moral and normal therefore Hitler was not a nice guy.

[QUOTE=VietnamSounds;13474216]

I'd like to think Morals are objective.
Perhaps it is okay to kill another person under dire circumstances, but Hitler and Hitler alone got him in his situation, so he is responsible for his actions, and as his actions were morally poor, Hitler was not a nice guy.

Hell Hitler wasn't even consistent with his yelling and complaining about getting other Germans to be safe in Europe, (take for example the South Tyrol under Mussolini's rule, they were brutally oppressed with many Germans yet Hitler ignored them).
If Hitler had wanted to help Germans he would have at least figured out that killing million's of people is not the way to do it.
I doubt even from Hitlers warped point of view he thought his actions were moral, he merely ignored them.
Hitler was not a nice man by any account, from his actions, from the consequences, from his intentions, he was dictator.Yes, I think it's already been established that Hitler was a dictator and an all-around jerk. That's not what the topic is about.

Will Smith never said "Hitler was basically a good guy." He said that from Hitler's own point of view, he was good. Everyone else's point of view has nothing to do with this discussion.

If Hitler had wanted to help Germans he would have at least figured out that killing million's of people is not the way to do it.I get the feeling you think killing people is an unusual way for people to try to solve problems. It isn't. The people who started the United States thought they could help the Natives by bringing Christianity to their country, and killing them. Animal rights activists sometimes convince themselves that they are making a contribution to society by blowing up laboratorys full of mice. Apparently Seung-Hui Cho thought he was Jesus because he was helping "defenseless people." I honestly don't think any of those people I just listed had bad intentions. They arrived at the conclusions they arrived at because they used black and white good vs bad thinking. And naturally, when you use that kind of thinking, YOU are good and the people you dislike are evil. That's why I choose to think of no person being essentially evil. I consider that the type of thinking that leads to death.

Yes, I think it's already been established that Hitler was a dictator and an all-around jerk. That's not what the topic is about.

Will Smith never said "Hitler was basically a good guy." He said that from Hitler's own point of view, he was good. Everyone else's point of view has nothing to do with this discussion.

I get the feeling you think killing people is an unusual way for people to try to solve problems. It isn't. The people who started the United States thought they could help the Natives by bringing Christianity to their country, and killing them. Animal rights activists sometimes convince themselves that they are making a contribution to society by blowing up laboratorys full of mice. Apparently Seung-Hui Cho thought he was Jesus because he was helping "defenseless people." I honestly don't think any of those people I just listed had bad intentions. They arrived at the conclusions they arrived at because they used black and white good vs bad thinking. That's why I choose to think of no person being essentially evil. I consider that the type of thinking that leads to death.

No as i've said before Hitler was not a good guy, from his own point of view, speaking in a moral sense.

Actually those examples you gave can prove my point, that killing other people is not an ordinary thing to do, that you shouldn't kill others, which is what Hitler did to achieve his goals.

The problem is if we follow the type of moral philosophy you're stating, that (from the statements you make) morality is subjective then yes we can't really say what Hitler did was wrong.
The implications of this are enormous, we could argue that nearly anyone is only trying to be nice, so how can we judge them?
It's not a moral view i hold, i suspect this is what shows the difference in our opinions.
it's back to the Objective Vs Subjective morality.
Although i'm aware there are good arguments for both, i still think it makes more sense to stick with Objective morality(but i would prefer not to totally de-rail the thread with this).

No as i've said before Hitler was not a good guy, from his own point of view, speaking in a moral sense.

Actually those examples you gave can prove my point, that killing other people is not an ordinary thing to do, that you shouldn't kill others, which is what Hitler did to achieve his goals.

The problem is if we follow the type of moral philosophy you're stating, that (from the statements you make) morality is subjective then yes we can't really say what Hitler did was wrong.
The implications of this are enormous, we could argue that nearly anyone is only trying to be nice, so how can we judge them?
It's not a moral view i hold, i suspect this is what shows the difference in our opinions.
it's back to the Objective Vs Subjective morality.
Although i'm aware there are good arguments for both, i still think it makes more sense to stick with Objective morality(but i would prefer not to totally de-rail the thread with this).I never said people shouldn't be judged. People should be judged as wrong for harming others. I simply think nobody should be judged as being evil. I don't see why the concept of evil in human form is needed. It's dangerous.

I never said people shouldn't be judged. People should be judged as wrong for harming others. I simply think nobody should be judged as being evil. I don't see why the concept of evil in human form is needed. It's dangerous.

So are you saying no one is evil?
In a world of billions of people not one of them has the capacity to do evil?
I find this hard to believe.

I'm saying evil is a social construct, an unnecessary one.

I'm saying evil is a social construct, an unnecessary one.

Yes it is a social construct, but it's there. Because as humans we all have some basic capacity to be cruel, some more than others.

Hitler was very ordinary. He had one talent though, and that was giving speeches. He came to power through the power of his voice.

That ain't ordinary!
I'd freek out if i had to make a speech to millions of people, how is that normal?:eek:
What is normal anyway?

Yes it is a social construct, but it's there. Because as humans we all have some basic capacity to be cruel, some more than others.That's true. The problem is we're approaching this problem from totally different angles. So I think we've reached an impass here.

That's true. The problem is we're approaching this problem from totally different angles. So I think we've reached an impass here.

I think you're right.:p
But at least we've covered different ground, to come to prove our different ideas.

Because what he actually did had devastating consequences for many people.
I doubt Hitler was an ordinary man, he murdered many people, and specifically ordered the murder of his political opponents, trying to claim power for himself.
Hitler was not ordinary.Hitler was very ordinary. He had one talent though, and that was giving speeches. He came to power through the power of his voice.

So are you saying no one is evil?
In a world of billions of people not one of them has the capacity to do evil?
I find this hard to believe."evil" is an interpretation. a judgment.