Why Is Hitler Wrong?

To us, Adolf Hitler was known as an evil dictator who did horrendous things such as create the most infamous thing the “Holocaust” which resulted in around six million innocent Jews being killed. He started WWII which ended up with around 50-80 million people dead. But did Hitler do anything that was positive towards Germany or even the world. Adolf Hitler was a powerful leader with most of Germany behind him, so the question remains did Hitler do anything good?

Immanuel Kant is said by many to be one of the most influential “thinkers” in the history of Western philosophy (McCormick, n.d.), this being said, most of his theories continue to be taught and are highly respected by society. Kant was a firm believer that the morality of any action can be assessed by the motivation behind it (McCormick, n.d.). In other words, if an action is good but the intention behind the action is not good, the action itself would be considered immoral. Those who follow the utilitarian view would disagree, arguing that an action which benefits the most number of people would be considered moral regardless of the intentions behind it. Kant argues that the intention behind an action matters more than the number of people benefited. This theory of morality falls hand in hand with Kant 's concept of good will, and through examples I hope to explain to readers, in a simple way, what Kant was trying to convey.

According to Kant, we can control the will and meaning behind our actions. The morality of an action should be assessed by what the motivation of the action is. The moral worth of an action consists not in the consequences that flow from it, but in the intention from which the act is done. This is due to the fact that , for Kant, what the motive behind your

To us, Adolf Hitler was known as an evil dictator who did horrendous things such as create the most infamous thing the “Holocaust” which resulted in around six million innocent Jews being killed. He started WWII which ended up with around 50-80 million people dead. But did Hitler do anything that was positive towards Germany or even the world. Adolf Hitler was a powerful leader with most of Germany behind him, so the question remains did Hitler do anything good?

Hitler is baraling in, leaving the citizens blind to the ugly truth behind a broken Nation. Since World War II was a tough time for people who lived during this time period, people who lived during this time faced challenges such as death, Nazi occupation of Germany, and discrimination. As a problem for all ages and races, Death was a problem that was almost inescapable, even for those who were innocent. If you were Jewish and living in or around Germany you could be pummeled out of nowhere for no apparent reason. Although that may have been bad enough, Jews who lived in concentration camps faced a greater challenge, being randomly selected and shot, starving to death, or even sickness. As the Nazi occupation on Germany and neighboring nations

Hitler is one of the worst rulers the world has every seen. There are plantable reasons why Hitler was such a terrible ruler. One reason was because of the bad influences in his childhood. Adolf was the fourth of six siblings of whom only Adolf and his younger sister Paula reached adulthood. His father was abusive to him, his siblings and his mother. That made Adolf hate his father. Hitler was an oppressive dictator affected by abusive parents, rejected twice by the Academy of Fine Arts, and he rebelled against his father.

Adolf Hitler was an interesting man, but he had a bad reputation. He didn't have a normal childhood like other kids had. People tried to think of ways why he was so hateful to everyone. Adolf Hitler was surprisingly not the only child. He had five siblings that died. He led an interesting journey, even though his life kept on getting harder.

“ Humankind struggles with collective powers for it’s freedom, the individual struggles with dehumanization for the possession of his soul” (Saul Bellow).” Night” by Elie Wiesel was published in September 1960. This memoir was about Elie’s family and all the other Jews taken to concentration camps. Also about his experience in the the camps of how he struggled and got treated throughout the Holocaust to survive. There are three important quotes from the memoir that are significant and poignant that am going to be talking about.

10a. One thing that motivates people to hate is anger. Hitler’s followers bought into the idea that all Jews are evil because they wanted someone to blame for their financial problems. At the Museum of Tolerance, I learned that before Hitler rose to power Germany was in a recession. Many people lost money, jobs and even their homes. This made the people of Germany very mad. From this anger, Nazi followers arose, and their irrational ideas began to infect the minds of the German citizens. Soon Hitler and his crazy ideas were elected Prime Minister. This anger made many people in Germany lose sight of their beliefs and made them think irrationally. Throughout the Holocaust anger and hate was a driving force for the Nazi party.

This is can be tricky because as much as an institution can teach decency, that does not guarantee that a person would necessarily learn or want to learn to be decent. This also makes me question the concept of decency as well because what really is decency? What does it mean to be a decent person? Does it mean to lend a helping hand when someone is in need? Does it mean to smile and politely greet random strangers or to hold the door open for the person behind us? Does it mean to do no harm onto others? These are the questions that spawn just by trying to break down the concept of decency. However, I do believe decency is just doing what is right by the standards of what coincides with what the person believes is decent and society’s definition of decency. An example, society believes in doing no harm to others and I agree, therefore, I’m decent because I would not do any harm to another person. A politician, however, could shift on what it means on being

it's very common to hear people say that hitler brainwashed the germans. i've even heard it absurdly proposed that something about his voice hypnotized them. this is very convenient to believe, im sure, and a very convenient belief for the germans to perpetuate, lessening as it does the germans accountability, allowing us to sweep into a dark little corner the fact of the rampant anti-semitism that prevailed in europe for millenia (and which, make no mistake, still continues in eastern europe today), and saving us from confronting such tricky human-nature-revealing questions as: "how could a nature loving, hard working, family oriented people perpetrate such crimes?" (because if the germans could do something like this, then couldnt we all?). well the answer of course, according to most people, is hitler. it was allllll hitler.

Disregarding these cases, from the understanding of the judicial standpoint Kant believes one must be punished for the murder of another human being by means of taking their life, as seen in the quote above. Kant argues one imposes their will on another individual when they take that individual’s life. Due to this fact, to justly punish one who committed murder, the judicial system must impose on one’s will in the same manner as they did their victim’s will. Moreover, Kant argues killing a murder must be done to protect the greater good of humanity. Furthermore, to Kant, this punishment of a murder is consistent with his belief every human being is an autonomous being. He argues one who wills the amoral action which is not accordance with the

One can do what they think is the “right thing” to do because of the way they were raised. For example, Julie’s mother is a criminal and all she thought her was to do things her way. Julie was raised in that bad lifestyle according to others but for her, her mother is the best and there is nothing wrong with the way she was raise. In her mind, telling the truth is lying and lying is the truth. She must tell the policeman what happened in order for him to let go her friends so she “tell the truth” and her friend is free. In her mind she did not do anything wrong, it was a good intention, and a good consequence also. So, Kant’s theory is not complete because people are not raised the same way therefore think differently and have different perceptions of things. The mind is also complex so one can make itself believe that whatever they did was the right thing even though it was not.

From an objective standpoint, the word “great” is defined as distinguishable and unique, whilst it’s subjective use is “above average or excellent”. Within the context of history, it is polysemic. Many leaders, ranging from Gandhi to Hitler, were great in many ways, sometimes not sharing the same definition of great. Adolf Hitler, despite having mental instability, had an understanding of what the people wanted in germany from his beginnings in 1919 to when he was appointed Chancellor in 1933. In addition to this, several researchers and interviewers have testified and theorized that Hitler’s anxieties and tensions culminated into “a singleness of purpose: to establish the Third Reich” (McGuire & Hull, 1977). Part of being a great leader in

Kantian Duty Ethics is named after its creator Immanuel Kant. The way the Kantian approaches morality is by Deontological ethical theory. The word deontology comes from the Greek word deon, which translates to duty. (thefreedictionary) In deontological ethics it’s believed that morality is primarily a matter of rights and obligations. To Kant, morality isn’t based on hypothetical imperatives, instead it’s based on a categorical imperative, which in essence you should act only on maxims that you’re okay with everyone else also acting on. Kant was trying to identify the ultimate principle of morality, in which he thought he found in the principle of universalizability. In the principle of universalizability, it says that an act is morally acceptable if, and only if, its maxim is universalizable. (TFOE pg. 162) Kant believed that every action has a maxim. We don’t always clearly have a maxim, but whenever we act we do naturally have an intention of doing something, and we have a reasoning for doing whether it’s subconsciously or not. Also, Kant believed that to judge an action’s rightness you have to look at its maxim, and our morality of our actions has nothing to do with the outcome. To sort out the good maxims from the bad we have to apply universalizability. Another formulation of Kant’s is the