Talk:Adolf Hitler

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon nazi.svg

This Nazism related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>


I want to add some info to the "most evil person" part about Hitler and the nazi party's shockingly great views on animal rights. I'm not trying to put him in leather pants or anything, I just want to point out that even he had good points.Tfaddict (talk) 22:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean by "animal rights" in the Nazi context? There's some documentation that Hitler was, at least at times, a vegetarian, but what is your broader claim here?
Stuff like hunting restrictions, banning animal trapping, and laws on conservation. They were actually the first nation in the world to place grey wolves under environmental protection.Tfaddict (talk) 22:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Well, if you have solid documentation for that stuff, go ahead. But I'd caution you about any implication that this redeems Nazis.---Mona- (talk) 22:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I do have documentation, however I am completely unknowledgeable about how to actually source it. Tfaddict (talk) 22:32, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
If it's a link, it looks like this at the end of the sentence or paragraph: <ref></ref> There's other stuff you can do also, such as adding the title of the article and embedding the link in that, inside the reference.---Mona- (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

So a guy who had millions sent to their death really loved his dog. Whoop-de-do. There are various theories about Hitler's vegetarianism, but if you're going to attribute it, & his policies on hunting etc., to "animal rights" then you need some solid sourcing to verify that he believed in any such concept. Since he liked to compare what he viewed as inferior races of humans to animals, & since he apparently did not believe that people of these races had inherent rights, I'm going to kind of doubt it. WēāŝēīōīďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 23:52, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, he may have had extensive sympathy for animal welfare which became reflected in Germany's laws, but animal "rights" wasn't a thing yet.---Mona- (talk) 00:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Them being (supposedly) in favor of animals is mostly due to three things: Kosher butchering is a popular trope among antisemites that somehow "proves" how "evil" Jews are (even though all type of butchering end up killing the animal and doing so by it bleeding out. Kosher butchering has the added benefit of the person doing the killin actaully knowing what they do). The second thing: Hitler was (or claimed to be) a vegetarian. And of course Goering was an avid hunter (the Jägermeister you like to drink? Yeah, that was named for him...) But of course the record of the Nazis on animal stuff makes PETA and ALF cringe. Which is fun to watch :-P Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Hitler was a sensitive man! (probably NSFW) --Ymir (talk) 00:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

It's actually interesting that the similar slaughter practices in Judaism and Islam is arguably what has protected halal slaughter against being outlawed as animal cruelty in several European countries (because it would be pretty hard to outlaw one and not the other and the odd conjunction of right-wing Islamophobia and extreme pro-Israel attitudes those most apt to push for limiting halal slaughter practices are unlikely to do so in order not to hit Jewish practices as well). The argument against both practices is that the animal should be stunned (or otherwise rendered unconscious) first in order to alleviate the pain involved in bleeding out. Indeed, the general rule for non-religious slaughter seems to be that stunning or similar practices is mandatory. Whether this is in concord with Islamic/Jewish religious requirement is something about which there seems to be various levels of objections to or agreement with within both traditions. ScepticWombat (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
The fact of the matter is: Measuring pain is difficult. We can't know for sure which amount of pain the animal feels in which type of killing. However, I think it is safe to say that a botched stunning (and those happen from time to time in automated slaughterhouses) likely produces more pain than a well done halal/kosher slaughter... Oh and as for halal/kosher... There was a debate on some RW talk page some time ago as to whether kosher food without alcohol is automatically halal... I always thought it is... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Ah yes, if you compare a botched slaughter to a well conducted one, the latter is preferable, who'd have guessed... As for whether kosher = halal, doesn't the latter has to have some specific prayer recited over it during slaughter? I'm not intimately familiar with the details of liturgy here, but though it would be rather nifty if the procedures were interchangeable, I'm not sure it's the case. As a general rule (i.e. outside slaughter specifics), however, yes, I think you're probably right. ScepticWombat (talk) 01:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
AFAIK both Muslims and Jews say some kinda prayer before the ritual slaughter of an animal (during would be a rather bad idea).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 20:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I think the vast majority of Muslims / Jews who care about kosher halal will say "ah close enough" (as long as the milk/meat and alcohol thing is not violated, respectively) and get on with eating. Especially when on the road or far away from major groups of their coreligionists... But there is always the 1% fringe nutcases... And I don't know about halal butchers, but I have heard that kosher butchering is usually done by people who have a lot of hands on knowledge, making botching the whole thing much less likely... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
"I have heard that kosher butchering is usually done by people who have a lot of hands on knowledge" Funny, I've heard the same thing about people working in secular abattoirs too... ScepticWombat (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Wasn't there that book about meatpacking in Chicago? I personally have little reason to believe today's meat is produced all that differently... And is it really that easy to "industrialize" kosher/halal butchering without being kicked out of the religion for violating the rules? I mean I don't care all that much, but... yaknow.... Just thinking: The guy who started last week botching it or someone who has apprenticed for three years and sees it as his/her holy duty... But than again, there are "experts" who are to stupid to correctly apply tape measure Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
You know why most slaughterhouse workers aren't guys "who started last week"? Because a trained worker is able to process a carcass way faster and efficiency is everything. Also, there are other industrialised countries than the US and they rarely have farmed out a large sector of their meatpacking sector to illegal immigrants, but instead have the kind of skilled workforces that was the standard in the US before the deregulation fetishists and anti-union forces took over. To take just one example, I know of an education solely for intestine cleaners in my native country which takes 2-3 years, while training to be a basic butcher takes 2 years (with an additional 1-1½ years to specialise in various branches such as retail, delicatessen, or animal types) so please try to limit these apples and oranges comparisons. Of course any unskilled untrained labourer is likely to make more mistakes than a skilled and experienced one, but you could just as well turn things around and ponder how your sacred duty butchers became so skilled (probably not by practising on vegetables or props, I'd wager...), meaning that you are liable to get the exact same inexperience problems with religious slaughter too. ScepticWombat (talk) 02:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
You are probably right on at least some points. (And it is amazing that we are discussing whether kosher butchering is superior on this of all talk pages) However, every industrialized country (including the not-US one I am sitting in right now) has automatization most of its industries. Including slaughter. And I am quite sure that a machine is neither kosher nor halal as a slaughter thingy. And I may of course be mistaken, but I think a machine dealing with living things on occasion botches stuff. And I have heard some time ago that even countries such as Germany have huge animal cruelty problems in their slaughterhouses. So big that they ban cameras (and hidden camera footage invariably leaks)... Denmark was in fact favorably compared to Germany in one of the articles on the subject that made its way into Spiegel online Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Hunting Hitler on History Channel[edit]

So, question, how incredibly terrible is this? Like, seriously, I watched five seconds and I already noted how crap their investigation prowess was. Essentially, they all work on the conclusion that Boys of Brazil is a true story and try to find facts to prove it resulting in them searching waterways and oceans for what is essentially junk and declaring it proof. It's like someone taking Elvis sightings seriously.

Is this worthy of adding to the article or making a new one ala Ancient Aliens?

i don't know if it needs it own page. I don't think it's reached quite the same level of infamy as AA, but it wouldn't be a bad addition to the Myths section of the hitler page--Petey Plane (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Or maybe a page that more broadly covers the Boys of Brazil psudohistory--Petey Plane (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Again...The Hitler kid thing[edit] Burkean (talk) 02:56, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I was at work one day and I noticed that my fringe was slanting diagonally so I asked a coworker who was the same age as me, twenty five at the time, 'Does my hair make me look like Hitler?' to which she replied 'I don't know who that is.'

Thank God I don't work in retail anymore. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 09:56, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Source for the "paints a sky green" quote[edit]

Does anybody have a good, original source for the quote, "Anyone who sees and paints a sky green and fields blue ought to be sterilized."? The reference given is to this site, which doesn't provide a source. Googling a bit, I didn't find a source, but I did find this blog post where somebody else was complaining about not being able to find a source. Klortho (talk) 03:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

This is the speech he gave where the source originates from (in German) and here is an English translation of it. From a quick glance, he didn't say the forced sterilization outright but highly implied it. NameThatNobodyTakes () 06:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
So, you feel comfortable leaving it in as a direct quotation? Klortho (talk) 11:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
We should probably write, that it as a paraphrase of some sorts. I read the speech and he both rants about people drawing stuff that and implies, that they should be sterilized.--The (((Kigel))) (talk) (mail) 11:17, 9 August 2016 (UTC) 11:17, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


Do you really think that removing the snarky comment was necessary? I mean serious, would anyone actually take it seriously and assume that we think that all vegetarians are Hitler? Really? Arawn Emrys (talk)

If you're fine with reinserting the fallacy, go ahead. I'm all for snarky comments no matter who is targeted, but fallacious ones are where I draw a line. NameThatNobodyTakes () 14:37, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


You can cherry pick quotes showing Hitler to be an atheist or a Christian yet he is put in the category Christians. I can't edit the page or I'd remove it myself. Christopher (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying he was a model Christian exactly, and Christianity takes no blame for what Hitler personally believed, but Hitler was almost certainly no atheist. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
If he was an atheist he wouldn't have said so, he saw religion as important for controlling people. We don't know his religious beliefs.Christopher (talk) 11:49, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Hitler's actions speak louder than his words. You will agree that if he disliked something — regardless of what he said in his propaganda speeches — the man would try to eradicate it. Yet under him, a whopping half of his entire SS were practicing Catholics. While I'm sure he would have replaced that with some form of occult paganism in the end, he still didn't have atheism in mind (per se). Nor did the Vatican protest the Nazi extravagances (on the contrary, the church made any escapes into South America possible). Indeed, the pope only excommunicated one nazi, Joseph Göbbels, and that was for the crime of marrying a protestant. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
So what you're saying is Gobbels was literally worse than Hitler? Marrying a Protestant whore will do that!PeeBay (talk) 11:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
@PeeBay, What? Christopher (talk) 11:55, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
@Christopher, old Family Guy joke. Back when it was funny. His dad writes "Just a protestant whore!" on their car because Lois was from a WASP family.PeeBay (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Cover story (sticky)[edit]

This article is long and accurate. It makes a lot of sense, and would be perfect for the main page.Jeh2ow Damn son! 23:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Silver Nomination[edit]

Someone mentioned pushing for Gold, so lets go through the steps. Opening the floor. Zero (talk - contributions) 16:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

This article can't be silver until it includes my conspiracy theory Hitler was transported 70 years into the future
+1 for making the article silver. Overdue, frankly. Minish (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Everything checks out, I think it still missing some rational wiki charm though. +1 for Silver Tanker One (talk) 19:37, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
I think it's definitely bronze. It could use some work in the following areas both for bronze and silver: 1) rechecking references to make sure they work 2) reformatting references to remove naked the http 3) Investigating relevant things that Snopes and other fact-checking sites have looked into for possible inclusion here. Bongolian (talk) 21:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
I know of 1 crank that thinks that he boffed up Eva and her sister before escaping his bunker and eventually commiting suicide at the age of 93, while someone (he never mentioned who or whether Eva Braun & her sister escaped the bunker or not)took care of his 3 kids: Angela Merker, her step-sister Hillary Clinton and Hillary's "brother" Tim Kaine (because "kaine" sounds like "Kaïn", therefore hitler's... son or something?).
Oh, and he also thinks that Hitler was the leader of the Illuminati... Tinribmancer (talk) 00:53, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I've actually been planning to add some stuff and reorganize the Hitler article. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 01:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
That's great, let's get some collaborative effort going on this page! Bongolian (talk) 03:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
the bulk of this article seems to be overly concerned with hitlers religion, while the of the rest, over half is the most evil section which I would propose to remove. I know we are not Wikipedia, that we have a different focus than a simple encyclopedia, but I am struggling to see where the focus is in this article. it looks to me like a lot of work is required to be 'silver' AMassiveGay (talk) 18:32, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Source for “Hitler invented modern politics”?[edit]

I’ve added a fact tag to the bit about Hitler inventing modern politics; while he did obviously do all those things, I’m not certain he was the first to do them/put them all together/whatever? Anyone with more historical knowledge care to help out? Thanks A S E L A कुरा 05:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

What even is "modern politics"? --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 06:14, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
as i understand it, though not clearly explained in the article, is that the Nazi's use of propaganda took that 'art' to whole new level, particularly with their control of the media, at a time when what we call 'media' was in its infancy. the lessons that were learned have been used and expanded by every politician since that you could make the whole 'modern politics' argument such was the seismic shift, probably similar to the effect the internet has and is having today. it should require a source of some kind, and could be credited more to Goebbels (who apparently had no balls) than to hitler (who merely had the one) AMassiveGay (talk) 13:32, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
there is also the argument that everything post war - the soviet dominance over eastern Europe, the cold war, the use of Nazi scientists in the space race etc, formation of Israel, all played out the way did because hitler set the ball rolling, but that's a bit of a more hazy an idea AMassiveGay (talk) 13:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
it should also be noted that it is not required to be the first to do any of the things the Nazis did, but if people did similar things elsewhere or others prepared the ground, we only know about a lot these thing, or at least our understanding of them, is because the Nazis did them. AMassiveGay (talk) 14:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

most evil human section[edit]

is just facile genocidal top trumps and should be scrubbed from the article. he is no less evil because some others may be responsible for more deaths, and he is no more evil than someone with the blood of far fewer people. while hitler and the Nazis are the benchmark for evil in the western world, this section doesnt really go anywhere. it adds little to the article while elevating his crimes to something far beyond what normal human beings are capable of, it obscures the fact, the scale not withstanding, that genocide was not new nor unique, and normal human beings are very capable of doing some truly awful things. sadly we are too often reminded of this, and sadder still, not early enough. It should always be remembered that hitler was but one man, and could not have caused so much suffering on such a scale on his own. it required many more people, normal human beings, to be complicit in mass murder. hitler was a monster, but even if he was uniquely evil quibbling over 'how evil' misses this point and makes us miss the warnings that may make monsters of any of us. AMassiveGay (talk) 14:45, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 15:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes. There is no need to mark Hitler out as "most evil" as if there were some sort of contest. "Extremely evil" would do. Also, I question whether anyone could show their face in polite society in America after publicly praising Stalin. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
90% of the discovery channel's output is such contest. they are just lacking simon cowell AMassiveGay (talk) 17:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Good, we're getting somewhere on critiquing this page. The Disco Channel would be worth noting as promoting the 'most evil' trope as well as the loony trope of 'killing Hitler in infancy would save the world'. Bongolian (talk) 19:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
i dunno why its always killing hitler as a baby that we go to for that kind of trope. we could just wait till hes a bit older and obviously a cunt so we don't have to have wring our hands over baby killing AMassiveGay (talk) 19:53, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
i am reluctant to just out right delete this section at this time as i am unsure with what to replace it with and just what the focus of this article is or what we are trying to achieve.
this i think is an issue we have here on rationalwiki, particularly for historical figures so well known and with such a massive place in history. if we are not after an encyclopedic entry resulting in a likely subpar Wikipedia page, we still need to actually explain their place in history and we need to balance that with what we consider 'missional'. an indepth discussion of hitlers religion might be missional, but juxtaposed with the holocaust seems a tad petty.
maybe some kind general overview, a kind of Wikipedia page in brief, to highlight we are aware of the things hes done and his place in history with relevant links to where they are discussed in more depth, then a kind of mission statement of what this article will focusing on? it would be especially useful if the focus is not so much hitler but how hes been viewed or used by the various nutjobs we know and love. it might avoid any issues of balance. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't seem right to joke about Hitler and homosexuality: "Hitler's sex life, or lack thereof, has provided the grist for many a rumor mill — ranging from the assertion that he died a virgin, to his supposedly having deformed genitals[66], to the possibility that he was gay.[67] The idea that Hitler was gay is not in any way undermined by his taste in art (see illustration).[68]" I don't like the text under the illustration either: " Hitler's taste in art included anything by Arno Breker. Something you'd like to get off your chest, Adolf?" Ariel31459 (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@Ariel31459 If you want to rewrite it, go for it. Bongolian (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Finding his religion section[edit]

This section should probably be renamed, given that most of it is devoted to rumours that have nothing to do with Hitler's religion, and that his personal religious beliefs are addressed in a separate section of the article.--Omicron (talk) 15:50, 15 December 2019 (UTC)


I've basically done what I'm gonna do to this article. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 15:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

I've reviewed everything you've added, DuceMoosolini: it looks great. There are still parts of the page that could use revision, but I think we can move it to silver now. Anyone else? Bongolian (talk) 18:11, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
I've unilaterally decided that we've just about hit the "or forever hold your peace" part of these proceedings. So does anyone object to upgrading this article to silver? 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 21:37, 28 December 2019 (UTC)


Imagine being the sort of person who thinks to themselves, “I’m going to spend tonight whitewashing an article on Adolf freaking Hitler on a C-List wiki project because I’m offended that they called him a nasty dude”. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 08:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I'd call RW more B-list than anything else, we're ranked pretty high in the alexa ratings. Oxyaena Harass 13:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

That Hitler 'joke'[edit]

I don't think that joke was funny (that Hitler wasn't all bad because he killed Hitler). He escaped justice by killing himself and not facing a war crimes trial.

The idea of Hitler can be funny, but only as Mel Brooks has presented him as far as I've seen it (The Producers, Blazing Saddles). Bongolian (talk) 20:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

What Bongolian said. Scream!! (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)