Talk:Adolf Hitler

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

This Nazism related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

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

Animals[edit]

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>http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adolf_Hitler&action=edit&section=7</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. ωεαşεζøίɗWeaselly.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]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkJcFGvNgcY 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)

Vegetarian[edit]

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)

Christianity[edit]

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 Married....to a protestant whore!" on their car because Lois was from a WASP family.PeeBay (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2017 (UTC)