The Instigator
Bogcha
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Midnight1131
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Adolf Hitler was a good guy

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Midnight1131
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2015 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,558 times Debate No: 74927
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

Bogcha

Pro

"Adolf Hitler was a good guy"
I will indicate that if you are not prepared for this do not assume that this will be a easy win.

Rules:
No profanity;
No forfeiting or it will be (if the individual is unable to respond in a round he/she/it should indicate so in the comments);
No moral appeal (don't tell me "what if he will do that to you....")
First round is acceptance;

Let's play! :)
Midnight1131

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Bogcha

Pro

Thank you Con for accepting this debate. I will just copy and paste the definitions that i have posted in the comment's section:

good's definition on google is "to be desired or approved of"
I will be using GOOD as in GOOD or BAD (heaven or hell; right or wrong; left or right; bottom line it means morally right);

Moral: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

I will ease us into this round with the following. I ask the con to first provide rebuttals for my indications below and then prove his/her/it's point. Failure to comply will result in point deduction.

1. Hitler's intent of change was due to the Treaty of Versailles where Germany was stripped off: [1]
A) Territorial (lands have been taken from Germany and given to the allies)
B) Military (army reduced to 100K man with no tanks and no airforce as well as being guarded by the french for 15 years)
C) Financial ( germany loss of industrial territory and the imposed sanctions to cripple the banks resulting to bankruptcy; write 6.6mil check to the allies)

Concluding from the above, Hitler's actions can be seen moral as he only wanted "good" for his country. He did not want a Germany that was a slave to the other European Countries.

2. WW2 has created a boom in military development which in turn allowed major advancement in other areas of specialty (medicine, communication, logistics etc.) [2]
I will keep this one short because the primary sentence is self-explanatory, but in case it isn't continue reading. If Hitler did not start our current technological stage might not be at this level.

[1] http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Midnight1131

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate. I'll start off with rebuttals.

1. Hitler's intent of change was due to the Treaty of Versailles where Germany was stripped off: [1]
A) Territorial (lands have been taken from Germany and given to the allies)
B) Military (army reduced to 100K man with no tanks and no airforce as well as being guarded by the french for 15 years)
C) Financial ( germany loss of industrial territory and the imposed sanctions to cripple the banks resulting to bankruptcy; write 6.6mil check to the allies)

Concluding from the above, Hitler's actions can be seen moral as he only wanted "good" for his country. He did not want a Germany that was a slave to the other European Countries.

Hitler did want "good for his country." But his actions eventually changed into simple hatred of the Jews. Hitler had no reason to perscute Jewish people, but he did, even those living in Germany.

In Nazi Germany at the time, there was a total population of around 69,850,000, Germany suffered a loss of around 1,100,000 civilians[1]. But let's keep it to the people that Hitler killed deliberately, the Jews. Germany was the 3rd highest country in the number of Jews killed. Which comes up to about 210,000[2], compare that to the estimated Jewish population before the war, 240,000[2]. That's 90% of the Jewish population of Germany killed by Hitler, on purpose.
  1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
  2. http://en.wikipedia.org...

2. WW2 has created a boom in military development which in turn allowed major advancement in other areas of specialty (medicine, communication, logistics etc.) [2]
I will keep this one short because the primary sentence is self-explanatory, but in case it isn't continue reading. If Hitler did not start our current technological stage might not be at this level.

A major technological development of WWII was the atomic bomb, which resulted in 90,000–166,000 killed in Hiroshima,
39,000–80,000 killed in Nagasaki, around a total of 129,000–246,000+ were killed[1]. Considering that most of the technological developments were made surrounding the fields of weaponry, most of the advancements were mainly used for destruction.
  1. http://en.wikipedia.org...

Now moving on to my own arguments.

Aftermath of the War
Hitler himself, was dead. But it was his country that had to deal with the aftermath of the war. Germany was split into 2, East Germany and the West. Germans faced much discrimination after the war, as they were viewed with contempt. Many times they were insulted if they travelled abroad, by the locals who still viewed them responsible for the actions of Hitler. The German economy was also affected very badly after the war. Germany lost around a quarter of it's territory, Silesia and Neumark were taken over by Poland, East Prussia was taken by Poland and the USSR, and 9 million Germans were expelled from these territories[1].
  1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
  2. http://en.wikipedia.org...

Hatred of Jews

It's very obvious now, that Hitler really hated Jews. He was quoted on this many times, in his autobiography Mein Kampf[1].

  • The black-haired Jewish youth lies in wait for hours on end, satanically glaring at and spying on the unsuspicious girl whom he plans to seduce, adulterating her blood and removing her from the bosom of her own people. The Jew uses every possible means to undermine the racial foundations of a subjugated people. (Book 1 Chap 11)
  • ...the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.
  • Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: 'by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.'

It is not a good person, who bears such great hatred towards a group of people. So much so that he would generalise them all into one category, then start a quest to exterminate them all.

My opponent states that Hitler was a good person, based on morals. However my oponent failed to specify as to what they were referring to, the morality of Hitler's intent, or the morality of his actions. His actions should weigh more, as they affected his entire nation, and the entire world.

I know toss the ball back to my opponent.

Debate Round No. 2
Bogcha

Pro

Bogcha forfeited this round.
Midnight1131

Con

I extend.
Debate Round No. 3
Bogcha

Pro

Bogcha forfeited this round.
Midnight1131

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
I've been trying to get out of the habit of putting down all my arguments in one round. If my opponent refutes them all, then there's nothing left.
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
I don't see why you couldnt just do it in the same round
Posted by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
Theunkown I was going to mention more deaths from other nationalities in the next round, but my opponent did not respond.
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
I hate it when people only count the death of Jews as if they were some special snowflake.
What about the tens of millions of Poles, Soviets, homosexuals, disabled people, communist sympathizers and gypsies that were killed in an extermination atempt? Why are you people so Judeo-centric?!
Posted by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
I failed to provide a source for Hitler comments in Mein Kampf in the debate, here it is.
http://www.mosaisk.com...
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
This is so subjective it's not even funny... lol
Posted by Bogcha 2 years ago
Bogcha
well good's definition on google is "to be desired or approved of"
I will be using GOOD as in GOOD or BAD (heaven or hell; right or wrong; left or right; bottom line it means morally right);

Moral: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

Glad someone asked and did not just jump in.
Posted by Reeseroni 2 years ago
Reeseroni
Please define good, because I think we all know where this is going...
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
I'd like you to define "good" though, before the debate starts.
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
lol
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
BogchaMidnight1131Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gains conduct because of Pro's frequent forfeiture. Pro forfeited two rounds of the debate, and forfeiture is generally unacceptable conduct in a debate setting, however informal. Con graciously extended their arguments and bounced the debate back to Pro, which is particularly good conduct in response to a forfeiture. Thus, I penalize Pro for misconduct due to forfeiture of two rounds, greatly wasting their opponent's time. Due to this, I award Con conduct. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
BogchaMidnight1131Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
tajshar2k
BogchaMidnight1131Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF