CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
If you studied history closely, you would see that Eastern German territory was being awarded to Poland, whilst the western area, known as the Rhineland was completely demilitarized, effectively leaving Germany's western border completely defenseless against a French assault. The Treaty of Versailles was slowly strangling Germany, and the only people with the courage to stand up and say no were NSDAP, later to be known as the Nazi party. They raised up the German people and gave them back their pride. As I said before, Jewish extermination is not a Nazi belief, but a two fold plan to provide a scapegoat for Germany's economic and social troubles, and to a lesser extent to provide free labour to aid the war effort.
"As I said before, Jewish extermination is not a Nazi belief, but a two fold plan to provide a scapegoat for Germany's economic and social troubles, and to a lesser extent to provide free labour to aid the war effort."
Im not sure I am getting what you are saying. "jewish extermination is not a Nazi beleif" - so it just happened by accident that millions of jews where almost exclusivly put into camps where they were killed in o so many inventive ways, No plan or agenda behind it???
so if that was true why did many of the nazis start exterminating the Jews, if it was only a belief of Hitler, then how did it get to the extermination of 11 million people, 5 million of them non-jewish, explain to me how 11 million people were exterminated if the belief was only Hitlers. extermination was not only a belief of Hitlers, it was a belief of many nazis as well.
that many people would not have followed him unless they believed him and agreed with him, most of them didnt, but a lot of the people did agree with him
No. Naziism is a vague "theory" full of abstrakt ideas that where fashionable at the time (intelligence, private enterprise of the ubermenchen, social darwinism, linear history) , and these abstrakt ideas where used as PR (then called Propaganda) to further facist aims. The same is true for other political theories (that they are basically PR) because none of them really work except on the surface (that is; on TV and in lecture halls.).
Trying to put space between Naziism and Jewish extermination is sort of like saying that the sub-prime crisis has nothing to do with modern capitalism.
But I guess we will always find fringe groups how get hung on senseless ideas.
Explain to me then, how a 'vague "theory" full of abstrakt ideas' turned an impoverished nation into one of the world's most powerful, in under 10 years?
Anyway, attributing Jewish extermination (which I now suspect was inflated to demonize Nazis) to Nazism is like attributing Global extortion to Democracy. Though both have been carried out under those Government types respectively, they have nothing to do with the Political systems themselves.
Anyway that's not the debate, and I mentioned it at first because I knew that would be the main argument against the Nazis. The real debate is 'The Nazis, a necessary evil?'
"Explain to me then, how a 'vague "theory" full of abstrakt ideas' turned an impoverished nation into one of the world's most powerful, in under 10 years?"
I just did; by building a bubble like we are in now, but they didnt do it by overborrowing for morgages, they did it by inflating heavy machinery production, leaving them with a bunch of armory they didnt find much use for except to kill some people and then sell some other people wepons in the turmoil to keep the bubble going.
Anyway, attributing Jewish extermination (which I now suspect was inflated to demonize Nazis) to Nazism is like attributing Global extortion to Democracy.
except "global extortion" is a very vague and fuzzy subject where it is hard to pinpoint exact players and their agenda, while jewish extermination was very precise and it is easy to pinpoint the exact players and what their agenda was
The Nazis, a necessary evil: Ofcourse not, they did not leave anything good behind, in the process of building Germany back up, they ruined a bunch of country´s and left Germany in shatters. So what greater good could there possibly be that makes them a necessary evil?
Jewish extermination is not a Nazi belief, but a two fold plan to provide a scapegoat for Germany's economic and social troubles, and to a lesser extent to provide free labour to aid the war effort.
So the Nazis didn't believe in killing Jews for fun, they killed Jews as an economic scapegoat and also using them for free labor to aid the war effort. That's much better. Geez, that should win the world over quite nicely. Dude, what the hell is wrong with you?!
You mean the world would forget about it all and they'd get away with it?
If Germany had won the war, there'd still be tension and unease within the world because of what they did and eventually they'd still have to pay... No people is going to forget you tried to exterminate them like that.
But clearly they didn't win... precisely because they weren't trying to win the world over with charm but with weapons ;)
What resulted in the Treaty of Marseilles? Was it because Germany was all peaceful and nice or was it because Germany went and invade Belgium, Luxemburg and France? For those that don't know history, it was the beginning of WW1. The war that Germany lost.
I'm not talking about what the treaty was, we all know what the treaty was: It was something the world used to punish Germany (rightly or wrongly) for their part in the war. I'm talking about what resulted in the treaty in the first place?
We can debate until we're blue in the face but WW1 was due to many factors. It was Germany that threw the first stone however. Forget about the assassination of the duke, that was hardly felt in the grand scheme of things.
You know what happens in wars: Winners are heros and losers are criminals. The world just punished Germany at the end of WW1, but at the end of WW2, they went a different route, which is ofcourse a much better one. This is not as a result of the Nazis' work because they had no control over this process. Germany was divided up into many pieces and was controlled by the Allies after WW2. Germany is the way it is today because of the goodness in the people of the world that controlled her after WW2.
So it was goodness that led to 40 years of separation and penalization?
It was goodness that led to the Berlin blockade?
It was goodness that led to the iron curtain?
If you are so in love with the idea of a world ruled by the communist Russians, then maybe you should look at their own country.
Typical victor's speech. Germany had every right to start WW II, even though they actually didn't. Their first military act was to retake land that was stolen by Poland at the end of WWI, so that it could have sea-ports. Then BRITAIN declared war on GERMANY. Lucky for them, too, because Hitler's plan was to invade Russia, and with Germany's full military might he would have crushed Stalin. It was only the intervention of the western allies that stopped him. If this had not happened, then when Hitler eventually did invade the west, if that was his plan, he would have one, with all of Russia's resources behind him.
'Germany is the way it is today because of the goodness...'
I say again, if the Nazi's had not come to power, then Germany would not exist today. All we would have would be a bigger France, and a bigger Poland.
Goodness? So it was goodness that led to 40 years of separation and penalization? It was goodness that led to the Berlin blockade? It was goodness that led to the iron curtain?
No it wasn't. It was hate, revenge, mistrust of the German people. The part about the goodness of people is how Germany is the way it is today. People didn't want to completely destroy Germany, they came pretty close, but they didn't, so here it is.
I say again, if the Nazi's had not come to power, then Germany would not exist today. All we would have would be a bigger France, and a bigger Poland
Nah, I say if the Germans were ruled by peace loving tree huggers instead of the Nazis, Germany (and the world) would have avoided WW2, the economy would have thrived with green energy technologies and Germany would have lead the world in the space and technology frontier.
The extermination of Jews is not a feature of Naziism. It was historical tensions in Germany that allowed Hitler to undertake this. However you want to look at it, the only reason Germany exists today is because of the nazis rebelling against a world that wanted to carve up German territory.
Whatever, Germany exists today because people of the world are generally nicer today than they were in the days before WW1.
Think about it:
- Germany and its allies fought a massive war and lost (WW1) so they got handed the Treaty of Marseilles (it wasn't very nice of the winners, I know but they were pretty angry and gave Germany what it deserved).
- Germany rebelled against the treaty and so fought another massive war (WW2) and lost again and was split into many pieces! (The world was a bit nicer this time, but didn't trust the Germans so they took over administration and the country didn't regain full sovereignty until late 1990 and is now what it is today). No thanks to the Nazis.
What the Nazis could have done was be a beacon of world peace and technology, then they would have been seen as something good for the German people. Instead, they warred and murdered and left Germany at the mercy of the world, thank god the world isn't run by people like the Nazis too... otherwise Germany wouldn't be Germany any more, it would have been carved up and its name changed and its citizens murdered in gas chambers and its culture completely erased and relegated to only exist in history books.
Clearly you don't understand the history. If the Nazi's had done nothing, Germany would still be a cesspit filled with Poles and poverty. As it is, it has the largest economy in Europe, because they stuck up to the rest of the world and decided it was time to stop paying ridiculous reparations in accordance with the treaty of Versailles (you idiot). And if the world was run by Nazis, at least I wouldn't have to argue with you, because you'd be the first into the fucking gas chamber.
Besides, you'll notice the Allies didn't try the whole reparations thing again did they? They knew better that time.
so, you'd rather have a world controlled by nazis, you realize there'd only be less then a billion people left in the world right?
The nazis would have murdered everyone else because first, they would have murdered all the allied troops and anyone who argued with them, then Hitler would have had anyone non-aryan/christian sent to the camps to die because they weren't perfect. Some messed up world you would like to live in. Your the perfect nazi, someone who cares only about themself. besides, i agree with NVYN, people are a lot nicer today then they were back then
Really? I was of the assumption that England wasn't part of Central Europe, but i must be mistaken then because Germany decided to attack Central Europe AND England
Clearly I don't understand history? I'm not saying the Nazis shouldn't have done nothing, but starting another conflict that resulted in its country torn apart into many pieces, death to millions of its citizens, rape of its women (some 2 million), etc, etc, etc, was that the smartest thing to do?
Yeah, clearly the world didn't try the whole reparations thing again cos they fucked the country up good and proper and didn't give it back its full sovereignty until late 1990. So what part of the "people of the world are nicer today" did you have trouble understanding?
Of course it was Ally troops that did that to the German women! The Germans did that to other countries' women. That's what happens in a war... unfortunately.
Do you know how many incidents of rape there were in the entire Wehrmacht? Several. Not many, not 2m, but several. Do you know what happened to German soldiers convicted of rape? They were executed.
No, I don't know, and you may well be correct. However what I'm saying is that the Nazis went to war and they lost that war thus exposing the German people to atrocities of war.
Yes, with attitudes like this you wonder why the Nazis got their asses handed to them... You go picking fight and being all superior when you're not, then you lose the fight and wonder why people were so mean to you. If it was me, I wouldn't have stopped at the fucking Treaty of Versailles, or split your country into pieces, I'd have fucking used the atom bomb on your asses and turned your entire population into mutant freaks, then we'd have Mutantland instead of Deutschland.
Germany and its allies fought a massive war and lost (WW1) so they got handed the Treaty of Marseilles (it wasn't very nice of the winners, I know but they were pretty angry and gave Germany what it deserved).
Ok, this pisses me off.
Your an asshole
ONE: GERMANY WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR WWI!
Ausria-Hungary was.
TWO: Germany got LIED to by the Allies (France, etc.) The Treaty said AT FIRST that they would be left alone. Later, it was altered and Germany had NO say in what the treaty "argreements" would be. Therfor, land was stolen from Germany by all the shit countries in Europe.
Say you're the big dog in your neighborhood and the little dogs allied themselves with you, then when one of them got into some trouble, you went and waged an all out war against all the other dogs you thought were responsible... if you lost that war, the other dogs are not going to make the little dog pay, they'd make you pay!!!
So no, Germany didn't start the war, Germany started invading countries soon after the assassination, which started the war.
TWO: The treaty wasn't really fair, but that's because all the other countries were really pissed off... you don't go waging war and then expect people to be all nice to you when they beat your ass.
Death counts is nothing. In a war, you have deaths, that's not a statistic to compare victory or defeat. Look at Germany after the war. The heroic Nazis were no more and the German people and country in tatters.
Saying the Nazis were "just plain evil" is wrong. Noone would ever define them selves as evil. at the time germany was poor and angry, and Hitler and the Nazi party helped germany by lowering unmployment, increasing food supplies and increasing education. Hitler was seen as such a great man that he was Time's man of the year in 1939.
They were good for Germans, bad for everyone else. I don't agree with their methods, but "evil" is a point of view. They believed they were doing the right thing.
The Psychopaths that called themselves Nazis, destroyed Germany. If not for the Marshall Plan, Germany would look like Bulgaria and Romania, and Americans would not have to tolerate the drivel of Neo-psychopaths, extolling the virtues of the Freaks they use as roll-models
No they weren't psychopaths, they were political fanatics who thought it was a great idea to invade everybody... They had a leader, but that leader couldn't lead if they didn't let him, so they're responsible.
Laugh all you want, but they didn't just invade those countries that "stole" their land. They got carried away in the frenzy of war and practically thought they could take on the whole world!
Well, the world shoved that attitude back up their asses good and proper!
Germany did NOT want to take over the world only Central Europe.
If Britain and the US stayed out of WWII Hitler and Stalin would have just fought it out the US and Britain would have had a open seat on watching a communist vs. a communist.
Tell me, where do you get your evidence that they (Germany) wanted to take over the world?
If Britain and the US stayed out of WWII Hitler and Stalin would have just fought it out the US and Britain would have had a open seat on watching a communist vs. a communist
I'm pathetic? Nazis are not communists.
Tell me, where do you get your evidence that they (Germany) wanted to take over the world?
Geez, I don't know... let's see... Hitler allied with the Soviets then turned around and attacked them unawares? Isn't that proof that we've got a dishonorable swindler on our hands? If the Brits and Yanks didn't do anything, they'd have a front row seat to their own fucking demise!
You still have NOT provided evidence that he wanted to.
Look Hitler and Stalin made a 'Peace Act' that they KNEW was going to be broken by one or the other, it was a military move on both sides, it bought them both time to prepare for war.
In a way they were communist but OK they were Socialist...big difference? They're both on the Left.
I dunno buddy, allying myself with others so they can help me in times of need, then eliminating them so I can be the only one remaining in the end... that's a classic crime boss move... that's more proof than I need.
I believe in honesty and correctness at all times. I won't ignore factual errors on the part of my ally simply because he is my ally. That is a cowardly road to victory.
I admire that quality, friend or foe. But I think you've misunderstood my post. I was referring to Hitler's temporary relationship with Stalin. He allied himself with Stalin for help, then when the Russian least expected it, he attacked...
Actually, both leaders knew that they would one day go to war. There was no alliance, in fact, they agreed not to attack eachother until after they had carved up poland between themselves.
What the f..k is going on here? When you judge a party or a leader, you judge everything that they do and you judge the overall outcome. You don't just look at the good stuff, nor should you just look at the bad stuff.
So, what was the overall result of the Nazi's Germany? They managed to pull Germany out of economic disaster and plunged her into the depths of hell that was the second world war.
Nice one Nazis, the German people thank you for rendering them completely helpless at the end of WW2 with the country effectively under foreign control and split into many pieces. Nice. Thank the allies for not having the same belligerent destructive attitude.
No, because the extermination of Jews via nazism is not the reason that Germany exists today. Germany only exists because of trading. And because other countries feel sorry for it.
So the Nazis did some good things, but they f...d up the entire country.
If I tried a murderer in court, I'd give him credits for all the good deeds he'd done in his life, but I'd hang him for the crimes he'd committed. He wouldn't be remembered for all the good deeds he'd done.
Ok, lemme explain what "fucked up the country" means:
- rape of some 2 million German women.
- death of about 10% of the population.
- the country got divided up into many pieces (essentially 2 halves), the Soviets and Poles got half, the other half controlled by the Brits, Yanks and Frogs (sorry if anyone is offended by my use of "casual" language).
So is that fucked up enough for ya? The German people had no control over their future after WW2 (full sovereignty restored in late 1990).
Why can't the Nazis unite the people with a space program or world eradication of hunger or a program to completely free itself of dependence on fossil fuels? It's easier to unite people with war, I know, but that's easy, nothing to admire.
You want my admiration, do something difficult and positive. Not something easy and negative.
The rape and death percentage. Did the Nazi themselves inflict that upon the Country of Germany? NO
Other countries did it's called Hate Crimes bro.
Also, the so called "Prestigious", "Royal" British made a block-aid killing an estimate 750,000 German CITIZENS, this was a very foul move done by the British, but nevertheless, it was a failed attempt on trying to make Germany's Government Struggle.
The rape and death percentage. Did the Nazi themselves inflict that upon the Country of Germany? NO, other countries did it's called Hate Crimes bro.
Well, the Nazis went and attacked people, so they attacked back. It's called putting up a fight. It's also called putting the Nazis back in their place.
So the Nazis didn't rape their own women, but they started a war, one that they lost, allowing war atrocities to be committed against their people.
LOL!!! "totally unnecessary"? You have a gift for understating things. When was rape ever necessary? So I agree that it was "totally unnecessary", but in a battlefield respect for the enemy will not bring you victory.
no it wasn't there was absolutely no reason to kill the jews!! they didn't deserve to die they did nothing wrong except for they knew how to run a buisness and apparently the Germans didn't ... hello the stock market crashed!!! look who still had money and buisness..the Jews!!!
where do you get off calling people idiots for voicing their opinions and for voicing facts that are true and that need to be recognized when discussing this kind of an issue
If you want to review the Nazis contribution to German society, you must look at everything they did and the results those action brought. You shouldn't concentrate on the holocaust, but you shouldn't discount it either.
Yes Hitler was the leader, but he couldn't possibly have done it without the hatred of the German people and of the Nazis. A leader (no matter how extraordinary) is only good at harnessing the emotions and will of the people. The German people as well as the Nazis cannot deny responsibility and attribute the entire thing on Hitler... and they haven't. Germans are generally ashamed of the holocaust.
It is wierd to me how people can get lost in words. It maybe that without the Nazis the word "Germany" would maybe not have been used anymore (maybe) But "germany" the nation, or "Germany" the social infrastructure, was ruined by the second world war. So this debate seems to me to be a new low in how stupid neo-nazi comments can be.
yeah but at what price.. I would not argue that because a loan shark said I own him a redicoulus amount of money, that then it would be a necessary evil for me to arm myself - rob all the houses in my neighborhood and then light them on fire, including mine.
so taking away all of the jew's money, homes, property, businesses, etc... is not considered robbing them of it? Maybe the nazis were all happy, but im pretty sure the people in the ghettos who were starving and had lost EVERYTHING weren't too happy about their situation
if thats not considered robbery, then tell me what is
if thats not considered robbery, then tell me what is
Haha this made me think of this:
The US is doing the same types of things.
Social Security: Theft/High Treason
The government makes these types of pointless things to get peoples money and use it for their OWN purposes, is that not stealing?
Anyway, back to the Argument.
Why would the Jews be so upset? Between 1900-1910 they tried to have their "Holocaust"- Original meaning of Holocaust: Sacrifice By flame; especially fire, to receive Redemption from God.-
The Jews believed that it would take 7 million of their own kind to do this. (It was never accomplished but many were killed estimated over 1 million)
So, now after WWII the Jews claim that the death count of the "Holocaust" was 7 million, wait a minute! That seems to be a very very very! Popular number with the Jewish people doesn't it?
Actually the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust was over SIX million were killed, get your facts straight please.
Second, there is a difference between willingly walking into the fires, which I've never even heard they did that before, and being forced into ghettos, concentration camps, and then being slaughtered or forced to work to death.
And your somewhat right about the U.S. government but thats off topic.
Actually, as I have already said, 6m was the total amount of people who went through the camps, NOT the casualty rate. THAT was in fact closer to 1m.
However, this debate is not over the figures, it is about whether what the Nazi's did for Germany was good or not. In ten years, Hitler turned an impoverished backwater into one of the most powerful and technologically advanced nations on Earth. Then, in six years, the Allies changed it back again. Germany was only reclaiming land they had lost to the Poles. Seeing what they have done with their own country, would you really want to see the Poles controlling parts of yours? Would you for example, tolerate losing New York to Poland? Or would you kill the bastards and take it back again?
Then why didn't they just stick to attack Poland? If they were really in it to get back the land they lost, why did they attack Russia, France, and all of the other smaller countries in the area?
And what did it take to turn Germany into a technologically advanced nation? Forced labor and prisoners who had done nothing truly wrong were forced to work, from Polish people, to Jews, to Gypsies, they were all forced into labor, that is how that Germany was built, how can anyone say that is good? How can it be good for Germany when their own citizens as well as other people were forced into labor to build it?
You seem not to be able to take things in their context. It is true that the Nazi party pulled germany up from recession, but they did it by enhancing war machine tool manifacturing,- or in other words, they created a bubble that was bound to blow up into a big war. You cant just talk about the years before the war as if what was done then had nothing to do with the war happening. Building huge amounts of armory and then not use it would have been unsustainable and would have put Germany straight into deppression again, they circumvented that by attacking other countrys and robbing them, but only for a few years, because in the end they caused more loss world wide then Germany has ever experienced. So no greater good and hence the Nazis where far from being a necessary evil.
My analogy for robbing their neighborhood meant -germans robbing other country´s - not their own people.
