Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sam's avatar

Julius, thanks for the attention to detail on this difficult topic. One of the main reasons it is so difficult is that it involves "forbidden" writings, thoughts, and analysis - even the most factual, rational analysis. When we are forbidden to think and to use our intelligence to analyze objectively, we have major social problems. And I'm talking about those of us who are being honest and candid and completely compassionate, not about those of us with agendas to spread hate, condemnation, and demonization, or to originate and repeat lies and maintain control over others. I believe the latter are the ones who dominate the former.

In our society, Hitler has been stripped of his humanity. He's not human and thus he has nothing to say as a human. Of course that's because of all his condemnable behavior. But at the same time, such dehumanization is false; Hitler cannot be made nonhuman, and I'm sure some people will condemn me for pointing out such a fact. The lesson I see here only teaches us what human beings are capable of - both with Hitler and with those who condemn rational, fact-based analysis. This is the same lesson I derive from others, for instance, Netanyahu. I don't see much moral difference between Hitler and Netanyahu.

But getting to your main comment: "Then we can definitely say that Hitler was a Good ‘anti-semite’," I don't quite agree because humans are not usually only one thing or another. The passages you quoted above show us that Hitler went through different attitudes at different times. So it is possible that Hitler sometimes demonstrated a justified criticism of Jews, which conforms to the definition of "good antisemitism," though that in no way explains everything about him, nor in particular his atrocities to Jews and many others later in life.

I haven't read "Mein Kampf," and thanks for the excerpts which show a human side of Hitler, so I cannot make a simplified conclusion that he was a "good antisemite," even in his later years. (I must say that some of the passages were not clear to me.) He often comes up in these discussions, and such reference often only adds to the confusion, censorship, and difficulties we have in discussing these topics. But even if he did sometimes express some good antisemitic behavior, his decision to harm individual Jews and others goes far beyond that, being completely indefensible and condemnable. In the terminology of my essay, no amount of the good kind of antisemitism can justify the bad kind of antisemitism. In some people both kinds can exist, and maybe this was the case with Hitler.

Expand full comment
Julius Skoolafish's avatar

Notwithstanding, just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that the (pseudo) term ‘anti-semitism’ has some meaning. Then we can definitely say that Hitler was a Good ‘anti-semite’.

Mein Kampf Chapter 2 (Stalag edition):

“It was not until I was fourteen or fifteen years old that I frequently ran up against the word ‘Jew,’ partly in connection with political controversies.

These references aroused a slight aversion in me, and I could not avoid an uncomfortable feeling which always came over me when I had to listen to religious disputes. But, at that time, I did not see the Jewish question in any other light.

There were very few Jews in Linz. In the course of centuries the Jews who lived there had become Europeanized and so civilised in appearance that I even looked upon them as Germans. The reason why I did not then perceive the absurdity of such an illusion was that the only thing which I recognised as distinguishing them from us was the practice of their strange religion. As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of horror. I did not in the least suspect that there could be such a thing as systematic anti-Semitism.”

[…]

“Although Vienna then had about two hundred thousand Jews among its population of two millions, I did not notice them.

[…]

I will not say that the manner in which I first became acquainted with it was particularly pleasant. In the Jew I still saw a man who was of a different religion, and, therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I was against the idea that he should be attacked because he had a different faith.”

Only later did Adolf Hitler develop an aversion to [those who call themselves] ‘jews’ as a direct result of their anti-human behaviour. ’Jews’ maintain that they are a separate race, and Hitler developed no such aversion to any other ‘race’.

continuing with Adolf Hitler:

"My ideas about anti-Semitism changed also in the course of time, but that was the change which I found most difficult. It cost me a great internal conflict with myself, and it was only after months of struggle between reason and sentiment that the former gained the victory."

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts