Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Adolf Hitler: A good politician?

  • 19-04-2010 11:10am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,463 ✭✭✭


    A complicated question I know which most will answer negatively. However I was remembering this question posed to us by my secondary school history teacher. We threw back the typical answers that he was a tryant giving examples of the bloody wars he started and the holocaust. However our teacher gave us examples of the good Hitler did for his country. Motivating his people and giving them back their pride which was lost after the Treaty of Versailles. He rejuvenated his people by giving them a purpose in life by declaring that they were the best nation in the world. He brought back together his people into structured groups albeit with racist motivations. After the depression he set up schemes to get people into work for examples in the arnaments industry and building autobahns. If my memory serves me correctly he cut unemployment from 5 million to less than a million. The views he expressed when talking were vile but he was certainly a charasmatic speaker and you can see why so many were in awe of him. He was revered by adults and children alike. He was one of the most charasmatic politicans of all time.
    Can his good political credentials be divorced at all from his horrendous political acts. Will history ever look at Hitler's policies individually and judge them on their basis instead of looking at his policies at a whole and seeing the Anti-Semitic and Meglomaniac aspects of it.
    So fellow boardsie can Hitler ever be viewed as a good politician?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    Adolf was a good politician, he had the pulse of the people and he manipulated this ruthlessly.

    However, Adolf was manic and he would slip in an out of sanity ~ history will be debating where he was lucid, on drugs for his ailments or insane.

    He was a plucky little devil driven [initially] by the injustices of the day and the down trodding of his beloved Germany.

    He skilfully used the political system up to a point, he was in fact gaining considerable ground when some opposition groups could see the madness and feared [rightly] for the future and began fighting back and were swinging the electorate back from Adolf ~ at this point, Hitler departed politics for violence, burning the Reichstag, murdering the opposition and successfully blaming it on his opponents.

    This practice is unfortunately very political today as can be seen in our own TV coverage of our government in action ~ granted we don't send out the terrorist squads so much anymore, but the action is nonetheless the same.

    The upshot is the general electorate believed in Adolf, believed in his [public] principals and were genuinely captivated by the man during his rallies.

    Yes, up to points, a great manipulator, but not inventor of swinging a political system ~ one could extend this into EU policies and treaty agreements, another discussion perhaps.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 694 ✭✭✭douglashyde


    Kiwi_knock wrote: »
    Can his good political credentials be divorced at all from his horrendous political acts.

    These are the same things; your credentials are a derivative of your acts.

    You can't have double standards when deciding on a broad question like "Was Hitler a good politician?" ie. You can't say that "Hitler was a good politician but still evil" because an evil person can not make a good politician.

    My answer would be, No, he was not a good politician for obvious reasons.

    Yes, he was a good manipulator, speaker and leader (to certain people).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,932 ✭✭✭hinault


    You’ve got to remember that 1914-1918 formed Hitler’s world view and his entire political ideology.
    Germany only became a unified country in 1871 and from 1871 to 1914, Germany’s ascendency as an economic power was phenomenal.
    Germany which had been divided before 1871, represented a threat to the like of France/Britain and Russia between 1871 and 1914.
    With Versailles Treaty, Germany was effectively annexed.
    The Allies controlled the Ruhr valley (Germany’s economic powerhouse) and the reparations imposed on Germany were punative.
    As well as this, you need to remember that Germany were also subject to one of the most devastating economic downturns in history (in 1919, for example 1dollar = 100 marks, by 1924 1dollar = 1.5billion marks).
    Given that backdrop, Hitler decision to stop the repayment of reparations and his decision to re-occupy the Ruhr ensured the immediate survival of Germany. His decision to commence public employment programmes and to invest huge sums in the German nation helped to restore Germanic national belief and to rediscover the ascendency of 1871 – 1914.
    Hitler recognised the weakness of the Allies intent to seek redress for 1914-1918.
    He exploited this mistake and in the early days, his policies did work for Germany.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    It depends on your political ideology, and how you stand on personal freedoms. Bismarck was a bastard but undoubtedly a great politician in the strictly nationalist sense - he propelled 'Germany' into the international arena and almost single handedly made them the greatest state on the earth.

    Hitler led an economic rejuvenation and a mass movement which gave the Germans back their self belief. If he had died in 1936, before anti semitism got into full swing, and a Social Democrat party came to power, I've little doubt he would be regarded as one of the greatest political figures in history. History has an amazing ability to morally ambivilent when looking at the past with hindsight, plenty of excuses would be made for his authoritarianism and racism.

    The reason Hitler is despised is because he killed millions in horrific circumstances, industrialised individualism, and initiated the worst war the world has ever seen. If he had died before he followed this through, I don't think he would be derided as merely a destroyer of civil liberties, he would be remembered as the champion of national rejuvenation.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,932 ✭✭✭hinault


    Denerick wrote: »
    It depends on your political ideology, and how you stand on personal freedoms. Bismarck was a bastard but undoubtedly a great politician in the strictly nationalist sense - he propelled 'Germany' into the international arena and almost single handedly made them the greatest state on the earth.

    Hitler led an economic rejuvenation and a mass movement which gave the Germans back their self belief. If he had died in 1936, before anti semitism got into full swing, and a Social Democrat party came to power, I've little doubt he would be regarded as one of the greatest political figures in history. History has an amazing ability to morally ambivilent when looking at the past with hindsight, plenty of excuses would be made for his authoritarianism and racism.

    The reason Hitler is despised is because he killed millions in horrific circumstances, industrialised individualism, and initiated the worst war the world has ever seen. If he had died before he followed this through, I don't think he would be derided as merely a destroyer of civil liberties, he would be remembered as the champion of national rejuvenation.

    agreed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 709 ✭✭✭Exile 1798


    Perhaps if he had died in 1938.

    You can't exactly look past the fact that he lead his country and regime to ruination.

    George Orwell wrote this on Nazism and Hitler in March 1940:
    Also he has grasped the falsity of the hedonistic attitude to life. Nearly all western thought since the last war, certainly all 'progressive' thought, has assumed tacitly that human beings desire nothing beyond ease, security and avoidance of pain. In such a view of life there is no room, for instance, for patriotism and the military virtues. The Socialist who finds his children playing with soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won't do. Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don't only want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice, not to mention drums, flags and loyalty-parades. However they may be as economic theories, Fascism and Nazism are psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception of life. The same is probably true of Stalin's militarized version of Socialism. All three of the great dictators have enhanced their power by imposing intolerable burdens on their peoples. Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people 'I offer you a good time', Hitler has said to them 'I offer you struggle, danger and death', and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet. Perhaps later on they will get sick of it and change their minds, as at the end of the last war. After a few years of slaughter and starvation 'Greatest happiness of the greatest number' is a good slogan, but at this moment 'Better an end with horror than a horror without end' is a winner. Now that we are fighting against the man who coined it, we ought not to underrate its emotional appeal.
    http://fascisimile.com/node/17

    I think this is a brilliant insight into Hitler's political nous up until that point.

    And I've just realized while posting this that Churchill said almost the same thing as Orwell two months later upon become Prime Minister: "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35 Henry McConville


    Kiwi_knock wrote: »
    A complicated question I know which most will answer negatively. However I was remembering this question posed to us by my secondary school history teacher. We threw back the typical answers that he was a tryant giving examples of the bloody wars he started and the holocaust. However our teacher gave us examples of the good Hitler did for his country. Motivating his people and giving them back their pride which was lost after the Treaty of Versailles. He rejuvenated his people by giving them a purpose in life by declaring that they were the best nation in the world. He brought back together his people into structured groups albeit with racist motivations. After the depression he set up schemes to get people into work for examples in the arnaments industry and building autobahns. If my memory serves me correctly he cut unemployment from 5 million to less than a million. The views he expressed when talking were vile but he was certainly a charasmatic speaker and you can see why so many were in awe of him. He was revered by adults and children alike. He was one of the most charasmatic politicans of all time.
    Can his good political credentials be divorced at all from his horrendous political acts. Will history ever look at Hitler's policies individually and judge them on their basis instead of looking at his policies at a whole and seeing the Anti-Semitic and Meglomaniac aspects of it.
    So fellow boardsie can Hitler ever be viewed as a good politician?

    I think he was an excellent politican as he was able to fool the rest of the world as to what he was really up to for so long!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    this thread is a joke?

    anyways its his birthday today :eek:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    If we take the wiki definition of a politician:
    Any person influencing group opinions in his or her favor can be termed a politician.
    Then look at the Hitler Oath of of 2nd August 1934:
    The Wehrmacht Oath of Loyalty to Adolf Hitler, 2 August 1934
    "I swear by God this sacred oath that I shall render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler, the Leader of the German empire, supreme commander of the armed forces, and that I shall at all times be prepared, as a brave soldier, to give my life for this oath."
    Service oath for public servants
    I swear: I will be faithful and obedient to Adolf Hitler, leader of the German state and people, to observe the law, and to conscientiously fulfil my official duties, so help me God!
    Then we can say that as a politician he was a success. To get the army and the civil service to swear a personal oath of loyalty to you is about as good as it gets for a politician. However, the best politicians would have the public on their side voluntarily, using persuasion, whereas Hitler relied on a combination of fear and seduction.

    I think his success was down to his messianic control over a small nucleus of talented people, who magnified and radiated his mystique out to the ordinary Party members.

    Take for example this warm up speech by Goebbels just after the tyrant took power. Goebbels was such a showman and had such a genius for using new communication technologies, it must have been really exciting to be there and Goebbels always portrayed Hitler as the heaven sent saviour of the German people. So I think Hitler derived his power from his diabolical grip on a small number of key personnel.



    As a statesman, he was a disaster, he steered the ship of state to total ruin.



    As to his character, he was clearly a criminal and a mass murderer.



    .


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    Naziism can be a great unifying force on a nation.
    The trick is the HitlerJungen, once you have captivated the minds of the youth of a country they will do anything you want unquestioningly.

    A lot of the Social policies initiated in Nazi Gerrmany are things we take for granted today, minimum wage, Smoking laws, Rostered Holidays, healthcare, Childcare/Daycare,
    Motorways, Childrens allowance.

    those Brilliant people that Hitler surrounded himself with came up with that stuff, and Hitler was there to Stand on a podium and mesmerise the German people.

    Rumors persist that he spent the last few years of his life in a Drug Fueld haze tho, which may go some way to explainin how it all went tits up so Spectacularly


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 156 ✭✭sirromo


    It's hard not to feel some admiration the achievements of Hitler and his regime prior to their invasion of Russia.

    I've heard it said that if Hitler had died suddenly in May of 1941 that he would have gone down in history as the greatest German who ever lived.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 709 ✭✭✭Exile 1798


    Naziism can be a great unifying force on a nation.
    The trick is the HitlerJungen, once you have captivated the minds of the youth of a country they will do anything you want unquestioningly.

    A lot of the Social policies initiated in Nazi Gerrmany are things we take for granted today, minimum wage, Smoking laws, Rostered Holidays, healthcare, Childcare/Daycare,
    Motorways, Childrens allowance.

    In The Western World all those things you mentioned (bar smoking laws) were brought about by the struggle of Unions and Left Parties.

    Some of them pre-date the the Nazi era, the idea for all of them certainly do. It's not as if they can attributed to Nazi Germany.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    He was an excellent manipulator of people.
    Does that make him a good politician? Probably as thats what politics is all about now. Manipulating people's mind so that they vote for you and do as you want them to.


    Now Hitler could have had used his abilities to good cause. Create a country that could be an example of how a country should be where everyone kid gets education of the highest quality, all the sick get high level of health care, there is no one suffering from poverty and hunger, everyone lives happily alongside one another in a tolerant society with no crime.

    But he didn't do any of that and instead went on to pursue his evil plans of world domination and creating a "genetically pure" state by oppressing the one's who didn't fit into his image of perfect.

    So Hitler was a good politician but a bad person.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick



    But he didn't do any of that and instead went on to pursue his evil plans of world domination and creating a "genetically pure" state by oppressing the one's who didn't fit into his image of perfect.

    So Hitler was a good politician but a bad person.

    Its a lazy argument to suggest that Hitler wanted world domination, at any time. The moment he conquered France he sued for peace with Britain. he didn't even want to fight Britain or France in the first place. Historians are in consensus that Hitler merely wanted a Greater Germany in Europe and a small Eastern Empire incorporating Poland, some of the eastern states and the Soviet Union. Thats not world domination persé...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4 stokke


    Hitler both bad politician and person.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Kiwi_knock wrote: »
    A complicated question I know which most will answer negatively. However I was remembering this question posed to us by my secondary school history teacher. We threw back the typical answers that he was a tryant giving examples of the bloody wars he started and the holocaust. However our teacher gave us examples of the good Hitler did for his country. Motivating his people and giving them back their pride which was lost after the Treaty of Versailles. He rejuvenated his people by giving them a purpose in life by declaring that they were the best nation in the world. He brought back together his people into structured groups albeit with racist motivations. After the depression he set up schemes to get people into work for examples in the arnaments industry and building autobahns. If my memory serves me correctly he cut unemployment from 5 million to less than a million. The views he expressed when talking were vile but he was certainly a charasmatic speaker and you can see why so many were in awe of him. He was revered by adults and children alike. He was one of the most charasmatic politicans of all time.
    Can his good political credentials be divorced at all from his horrendous political acts. Will history ever look at Hitler's policies individually and judge them on their basis instead of looking at his policies at a whole and seeing the Anti-Semitic and Meglomaniac aspects of it.
    So fellow boardsie can Hitler ever be viewed as a good politician?

    not a good politician, an excellent politician


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    Denerick wrote: »
    Its a lazy argument to suggest that Hitler wanted world domination, at any time. The moment he conquered France he sued for peace with Britain. he didn't even want to fight Britain or France in the first place. Historians are in consensus that Hitler merely wanted a Greater Germany in Europe and a small Eastern Empire incorporating Poland, some of the eastern states and the Soviet Union. Thats not world domination persé...

    He wanted to create a super power in the middle of Europe, that is world domination. Its what America is doing now days.

    The way he achieved this was by manipulating people's mind into his type of thinking. Literally brainwashing them by making every child study his Mein Kempf propaganda book, through media, music (Wagner and all) and every aspect of society. Making the majority feel proud of their hereditary while oppressing the minority. Creating a sense of belonging and rightfulness among the people of the country so they would support him in whatever he wishes them to take part in.

    He made excellent use of the racial theories which were already prominent in the western world back then (British oppressing the Aborigines and Blacks in Australia and South Africa, Americans oppressing Blacks in America). So what hitler was doing was nothing new. Its only because he lost out the war that people think he was a tyrant and worse than the people he was fighting.
    If he had won the war, maybe then we'ld all be looking upto Germany like we do to USA as the super power of the world. And just how the racial theories in the rest of the world died out with time, the probably would have had in Germany as well. The world would be no different than it is today.

    Does it make Hiter an excellent politician? Yes.
    Does it make him any worse than the ones he was fighting? Not really.
    Does it make him (or for that case the ones he was fighting) a good person? No.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    No, a superpower in the middle of Europe is not the same as world domination. He had no real interest in non European colonies. He wanted Lebensraum in the vast Polish, Ukranian and Russian plains where his 'Aryan race' could multiply. These are not the same things.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    Denerick wrote: »
    No, a superpower in the middle of Europe is not the same as world domination. He had no real interest in non European colonies. He wanted Lebensraum in the vast Polish, Ukranian and Russian plains where his 'Aryan race' could multiply. These are not the same things.

    Right, in the interest of your pleasure, he didn't want world domination but just wanted to create a superpower in the middle of Europe which he could run his way.

    If Hitler had his way and would have won the war, I still think Germany would be the superpower of the world, like America is now and it's domestic and foreign policies would be no different to what America's are today.

    As I mentioned the whole racial purity and superiority thing were no new concepts back then and were prevalent in the society for a good while. Just as they died out over time, so would Hitler's racist ideologies had.
    If you notice how the Brits treated Aborigines in Austrialia and Blacks in Africa, you're realise its really not that much worse than how Hitler was treating the Jews.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 971 ✭✭✭CoalBucket


    No worse than Bertie


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Yes. If you ignore all the psychotic stuff.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,096 ✭✭✭bunny shooter


    History is written by the victors


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    Seriously?

    He was a brutal, narcissistic, self obsessed, violent thug of the low sloping forehead variety. Look a bit deeper into his rise to power - he beat and bludgeoned his way to the top via the raw knuckles of his beer-hall buddies. He may have been a gifted speaker, but you can pick that up at your local toast club. At every step of the way he was facilitated by more capable men and women, who believed they could use him revert the appalling conditions created after WWI, failing to account for his prison yard shiv mentality.

    Whatever good was achieved under the reign of that pleb was achieved by the German people, who have since proved themselves in many different ways.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    Adolf Hitler was one of the greatest politicians ever, he rose an unknown party to power and took control of the country, he turned a broken depressed German economy and turned it into the powerhouse of Europe. He led the fiercest and best trained soldiers into battle and single handedly conquered Europe.

    His legacy to this day can be seen in modern Germany with Volkswagen and the Autobahn network.

    OK obviously there were all the bad points but to look at the positives there were alot and the average German had things very good under the Reich and his Policies were National Socialism which cut out the crony capitalism and kept the control of the economy out of the hands of the Jews.

    He put the German people first and the only reason he is not consider far left was he was not into Political correctness and if Hitler had won the war Europe today would be free of Immigrants, Muslims and all other nationalities and this financial crisis would most likely have happened nor would Israel exist.

    History is written by the victors and people need to see that there is two sides to every coin.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    Stinicker wrote: »
    Adolf Hitler was one of the greatest politicians ever, he rose an unknown party to power and took control of the country, he turned a broken depressed German economy and turned it into the powerhouse of Europe. He led the fiercest and best trained soldiers into battle and single handedly conquered Europe.

    .

    He drove that economic "recovery" by spending the country's gold reserves. He had to declare war to keep the economy going; it was on the verge a meltdown far worse than 1929.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 709 ✭✭✭Exile 1798


    Stinicker wrote: »

    History is written by the victors and people need to see that there is two sides to every coin.

    That's impressive, two platitudes in the one sentence!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    Who would ever call him a good politician hes such a loser... cruel is the only word to describe him!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29 boars


    very very smart man, intelligent- and extremely smart politically in achieving power in Germany after world war 1. He knew how to "work" the people.

    however if he were alive now and i seen him walking down the street today i would shoot him for the good of mankind, he did the most horrific and horrible things this world has ever known,

    oh and i would also desicrbe Stalin and Mussolini as smart and intelligent- but I despise them as much as i do Hitler- but it cannot be argued against the suggestion that the three of them were the greatest political leaders of the time- not forgetting Churchill*

    *obviously i would only compare Churchhill to the three diictators in the context of being great politicians.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    You wouldnt consider Churchill to have been a bit of a WarMonger too?? they were all products of their time, Hitler stands out as one of the greatest Statesmen/Showman politician ever.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 709 ✭✭✭Exile 1798


    You wouldnt consider Churchill to have been a bit of a WarMonger too?? they were all products of their time, Hitler stands out as one of the greatest Statesmen/Showman politician ever.

    Absolutely I'd consider Churchill a war monger. His entire career bares this out.

    It's just by the fluke of history that a pigheaded, pro-Empire war monger like Churchill is seen as right and in a sense was right about Hitler. But Churchill also advocated tough military confrontation with every other previous group or government that was a threat to British power and prestige - including the Irish!

    So I think Churchill's treatment as a Prophet as far as the threat of Nazism is concerned is much over stated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    Hitler was one of the best politicians of all time! He made speeches that even though I do not speak German I know are very riling. he manipulated the minds of his people and even had the carisma to make the Allies not worry about him until 1939. He was intelligent and was strict on discipline.

    That said, he was COMPLETELY insane and a murdering piece of human bile!

    Kept a great moustache though:pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Seriously?

    He was a brutal, narcissistic, self obsessed, violent thug of the low sloping forehead variety. Look a bit deeper into his rise to power - he beat and bludgeoned his way to the top via the raw knuckles of his beer-hall buddies. He may have been a gifted speaker, but you can pick that up at your local toast club. At every step of the way he was facilitated by more capable men and women, who believed they could use him revert the appalling conditions created after WWI, failing to account for his prison yard shiv mentality.

    Whatever good was achieved under the reign of that pleb was achieved by the German people, who have since proved themselves in many different ways.

    No - he was democratically elected by the German people in 1933.
    Plus he was awarded with the Iron Cross First Class and Second Class for bravery during WW1. He didn't drink or smoke. He gave Germany back its pride, jobs and place in the world. He wanted to kill millions of other people admittedly to secure greater power for Germany. It is this principle he borrowed from the British and French empires of that time.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,018 ✭✭✭Mike 1972


    No - he was democratically elected by the German people in 1933.

    He didnt achieve an overall Majority in the Reichstag and wouldnt have achived much power at all without the help of Von Papen.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Mike 1972 wrote: »
    He didnt achieve an overall Majority in the Reichstag

    Neither did Bertie Ahern in 2007 - Brian Cowen didn't even get elected by the people. John Bruton was PM in this country with 25-30% of the vote.
    The Nazis received well over 40% of the vote. Hitler - for all his many flaws - was a man of action in a time of crisis.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,018 ✭✭✭Mike 1972


    Neither did Bertie Ahern in 2007 - Brian Cowen didn't even get elected by the people. John Bruton was PM in this country with 25-30% of the vote.The Nazis received well over 40% of the vote.

    So other than the fact that there hasnt been a Irish leader elected with a clear mandate in quite a long time your point is what exactly ?

    Hitler - for all his many flaws - was a man of action in a time of crisis.

    Yes but it just goes to show that "Good Politician" and "Man of Action" shouldnt always be assumed to be desirable attributes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,053 ✭✭✭Cannibal Ox


    Before he died he wanted to pass the Reich Health Bill, submitting every German citizen to a medical test. Any German that failed the medical test would be "relocated". He oversaw the mass murder of German Jews, homosexuals, and the disabled. He circumvented all legal provisions in the German constitution by direct rule. He broke the German nation, and his leadership led to the partition of Germany. He brought all of Europe to absolute disaster.

    No, he was not a good politician and if people think building roads is the sign of a good politician then I think people deserve the politicians they get.


Advertisement