Hitler? Who’s That?

Hitler? Who’s That?

David C. Stolinsky
Friday, Sept. 27, 2002

Recently Herta Daeubler-Gmelin, Germany’s justice minister, compared President Bush to Adolf Hitler. She left the cabinet. But her remarks did not differ radically from those of her boss, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who was running for re-election on a platform that included refusal to participate in the war with Iraq, even if the U.N. authorized such action.

Schroeder won another term by a narrow margin after promising not to "click my heels" and follow Bush’s lead. Of course, Americans don’t click their heels; Germans do. So Schroeder’s phrase was jarring, especially after the "Hitler" remark by his associate.

But that’s not the problem.

If a German cabinet minister had called President Bush a son of a bitch, a bastard or an even less printable name, it would have been a gross personal insult, and the one who said it should have resigned in disgrace. Besides, an insult to a head of state is an insult to his nation as well, and a prompt apology would have been in order.

That’s not the problem, either.

The real problem is this. Of all people, Germans should know who Hitler was and what he did. And of all Germans, the minister of justice should know what injustices he committed.

World War II ended more than half a century ago. After the war, Germany went through a long period of self-examination, as well as a program of denazification imposed by the victorious Allies. One would think that after all this time, Germans would be quite clear on the nature of Hitler.

One would be wrong.

But Germans aren’t unique in their historical ignorance and moral confusion. Many people don’t really know who Hitler was. Sadly, this includes many Jews, who should know with crystal clarity what made Hitler Hitler.

Many people see Hitler as a hysterical orator, waving his arms and grimacing as he ranted at his audience. But what if he had a quiet, boring manner of speaking, as did his rival mass murderer, Stalin? Would that have made Hitler any less evil?

Many people see Hitler as a militarist, with his brown uniform and shiny leather boots. But what if he often wore civilian suits, as does Saddam Hussein? Would that have made Hitler any less destructive?

Many people see Hitler as a right-winger. Still, Hitler called himself a socialist. In Nazi Germany, private owners were allowed to retain their factories, though their production and finances were strictly controlled by government officials. But what if things had been done as they were in Stalin’s Soviet Union, where government officials controlled things directly? Would that have made Hitler any less vicious?

Many people see Hitler as a European, an extreme example of the racial and religious hatred for which Europe is notorious. But what if he were an Asian, as was the head of the imperial Japanese war cabinet, Gen. Tojo, who ordered horrible atrocities to be committed on Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos and others? Would that have made Hitler any less dangerous?

Many people see Hitler as an atheist, one who played on religious-based anti-Semitism but who worshiped only himself. Indeed, Hitler declared he was not a Christian, because Christianity is based in Judaism. But what if he had claimed to be deeply religious, as does bin Laden, and used religious fanatics to further his murderous aims? Would that have made Hitler any less depraved?

All these features were possessed by Hitler, but they were not characteristic of him. They describe his external appearance, but not his essence. If we mistakenly use these features, we will be able to recognize a new Hitler only if he is a hysterical orator, wears a uniform, is thought to represent the Right, and is a European atheist.

That, obviously, will allow us to recognize only a narrow range of Hitlers — while missing all the rest. But if we wish to live in a peaceful world, or even to live at all, we need to recognize all types of Hitlers.

We need to know what made Hitler Hitler.

First, Hitler was a raging megalomaniac. He firmly believed he had the intelligence to understand the world, and the will to control it. He was wrong in the first belief, but correct in the second. He hung huge pictures of himself everywhere.

Second, he greedily sought power — the more the better. He not only believed he could control the world; he also exerted every effort to prove it.

Third, he was filled to overflowing with hate and anger. He had so much hate that it filled an entire nation and spilled over into neighboring nations. If he hadn’t been stopped by military force, his hate would have filled the planet.

Fourth, he blamed all the problems of himself and his nation on "them." In his case, "they" were the Jews. He actually diverted desperately needed supplies and transport from the war effort to the death camps. When forced to choose, he chose genocide over victory.

Fifth, he was utterly ruthless. He eagerly tried to exterminate whole peoples, and he dealt savagely with rivals and former associates.

Sixth, he saw other nations and races as inferior "subhumans" who were to be enslaved — or exterminated at will — by his "supermen." His propagandists referred to the Jews as disease-bearing rats that had to be exterminated. His enemies were totally dehumanized in an attempt to justify an aggressive war.

Seventh, he had an unlimited capacity to deceive himself and others. Even as Germany was collapsing and Allied armies were closing in, he feverishly planned new attacks by nonexistent troops.

Eighth, he loved only himself. He was willing to see nations, even his own, devastated if it might serve his purposes. At the end, he flooded the Berlin subways, drowning thousands of Germans hiding there, to delay enemy troops a few hours.

Ninth, he was a black hole in human form. Millions of human beings and entire nations disappeared, leaving little trace, in his vain attempt to fill the emptiness at his center. What he built was short-lived, but what he destroyed was gone forever.

Tenth, he claimed to be a socialist, but he ran a militaristic, totalitarian state in which his whims were enforced by vast apparatus of terror.

Eleventh, he produced poison gas and used it on minorities. He produced missiles and used them, and was trying to produce nuclear weapons when the war ended. Until we inspected the laboratories, we were uncertain how far he had progressed.

Is this a complete description of Hitler’s essential nature? Probably not. No one can be described completely in words. But I think it gives a useful picture of what to look for when we search the horizon for new Hitlers.

Present-Day Hitlers

Ask yourself how well bin Laden and Saddam Hussein fit this pattern. I think you will find an excellent fit. A perfect one? No, everyone is unique is some ways. But a good enough fit to raise loud alarms.

Please, don’t be on the lookout for a uniformed right-wing European atheist with a hysterical speaking style. Instead, be alert for persons exhibiting Hitler’s essential characteristics. And the more of these characteristics you see, the more urgent the situation becomes.

For example, take Saddam Hussein:

He is a megalomaniac who builds luxurious palaces while Iraqi children go hungry, and who hangs huge pictures of himself everywhere.

He avidly seeks power and the weapons with which to increase it.

His policies are based on hatred.

He incessantly blames his, Iraq’s and the world’s problems on Americans and Jews.

He ruthlessly persecuted the Kurds in the North and the Shia in the South, even using poison gas on his own citizens. He is equally ruthless with real or perceived rivals, having them killed without hesitation. His agents torture children in front of their parents to obtain information or confessions.

He began an aggressive war with Iran in which millions died uselessly — the borders remain unchanged. Again, poison gas was used. When this didn’t work, he invaded another neighbor, Kuwait, from which we expelled him.

Nevertheless, he glorifies these defeats as victories, for which he praises himself.

He is utterly oblivious to dead and maimed Iraqis — the result of his policies.

As he was driven from Kuwait, he set fire to the oil wells, causing environmental havoc. Who can doubt that he would do the same to his own oil wells if he wished? Who can doubt he would gladly see Iraq destroyed if it would inflate his ego one last time? He has repeatedly used chemical weapons. Who can doubt he would use biologic and nuclear weapons if he could?

He claims to be a socialist, but he runs a militaristic, totalitarian state in which his whims are enforced by a vast apparatus of terror.

He produced poison gas and used it on minorities. He produced missiles, used them on American troops and on Israel, and is perfecting them. He is attempting to produce nuclear weapons. In the absence of thorough inspections, who can be sure how far he has progressed?

Perhaps, with the passage of another half-century, leftists in Germany and America will come to be able to recognize a Hitler when they see one, and not merely use the term for anyone they don’t like. But meanwhile, all the rest of us had better be alert.

Perhaps (and only perhaps) we may be forgiven for not recognizing the first Hitler and stopping him before a world conflagration resulted. But we will never be forgiven for not recognizing subsequent Hitlers, or for not stopping them in time.

Editor's note:
Ann Coulter tells how the left slanders conservatives (lower price than Amazon!)