Hitler

[requiem]

Genius, mad-man or both?

[andy hughes]

I doubt if Hitler would qualify for the standard cireitia of a genius, but may well have been clinically insane. He was obviously a driven individual and granted gifts of oratory and charisma that gave him great power and influence. The way in which he chose to utilise his skills led to actions which surely cannot be reconciled as rational. So the short answer is no, and maybe.

[requiem]

Interesting. There's a saying along the lines of "The difference between genius and insanity is measured only by success" and this definitely applies. They way in which Hitler won the election is a mirror image of how George W Bush won his election (Illegally using sneaky tactics) and that to me was a stroke of genius. Gaining power without the most votes. Also Hitler's capacity to manipulate people to his own ends was astounding, so my opinion is that he was a genius. However, I do agree on "the way in which he chose to utilise his skills" part, but I think this is a separate point to the genius question. I'll be interested to hear more peoples perspectives on this though.

[simon_says]

If you class genius as the ability to, at first move Jews into slums, then murder 6 MILLION of them, then he was a genius.

[requiem]

Simon Says: Yes, he did liquidate several million jews, but one act of insanity does not force you into the inability to be a genius. I'm certain people you class as " genius' " have done stupid, inane or downright 'evil' (if there is such a thing) things in their time, they just weren't as publicised.

[Cactus]

requiem, are you quoting Elliot Carver from the Bond movie Tomorrow Never Dies? In answer to your original question, IMHO - no and yes. Not a genius, but a genocidal maniac.

[requiem]

Being a genius isn't exclusive to people on the right side of the law, or those who have 'good' morals.

[BVRichthofen]

I would say borderline genius/mad. Taking away the obvious undisputed terror the man spearheaded, his power to influence not only individuals but nations was astounding, and invites a certain involuntary admiration personally. I'd say he was a rhetoric genius but an ethical loon. The nation was depressed, oppressed and with the social/political climate during the inter war period it was a nation screaming out for guidance. Unfortunatley Hitler was there, simply a pure evil being and it probably stemmed from his own racism, paranoia and personal shortcomings.

[sft42]

LIQUIDATE!!! an amazing term to use for the wholesale slaughter of millions of people just because of their Kirk. and TW is only standing up for him cause he's of the vertically challenged brigade....and as for discussion is Pol Pot a genius? or Stalin? as a solution to socio-economic problems the genocide of your countrymen leaves a lot to be desired.....but to answer...maybe, maybe and yes.

[inbfenby]

Genius? He was a chancer with a chip on his shoulder who got lucky, got found out, then took the cowards way out. If you judge him on his writings I believe he probably had a subnomal IQ. Mad? Wouldn't you be if you only had one testicle!