Rebuilding Hitler's Bunker

[Zacs-Master]

A necessary evil to keep his monstrous actions in the conscience of future generations, so a step too far?
I'm presently undecided but think I'm erring on the side of the latter.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/01/10/hitlers-bunker-to-be-recreated-as-exhibit-by-german-museum_n_6448268.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

[janbee]

Maybe get the TV team from 60 minute makeover to do it.!

[ummmm]

It's history. We should preserve as much as possible, evil or not.

[jd_1984]

It may represent an evil force from history, but it can still be interesting. I would pay to visit.

[rockyracoon]

I don't think it's a bad thing for people to be reminded, we are now living in a world where lunatics are trying to assimilate or destroy the rest of us. History is invading the future.

As long as it's done in a sensitive manner and not as an entertainment/amusement attraction.

[Gromit]

Nothing wrong with it in the context of an exhibit at a museum.

We can visit Churchill's Bunker at the Imperial War Museum, so why not Hitler's counterpart?

http://www.iwm.org.uk/visits/churchill-war-rooms

[Cloverjo]

I'm worried that it might encourage visitors to sympathise with Hitler.
From the link:
"We want this to be an educational experience so that families or groups of school kids can see how it really was; to experience the tiny rooms and the dampness of the bunker. We want to recreate it to show people," [museum director, Ingo Mersmann said]

[Zacs-Master]

I seem to be in the minority at the moment. Thanks for the opinions so far. Interesting.

[jno]

I agree with you: it's one thing to preserve, another to rebuild. I'd certainly back keeping the original if they had it, but they don't. But recreating it... anyone could do that for any purpose they wanted.

[naomi24]

The holocaust museums and memorials around the world keep Hitler’s monstrous actions in the conscience of future generations – and rightly so. I’d be very interested in seeing a recreation of his bunker.

[Zacs-Master]

I thought the concentration camps were enough personally. I think the bunker will only serve to inform and tittilate those with a morbid fascination, rather than serve as a lesson.

[Gromit]

Just being devil's advocate Zacs.

Should Churchill's Bunker be closed for the same reason?

[-Talbot-]

Churchill's bunker already exists, Hitler's doesn't.

I would visit the authentic bunker but not a replica.

[Zacs-Master]

Churchill didn't cause the hollocaust or want to create a race of Aryan super humans. He was one, amongst many others, who saved us from it. So, no.

[naomi24]

I would have thought anyone with a morbid fascination would be more likely to visit, say Auschwitz, or Yad Vashem, where they can actually see the appallingly graphic results of his strategy - but each to his own. I'm interested in history.

[Zacs-Master]

Naomi, I'm visiting Kraków later this year and am in two minds as to whether to go to Auschwitz. I found Schindlers list quite disturbing and couldn't watch it all the way through. Is it a 'must see' experience?

[naomi24]

For me, yes - but I can't speak for you. I've unashamedly cried buckets in those places. The Holocaust is something that must never be forgotten.

[mushroom25]

I've not visited Oswiecim, but I have been to oradour sur glane.

chilling.

[naomi24]

Incidentally, I once visited Schindler's grave in Jerusalem - just to pay my respects.

[vulcan42]

The original site has a plaque indicating the historical importance, in my opinion, that is sufficient. To build a new bunker 300 miles away seems pointless to me. Churchill's war rooms are on the original site, would you visit them if they were replica's in Carlisle?

[ludwig]

I don't see a problem with it.