Wiki entry on Hitler's religious beliefs.

[robvalue]

I'm always suspicious of articles that use words like "maybe" to make crucial points.

[Brian37]

The point of posting it at all is to allow for a conversation, not so much for atheists, but for theists to see, that atheists just because we do not believe in a god, does not mean we value dictatorships. It does not matter to sane atheists with empathy that Hitler did or did not believe, he did have a warped sense of the divine magic hand regardless. But to demonstrate that the word "atheist" is not a club or loyalty oath and it does not make us worship dictators.

[Alex K]

Indeed. And we've said it a million times before: what made people worship even atheist dictators like Stalin was, in no small part, the centuries of conditioning performed by the church. It suppressed the critical thinking abilities of the population in order to remain in power, and when its power broke away, the dictators that followed found fertile ground - the people merely had to change from one leader who was not to be questioned rationally, to another.

Now, was Stalin more brutal because he was not Christian? Maybe, maybe not; but be that as it may - do the theists here really want to argue that Christianity makes better dictators? Because it obviously doesn't make a better people.

The point of posting it at all is to allow for a conversation, not so much for atheists, but for theists to see, that atheists just because we do not believe in a god, does not mean we value dictatorships. It does not matter to sane atheists with empathy that Hitler did or did not believe, he did have a warped sense of the divine magic hand regardless. But to demonstrate that the word "atheist" is not a club or loyalty oath and it does not make us worship dictators.

[Brian37]

Indeed. And we've said it a million times before: what made people worship even atheist dictators like Stalin was, in no small part, the centuries of conditioning performed by the church. It suppressed the critical thinking abilities of the population in order to remain in power, and when its power broke away, the dictators that followed found fertile ground - the people merely had to change from one leader who was not to be questioned rationally, to another.

Now, was Stalin more brutal because he was not Christian? Maybe, maybe not; but be that as it may - do the theists here really want to argue that Christianity makes better dictators? Because it obviously doesn't make a better people.

The point of posting it at all is to allow for a conversation, not so much for atheists, but for theists to see, that atheists just because we do not believe in a god, does not mean we value dictatorships. It does not matter to sane atheists with empathy that Hitler did or did not believe, he did have a warped sense of the divine magic hand regardless. But to demonstrate that the word "atheist" is not a club or loyalty oath and it does not make us worship dictators.

Worship of gods, in antiquity polytheist and monotheist was a result of humans falsely attributing their success to the divine, that was combined feudal system with centralized wealth. Not even the ancient Roman/Greek "democracies" were truly western like today. They were puppet governments still under rule of Caesars who still had final say, just like a god.

[abaris]

Now, was Stalin more brutal because he was not Christian? Maybe, maybe not; but be that as it may - do the theists here really want to argue that Christianity makes better dictators? Because it obviously doesn't make a better people.

Stalin was brutal because he was a psychopath and a paranoid one at that. Same goes for Hitler. Both had no empathy to speak of. And both had a pseudo religious cult built around their persons. They even admired each other. Even during their war.

[Thumpalumpacus]

What ideas of his do you like, Psycho?

https://diggerfortruth.wordpress.com/201...good-guys/

I will address each numbered point in order:

1) This point is factually incorrect. Hitler spoke to the Reichstag in 1939 about exterminating the Jews if war came to Europe, as documented by Shirer, and in a 1942 speech at the Sportspalast. Those are two that come to mind without using any research materials at all.

2) Very kind of him to worry about the conditions in the camps he approved, camps where Jews were incarcerated solely because of their race. The idea that there were no human gas chambers is belied by the facts. Testimony from both NaZi and Jewish camp workers attest to the existence of extermination camps. So, we have another lie.

3) Yes, Hitler loved Blondi. That makes everything all right.

4) The premise that Jews would destroy Europe is flawed. Indeed, events bear out that it was Hitler's decision himself which brought ruin to so much Europe.

5) This is simply another way of saying that he was racist.

6) Humility, eh? Like thanking Providence for saving him in the assassination attempts? Like ruling by fiat? Humility?

7) Innocence by association is just as fallacious as guilt by association.

8) This is not helping your case. Firstly, simply because someone is religious does not mean they are good. Secondly, by the time he ordered the enactment of the Final Solution, he was at most a deist.

9) Censoring art is not a good thing. Regimenting an entire nation in order to execute aggressive war is not a beneficence.

10) Stamping out usury seems to be a good thing. Murdering 5.7 million Jews in order to do so seems to be, to use Zappa's apt phrase in another context, a case of treating dandruff with decapitation.