New insight of Hitler's persona (DER SPIEGEL)

Since it was part of what I learned about Hitler in books and in a college class 15 years ago.

:shrug:

but this takes an new approach of where it came from and embeds him even further into the Zeitgeist that was ruling when he grew up, which I do find interesting.

"Hitler's deluded view of himself as a genius is based on the confused system of thought emerging in the late 19th century, which centered on the idea that a genius -- a strong personality who outshone everything else -- could do anything and could do anything he pleased."

It's perhaps too much of an European historical viewpoint framed around it.

on pre-Nazi Germanic philosophers (RW guys) like de Lagard, Langbehn and Moeller van der Bruck, and they were looking for someone who could unite and redeem with aesthetics, Hitler seems tailor made. I wonder how much of his personality was a product of the times.

I'll look into it. Thanks for the input! :hi:

That Hitler's self-conception was deeply indebted to late-nineteenth century narratives? This is undergraduate history stuff, well known for years. .

Of course he was a kid of his time and acted accordingly to its beliefs, it's social history and its raging problems after 1918; and, especially, the Weimarer Republic. He couldn't be any other time's child for sure. But this isn't what this interview is about; it offers a new perception of something most historians (starting with J. C. Fest's Hitler biography) never addressed; the view point of one who perceives himself to be an artist genius (and not a political genius nor a military strategy genius he was branded by so many.)

No wonder the Republicans are always trying to cut funding for the arts! They're protecting us from the next Hitler!

:tinfoilhat:

Why, that's reason to vote for them right there! I didn't realize that... thanks for the info! Didn't realize art was so dangerous! I'm burning my VanGough! :bounce: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Yes, beware of artists! Especially when they think they're genius. Bob Ross for President! ;)

Artists CREATE things, not destroy them... he was a bi-polar, psychopathic, insane... well... you know...

The fact that he never created anything but hate just shows how deranged he was.

...John Wayne Gacy thought he was an artist.

Fucked up clown portraits do not an artist make.

Case in point: Jessica Simpson is a musician.

and most people aren't interested in looking at her music...:rofl:

:toast:

Though fiction, even speculative fiction, it displays serious thought on the question, and real insights.

Anything, anything at all, can be an art....

And I believe that too, that anything can be art. I drive through east St.Louis and can see beauty in the worn down, burned out buildings. It is in the eye of the beholder. I once took a friend of mine who used to be a crackhead through there and he was squirming at driving through the place where he used to score drugs, until I told him that it was a beautiful place, even in it's decay, simply because that's the condition that it was in at the moment, therefore, whatever state it was in was perfect because that's it's present state. He saw that perspective and was no longer afraid of being there. I will check that movie out though, it sounds interesting.:fistbump: :hi:

Then again, it could be argued that the destruction of the Third Reich was just the opening stages, like erasing the blackboard so the "art" can then be drawn.

which was rather late when he was 30 years old.

he wasn't good. Maybe the standards of the time just didn't measure up to what he was doing. Not to defend the bastard, but Hell, if somebody wold have stepped up and said , that's good stuff Adolph... keep it up, Maybe he would have been encouraged to stick with it and saved the world all that grief! My point was that we all know that no genius would be dumb enough to go into politics. :rofl: Besides, I am just soooo tired of hearing about Hitler especially these days...sorry to even be here discussing it, and no offense meant to anybody here, just would rather see the money spent on "research" of Hitlers brain be spent on compensating holocaust survivors or something.

Shocker...

Europe and Asia would have been enough.

He was very reluctant about Africa and was kind of forced to intervene in 1941 when Mussolini asked for help. And the 'Afrikakorps' under Rommel was first an only defensive army.

Mediterranean region and take control of the Suez canal bridging an effort to take the Mid-east oil fields from the north through Russia. Plus the Sahara created a vast natural barrier. Wonder why he didn't try going through Turkey to get to the Mid-east? Hitler had the Russian front and Stalingrad was the gateway to Central Asia. Stalingrad and El Alamein, it was all downhill after those battles.

And well in accord with my own reading.

It comes to the same conclusions, of course, but I find the different approach from 'believing in being an artist genius' an interesting standpoint.

Few people actually go back and read antique literature, after all, so social meanings are easily lost with time. Even though the words may be the same, things written in different times often conveyed very different meanings when written than a reader now will take from them.

He considered HIMSELF to be an artistic genius and that he was "deluded"into believing that. That's nothing new. He had a penchant for stealing art. Does that make an art thief a genius? No, makes him a criminal. Hitler had lots of delusions, that doesn't make him smart. He was simply a nutbag who landed in the right spot in a nation that craved a leader, and fed off the hate and despair of the times. The German people and the climate there were ripe for him, and were willing to follow anybody who told them what they wanted to hear. As far as saying he was any kind of genius, or exploring that thread is plain... insane? I personally don't think that trying to figure out Hitler is worth the time or effort. His actions speak for themselves.

The book at hand is called "Delusions of Genius." The woman who wrote it isn't claiming that Hitler was a genius, or even smart, just that he thought he was, and that he was conditioned by 19th-century notions that genius is beyond morality and rules. Nobody's claiming that he was actually any kind of genius.

As for Hitler's actions "speaking for themselves" -- no, they don't. Apprehending an action and judging it morally don't in themselves provide insight, and the fact that we can make a clear moral judgment doesn't mean that insight isn't useful.

The fact that this is old news, and whatever this woman is getting paid for what she does is too much. I know he wasn't a genius, because he "decide to become a politician" :rofl:

Is that a word? Sorry.. heh heh might mean "north" in a scandinavian accent...

as we know of took place, and why it happened the way it happened and why this one and not that one came to power. I do believe we might learn from the answers about it and be more critical of the world as we see it right now.

Do you apply the same rule to Bush? Should we just drop what he did and forget everything. Not worth the effort to look into it closer? Excuse me, but this is an ignorant approach.

There are still secrets coming out about him...but the main fact was that he was a puppet. and the "art" thing is old news just being re-hashed. I am all for studying history, and am not "Ignorant" thank you very much. I am well aware that we learn from our lessons, and mistakes by studying the past. But did the lessons we learned from Hitler do anything to stop the propaganda poured on us by Bush?Cheney? Rove? No... it's only when we learn from the tyrants in the past and stop them from repeating it that any of this crap will be useful!

But your posts struck me as 'let it rest,' which I might have misunderstood, so my apology.

And I know a few who actually saw Bush's propaganda as what it was and tried hard to stop it. Most members here, in fact.

I got what you were saying and actually, we're on the same page about the part of learning from history. It seems to me, on another topic, that there is an awful lot of shit coming out about the Bush years that should have been common knowledge back then, and yet is just now coming out.:pals: :fistbump: :hi: Do you notice that too?

"He could paint an entire apartment in one afternoon! Two coats!"

I doubt it. He was tremendously lazy.

The overheated genius that stands head and shoulders above the untermenschen, thus is free to to anything they want.


Ugh. The early 20th century is so ugly.

High praise indeed! :hi:

And so perverted.

Yeah, I could deal with this all better if I didn't know that chances were good they all had stiffies whilst watching the daily torture film rushes. And I mean both the Nazis and the * Admin.


PS: Great thread, thanx!

It's no fun living through it.

I hope it turns around, but right now the ghosts of exceptionalism still rattle about in the halls of power.

Just look at the dominionists and 'Family' types. Same thing. 'You're special, so there are no laws to govern you'.


IMO, it is a dangerous philosophy. My only hope is that they all wind up taking each other out, because below the surface, their agendas often differ. Unfortunately, by the time they all reach that point, they'll have marginalized or disposed of the ones who stand in their way. The ones they can mutually agree on, like us.

SPIEGEL: Could Hitler seriously have considered himself a genius? His talent as a draftsman was moderate at best.

Schwarz: He apparently felt differently, and it was important for his ego that he was self-taught. After the humiliation of being rejected by the academy, he developed an aversion to all professors, and to all academic study. He referred to himself once as a minor painter, but that was at a time when he believed he was a great architect. On the whole, he saw himself as a creative genius. You mustn't forget that the concept we have today of a genius is so much more harmless than it was back then.

SPIEGEL: In what sense?

Schwarz: We define a genius on the basis of his talent. At the time, talent was not the main focus. A genius had to have a strong personality. He was a larger-than-life talent who was permitted to do anything, including evil things. The genius has outstanding ideas, and they must be implemented, even if they are completely amoral. Hitler admired the work of dour philosophers like Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche. One important aspect is often overlooked, namely that the concept of genius had long been colored with racism. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a Briton by birth who had married into the family of Richard Wagner, was a significant figure. He published his views in a book, which became a bestseller. Chamberlain, who promoted the great Aryan personality, was a key figure for Hitler.

SPIEGEL: Are you going so far as to draw a line between the concept of genius and the Holocaust?

Schwarz: Let me say it one more time: The genius was allowed to be above morality. The amorality of the Nazis represents taking this position to its unthinkable extreme. Goebbels wrote the brutal sentence: "Geniuses consume people." Part of Hitler's concept of a genius was the image of an enemy. In his case, it even needed to be a mortal enemy.

with the rise of Hitler. Their belief, and their interpretation of Nietzsche, was that they were geniuses and were above morality because of their genius, when they were actually mere psychopaths. They, also, (at least the dominant one of the pair) were extreme narcissists. They'd have fit right in with the Nazis.

They may have had various peculiarities, but they were pretty normal leaders for their time.

Also recall that Hitler had been a soldier on the Western Front, where 10,000s of soldiers on each side were being killed in a single day. Whole divisions of infantry were ordered over the top and into the barbwire in the face of machine gun and artillery fire.

There is a type of political leader or military leader, who, having experienced great slaughter first hand, have no compunction about ordering the deaths of many more people. They are not abnormal, just desensitized.

The social-historical context.

Everyone knows that. :)

Look at the dramatic costumes/military outfits, the over-the-top architecture, his hiring of Leni Riefenstahl to direct the best-ever propaganda art film. He told HER what to do. There is so much evidence that points to the failed artist who drove his rejection/anger/angst/need elsewhere, where it could affect people.

she only saw Hitler once, didn't like him and did everything SHE wanted to do. Of course, it's still a lie and a delusional point of view. These two were pretty much alike.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

stalin and napleon were on their way to the clergy, alexander loved poetry, Kim song il was a choir boy, and Mao was a florist (ok, may have made that one up).

Haven't seen many engineers or scientists going nuts and leading countries to war and genocide. Maybe we need more of them in power and to be weary of artistic/religious visionaries.

Ahmadinedschad (engineer.) :hi:

alright, only scientists then.

You win! We all win!

I thought he was a farmer?

but he was far from a farmer. "Peanut Jimmy" is a rightwing shtick.

He was educated in the public school of Plains, attended Georgia Southwestern College and the Georgia Institute of Technology, and received a bachelor of science degree from the United States Naval Academy in 1946.

practically a country bumpkin.

We need some PhDs in there.

NT

Since there were rumors about him having either Parkinson's disease or suffering from symptoms of tertiary syphilis, which also would have explained the tremors and his troubles to walk, back in 1945 by both Morell (who treated him with medication against it) and Ernst-Günther Schenck.

They stated that there was a high probability of it being true.

Plus they pulled out some film footage that the Nazis tried to cover up.

and if you see the latest 'official' photographs, he usually hold his left hand or carried a piece of paper in it so the tremors would end. He actually complained to Morell that he had difficulties to walk and always felt being forced to the left.

The symptoms were starting in 1940, when he was 51 years old. He was also a Meth addict, and Morell pumped him full of it. In the end, he was addicted to numerous medication.

You're special and can do anything you want.

who originated the philosophy of the Family, worked toward the goal of converting Hitler over to his form of Christianity. He felt that a form of Christian Fascism was needed to heal the world, even in his own words. The Nazis kicked him out thinking he was a spy.

to place humans into their various and uniquely human perspectives is profoundly painful to understand in retrospect


A strange sort of calling - expert on Hitler's relationship with art - Birgit dilutes genius, perhaps as a way to understand the voice she heard in the call itself; and in that process discounts The Iceman and early tools of Neandertal so that even Idi Amin could have access to it

:hi: