what do you think?
after a few people answer, I'll tell you what I think...
2006-09-18 15:54:29 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
thanks for answering... this is purely an opinion question. I think that he was an amazing leader. he was great at what he did. I dont think that im as angry about what happened as most people are because it inspired so much good... just think of the butterfly effect. I think it showed people what NOT to do in trusting your nations leader(s). once again, thank you for answering!
2006-09-18 16:22:41 · update #1
ok well you dont know what the butterfly effect is... well its ultimately stating that one little thing you do now could completely change your(or other people's) future. NOT THE MOVIE!!!
2006-09-18 17:01:37 · update #2
well teh answer I wanted as best is gone, so Im going to just let this go to vote. thanks for answering everyone!
2006-09-19 16:42:19 · update #3
That depends on what you mean by good.
Was he highly effective at motivating people and inspiring loyalty. Yes, by that standard he was a tremendously good leader.
Was he a leader who brought good things to his people and brought out the best in them? By this standard he was one of the worst leaders ever.
2006-09-18 16:00:15 · answer #1 · answered by Skippy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Uhhh, no.
Hitler was one of the worst humans that has ever lived. He started the second world war, in which millions of people died, and ordered the executions of 11 million people during the Holocaust. There were many signs that pointed out that Hitler was capable of doing what he did. If leaders of other countries would have done something when the warning signs were there, maybe something could have been done. Some people call Hitler the devil, and in the future we should do everything in out power not to let what happen ever happen again.
2006-09-18 23:15:31 · answer #2 · answered by lovemcss 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
how could you even ask that question? He is one of the evilest person in the history of the world!!!! He got lots of people to follow him unfortunaetly. But look at what he did. Too bad they didn't catch him. A good leader doesn't cower in a bunker he should of stood up if he truly believed what he did was right. The people that followed and still follow his believes makes me ashamed that I'm white! Same with the people who invented slavery! Right now, I'm not sure if there was any good leaders. I would like to have had him in this day of age and see what would happen to him then. Suddam did basically the same things and he got caught! He would of got his butt handed to him on a platter! He deserves to rot in hell!!!!!!!
2006-09-18 23:01:45 · answer #3 · answered by tray 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
His administration did do a lot of good for all of western Europe though ill intended what he contributed to this support were the economic and social successes, for which he fully took credit, during his early leadership: the virtual disappearance of unemployment, the rising prosperity of the masses, the new social institutions, and the increase of German prestige in the 1930s—achievements unparalleled in the histories of other modern totalitarian dictatorships. In spite of the spiritual and intellectual progenitors of some of his ideas there is no German national leader to whom he may be compared. In sum, he had no forerunners—another difference between him and other dictators.
2006-09-18 23:11:47 · answer #4 · answered by dstr 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He was efficient. Good and bad is a matter of perspective. In some ways his leadership skill out weight most modern leaders however it takes more then leadership to rule and this is what Hitler lacked. He had vision but was not practical. I am speaking purly from an objective prospective without regard to personal beliefs.
2006-09-18 22:59:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
He was charismatic. And in being so was able to get a large number of people stirred up about his message. He was really no different than Jim Jones or David Koresh in this respect. But he was rotten to the core when it came to playing by the rules. He certainly didn't mind slaughtering innocent people. And he was a pitiful tactician. You could've beaten him in a strategy game.
2006-09-18 23:07:30 · answer #6 · answered by Gene Rocks! 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most decidedly not. While he did seem to galvanize the masses, he early on advocated policies and beliefs which any sane person could see would not in the long run benefit the German people. His strategic and tactical errors particularly in regard to the war in the east, could never be considered as good leading.
2006-09-18 23:01:51 · answer #7 · answered by carnuba50 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He was a great leader and led the Germans to new heights. They believed in him and worshipped him.
He's an evil person though. Don't like him. He's a racist and the world is better without him.
2006-09-19 01:27:49 · answer #8 · answered by tyrone b 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
With respect to his ability to get the people to follow him yes. You have to understand they knew what they were giving up when he came into power in germany. They made him as close to a modern emporer as seems possible in todays world. They knew about most of the things that the party was doing but they still had faith in his vision.
2006-09-18 23:06:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
in the beginning he showed very strong leadership skills, without a doubt..... a great leader.
but it went downhill from there,,,, and he made a number of poor tactical decisions during the war that ultimately showed his downfall in leadership ability's and decision making quality's.
decisions that seemed to be that of a inexperienced leader, and ones that alot feel he would have done different during his earlier days of leadership,,,,,, something changed within him.....
some say it was the drugs that played a major factor in this decline of leadership skills..... and that they took a toll on him mentally.
but,,,,i can not say,,,,, i was not there.
2006-09-18 23:13:46 · answer #10 · answered by steelmadison 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋