2006-10-11 01:51:56 · 8 answers · asked by Grinner5000 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Actually he wasn't a butcher. He was a chicken farmer before rising to high office.But to answer seriously,evil as a term implies a specific attempt to subjugate the good. Himmler displays in his speeches and writings certain traits which today we would know as sociopathic. It follows then that he could not distinguish moral ethics, and indeed it appears that he was acting in what he thought of as the benefit to the German race.
Accepting that argument means that no he was not evil.
I'm sure Himmler never married Debbie McGee, nor did he ride around in a Rolls-Royce with the reg MAG 1C.
He certainly never lived at Alderley Edge or we'd have caught him, and I can't imagine him turning up at the gates of Auschwitz and saying "You'll like this......not a lot, but you'll like it"; so it looks like the Paul Daniels theory is out too.
2006-10-11 04:40:37 · answer #1 · answered by prakdrive 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evil butcher. Founded and organised concentration camps.Not right to compare him with Paul Daniels
2006-10-11 02:00:25 · answer #2 · answered by Mart 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Paul Daniels is far from harmless.
2006-10-11 01:54:21 · answer #3 · answered by sarcasticquotemarks 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I always thought it was a failing of Nuremberg that Paul Daniels never got tried.
2006-10-11 01:55:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not as bad as Paul Daniels or Herman Munster, he was dead evil.
2006-10-11 03:19:49 · answer #5 · answered by Bowzer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Evil man.
2006-10-11 01:54:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
evil butcher....into the black arts and rituals.....I don't think many people from that era would consider him harmless
2006-10-11 01:54:26 · answer #7 · answered by cyborg_2099 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well they both can make things disappear, so yes he just a harmless magician.
2006-10-11 02:26:08 · answer #8 · answered by ? 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋