2006-12-10 14:00:26 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Historians should stick to history, and not try to analyze someone's intelligence. One can be stupid, and still be intelligent. Intelligence has little to do with how good your grammar is. It isn't all about your mathematical ability. It doesn't really have much to do with how much you know period. Intelligence is basically all of one's ingenuity to solve problems. Hitler showed us very well that he was a good problem solver.
How to pull a country's economy out of the crapper: Hitler knew this, and made it happen.
How to take a country with no army, and take over most of Europe, the top of Africa, and almost half of Asia: Hitler knew this, and made it happen.
Unintelligent? I think not. Stupid? Possibly.
2006-12-10 14:16:20 · answer #1 · answered by CAUTION:Truth may hurt! 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the history books you have been reading suggest that Hitler was unintelligent, I would tell you to remember that history is written by the winners.
As for whether he was actually intelligent or not, Hitler was brilliant. He was an unbelievably charismatic speaker, he brilliantly re-wrote German history, and his propaganda machine was one of the best ever seen. He couldn't have done what he did if he wasn't intelligent.
However this does not mean that what he did was moral or admirable. If only he had used his gifts for the betterment of the world....
2006-12-10 22:12:03 · answer #2 · answered by mopo28 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In a strict sense of what "intelligence" is that may be correct because he was a dropout he may not have passed school tests but there's other aspects to intelligence. History shows that he was a charismatic leader who was able to get an entire country behind him and almost wipe out an entire population - that's scary smart. If he had been stupid then maybe the whole horrible events of wwII and holocaust would never have happened.
2006-12-10 23:35:59 · answer #3 · answered by wondering 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hitler- was actually quite smart. The textbooks are written by the winners, remember? he just didn't' consider a classical education important (oh, if he had, if he had... might have been an engineer or something)
he considered himself a visionary, an artist. so he tried to go to art School, but was rejected. he did survive for a while by selling impressionist paintings before he went off to serve as an artilleryman in WWI. He was decorated with an Iron Cross, and went back to work for the German government as an intelligence officer. He was assigned to monitor the Nazi Party, which he found himself attracted to.
the rest, as they say, is history.
2006-12-10 22:16:53 · answer #4 · answered by The Big Box 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hitler wasn't stupid at all. How can a moron raise himself up to be the most powerful and ruthless man in the world? It takes intelligence to attempt world domination... and he wasn't that far off from winning WW2.
2006-12-10 22:04:33 · answer #5 · answered by sirtitus 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I must ask what history book are you refering to? Hitler was a brilliant speaker and a talented artist...his military strategy was lacking and he was unquestionably nutty...... but I have never heard his intellegence questioned
2006-12-11 16:08:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
chances is that he wanted to dropout because he felt what was taught in school is lame for his level of understanding, moreover they didn't teach him the module "how to attempt world domination successfully" did they?
2006-12-10 22:10:40 · answer #7 · answered by alvineager 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋