Could Hitler Have Risen to Power without Scapegoating the Jews?

Discussion in 'Science & History' started by Gavik, Apr 18, 2007.

  1. Gavik

    Gavik Registered Member

    I was thinking about this earlier today and thought it would make for good discussion.

  2. CamelPepper

    CamelPepper Registered Member

    That was a large part of the basis of his rising to power, I don't believe he would have.
  3. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    He could have scapegoated anyone. I don't think he could have gotten into power without blaming a non-German group. The anger was there, political power was up for the first party to channel it.
  4. Corona

    Corona Registered Member

    No; Hitler had to magnify, twist, and channel the German public opinion, he could have scapegoated others, but Germans were already distrustful of Jews, so they were the easiest target.
  5. Duke1985

    Duke1985 EatsApplePieShitsFreedom

    It really could have been anyone, but Germany was in bad shape economicaly and all these jewish immigrants moved in and started doing well, better than alot of Germans, it made them an easy target.

    As far as getting his seat of power, if he didn't have a scapegoat its hard to say how far he would have got on the power ladder.

    Little known fact, Hitler was a house painter when he was young, french rebels would mime the painting motion as sign of defiance to the German occupiers.
  6. Yukon

    Yukon Guest

    I suggest you read the history books before making such a claim.
  7. MrCarolina77

    MrCarolina77 Guest

    Actually this hurt him a little bit. What REALLY brought him to power was going against the treaty of versaille. This was a HUGE part in helping him control the country.

    Yeah but that does sound like a logical reason. He got into power because of his defiance against the treaty. Many of the Germans hated it and Hitler gave them pride and honor for their country.
  8. Gavik

    Gavik Registered Member

    True. He could have just turned public hatred against the British and French (as he did anyway). He was a good enough orater to do so.
  9. AYHJA

    AYHJA Registered Member

    My believe in any event that if it can happen, it will happen...You can't assume that the means he took to his end was the only one available...
  10. ermcool

    ermcool Registered Member

    I think it was a combination of anti-semitism, and his veiment opposition to the treaty which helped bring him to power. He seems to have had a genius, as some have pointed out, for scapegoating, and it could have been any group, but the jews fit better. Also, he did have anti-semetic influences via books and such.

Share This Page