PART 6

[Christine]

I think it is also because, as Bullock notes, Stalin was more hands on. Stalin is more there, and Hitler always seems to be keeping something back. It is almost as if Stalin seems more "honest".

[Christine]

I think part of it was when things are bad, you just want someone to make it better; you don't really care how. When I was in college, I took a history class about women in history. There was a section on Hitler who got women to vote for him, even though the Nazi policy was bad for women. They just wanted things better so they willingly forgot some things.

[Kyle]

Bird Brian wrote: "Maybe I'm not saying anything very insightful here, but I can't believe how audacious Hitler is- even before he has any power, he refuses every negotiation which offers him power, but with restrain..."

Yeah Brian, I've thought about that too. It's not like Hitler was a "surprise" to anyone, or that he suddenly started doing things in office different from what he said he was going to do once he got in power (points for consistency, at least?).

Not that I think comparing our politicians to Hitler is a normally cogent thing to do, but I think about some of the crazy things people running for office have said, and sometimes wonder how much of it they would actually do if they could. People seem surprised when some politician who ran on a platform of cutting spending, ends up cutting school funding, or healthcare funding, or, etc:.

I don't mean to turn this into a political forum, but I suppose one lesson we can/should draw from Hitler, is to be very discerning and engaged in our political process; to not give power to others lightly.