Historical "facts" and popular representations of histrical figures that are wrong

[NLS]

Hitler may not have only had one testicle. Only 1 person during WWI stated he did but none of his medical records after then made any reference to it whatsoever. Even his private physician never mentioned it. Although it can't be proven to be false, it can't be proven to be true either

...

I never heard about that.

No wonder the guy was so mad.

Yeah, it's uncertain if that's what actually drove him nuts.

 

[Tropicaz]

Hitler may not have only had one testicle. Only 1 person during WWI stated he did but none of his medical records after then made any reference to it whatsoever. Even his private physician never mentioned it. Although it can't be proven to be false, it can't be proven to be true either

...

I never heard about that.

No wonder the guy was so mad.

Yeah, it's uncertain if that's what actually drove him nuts.

He was well known for being a bit testy

 

[PureChaos]

Hitler may not have only had one testicle. Only 1 person during WWI stated he did but none of his medical records after then made any reference to it whatsoever. Even his private physician never mentioned it. Although it can't be proven to be false, it can't be proven to be true either

That isn't even a fact. There is a song, "Hitler Has Only Got One Ball" that created that myth.

But a lot of people think it IS a fact and this thread is all about setting the record straight.

 

[DJjaffacake]

Some people seem to think King John was actually a good king and that it's just Robin Hood that's given him a bad name. He was, in fact, such a bad king that the Barons went to war with him. On the other hand, that gave us Parliament and the Magna Carta, so, as Churchill said, "When the long tally is added, it will be seen that the British nation and the English-speaking world owe far more to the vices of John than to the labours of virtuous sovereigns."

 

[Leadfinger]

I think Hitler was a great leader. He did a few things during the 30's that he shouldn't have (like dissolving the SA with a knife and locking up the socialists) but underneath the mess there was a fantastic leader. He gets misrepresented and demonized much more than he might deserve.

If he hadn't come into power during the depression, if the upper class had been slightly more varied in ethnic makeup, if the socialists didn't cave to public pressure and open the door for him... Under different circumstances, Hitler may have been the greatest leader Germany had ever known.

What about the whole "let's eradicate the Jews" thing?

 

[Supertegwyn]

I think Hitler was a great leader. He did a few things during the 30's that he shouldn't have (like dissolving the SA with a knife and locking up the socialists) but underneath the mess there was a fantastic leader. He gets misrepresented and demonized much more than he might deserve.

If he hadn't come into power during the depression, if the upper class had been slightly more varied in ethnic makeup, if the socialists didn't cave to public pressure and open the door for him... Under different circumstances, Hitler may have been the greatest leader Germany had ever known.

Even in Hitler was the greatest leader in German history Pre-World War 2 (he by FAR isn't), World War 2 completely negates that.

Great leaders don't start a war that completely destroys their country.

Captcha: Piping hot

Why thank you.

 

[Roggen Bread]

I think Hitler was a great leader. He did a few things during the 30's that he shouldn't have (like dissolving the SA with a knife and locking up the socialists) but underneath the mess there was a fantastic leader. He gets misrepresented and demonized much more than he might deserve.

If he hadn't come into power during the depression, if the upper class had been slightly more varied in ethnic makeup, if the socialists didn't cave to public pressure and open the door for him... Under different circumstances, Hitler may have been the greatest leader Germany had ever known.

Für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland sprechend: Einfach nur NEIN!

(Speaking on behalf of the Federal Republic of Germany: Just NO!)

He was a stupid, mad, untalented, power mad, megalomaniac dipshit.

Yes, he was a rhetoric genius, but that's it. (He actually practiced his hard "R" and the powerful aggressive intonation, due to being from Austria, he acutally spoke very soft.)

Most of his decisions were, as some people wrote before, short sighted and plain stupid.
His military tactics, (he called himself Gröfäz, Größter Feldherr aller Zeiten, Greatest commander of all times) were just stupid. If some of his real generals (people who actually knew the slightest thing about tactics) tried to propose different strategies he just lost it, rolled on the floor and bit into the carpet (for real. He was a seriously choleric person.)

He fucked over the complete economy by dismantling industrial facilities and turning it into weapons, he alienated scientists (even those, who were "aryan") by being a stupid motherf*cker and telling them how to work (some even got executed because they knew better and would not step back from their opinion).
This guy just had no idea what he was doing.

And if your profile is right, you're Australian.

Please do not tell Germans who their best leader was. Whoever it was (Bismarck, ffs!), it was NOT Hitler. This is just insulting.

 

[ChocoFace]

That modern psychology was founded by Sigmund Freud or that his theories are still relevant to this day. He didn't and they're not. Freud's lasting contribution to modern psychology is popularizing it and some of his counseling methods.

Well, Freud did bring up the idea of a subconcious, so there's that. Otherwise i agree with you, because technically it was all speculative and couldn't actually be proven right or wrong.

As for what i think deserves clearing up, is that native americans were way more advanced as a civilization than we're lead to believe. They had huge cities connected by trading routes and were militarily very strong. Even Vikings couldn't expand to their territories, not to mention the pilgrims who only came out ahead because of smallpox (not sure if it was actually smallpox, or some other disease), which wiped out over 90% of the native americans over a few years.

 

[AntiChri5]

I think Hitler was a great leader. He did a few things during the 30's that he shouldn't have (like dissolving the SA with a knife and locking up the socialists) but underneath the mess there was a fantastic leader. He gets misrepresented and demonized much more than he might deserve.

If he hadn't come into power during the depression, if the upper class had been slightly more varied in ethnic makeup, if the socialists didn't cave to public pressure and open the door for him... Under different circumstances, Hitler may have been the greatest leader Germany had ever known.

Seriously? The only good "leader" quality he had was an ability to get people to follow him. He was short sighted, paranoid, not particularly bright, very arrogant and above all insanely genocidal

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

My uncle told me something about how Abraham Lincoln was actually really racist or something. No idea if that's true or not but it seemed far fetched to me so I just agreed with him so he'd shut up.

Well, it's a matter of perspective really. By today's standards he probably would be very racist. While he may have wanted the abolition of slavery, he certainly didn't want a society where black people were considered equal to white people. However, by the standards of the time, wanting an end to slavery, as well as allowing black people to serve in the ranks of the Union, made him about as progressive as could have been hoped for.

 

[Roggen Bread]

And if your profile is right, you're Australian.

Please do not tell Germans who their best leader was. Whoever it was (Bismarck, ffs!), it was NOT Hitler. This is just insulting.

Please don't tell Australians what to think of German leaders.

See, that can work both ways.

But I do not insult you asking you not to do this.

You actually managed to offend me. This does not happen often.

 

[AntiChri5]

And if your profile is right, you're Australian.

Please do not tell Germans who their best leader was. Whoever it was (Bismarck, ffs!), it was NOT Hitler. This is just insulting.

Please don't tell Australians what to think of German leaders.

See, that can work both ways.

Please don't make Australians look like raging douchebags. A German has every right to tell someone from another continent not to lecture them on who their greatest leader was.

 

[Kathinka]

And if your profile is right, you're Australian.

Please do not tell Germans who their best leader was. Whoever it was (Bismarck, ffs!), it was NOT Hitler. This is just insulting.

Please don't tell Australians what to think of German leaders.

See, that can work both ways.

he has a point though, there is absolutely no historical evidence to support that claim.
hitler needed supernaturally good luck to do as good as he did in the first place. not even starting about his complete incompetence in military and diplomatic matters, his interior politics were bonkers too. the economy was based on shifting around huge sums of money that didn't actually exist anywhere and would have collapsed without the enormous workforce provided by slave labor. and every aspect of the state, from economy to sociological, was from the beginning on centered around a war of aggression, ever decision was made with that in mind. and even THAT wasn't executed as good as it could have been.

so, tl;dr:

no. just...no.

 

[Wintermoot]

the Americans beat the Nazi's
actually the Soviets captured Berlin which forced Hitler to surrender (or in his case commit suicide).
The Americans helped the Britians and Canadians with the liberation of West Europe (Holland,Belgium,etc.)