Would it be moral to kill Hitler in 1932?

[DrZoidberg]

Really? Do you really think that the landed nobility of old is equivalent to the educated elites of the post-industrial world? Back in the day the nobility were engaged in a kind of continuous terror of the population in order to keep them under their thumb. Today the people have to be persuaded to live on their knees. There's a big difference. Before the breaking point was when the peasantry rose up in revolt because the pain of life was too great. Today the breaking point is when the hoi polloi vote for the next flavor of the day.

Having a limited menu to chose from isn't equivalent to not getting into the restaurant at all.

I'd say that the stinking rich who run your plutocracy were immensely worse than any landed nobility since Ghengiz Khan's, whose robber chiefs they resemble in all but that those were at least efficient. By the way. 'hoi' means 'the'. Hoi polloi are the many.

How worse? They are disproportionately wealthy. But then again, there's more wealth to go around. Those at the bottom have never had it so good. Back in the good old days mortality rates were so high that life had very little value. Peasants were used up and discarded when their use had expired. Not to mention taxes. Even though the peasants of old earned a fraction of what people do today, they paid a hell of a lot more taxes.

 

[blastula]

1932? How about in 1889?

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkobIFk0Buw[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Underseer]

It seems to me that one form of aristocracy is just replaced with another form of aristocracy, elitism by any other name.

Really? Do you really think that the landed nobility of old is equivalent to the educated elites of the post-industrial world? Back in the day the nobility were engaged in a kind of continuous terror of the population in order to keep them under their thumb. Today the people have to be persuaded to live on their knees. There's a big difference. Before the breaking point was when the peasantry rose up in revolt because the pain of life was too great. Today the breaking point is when the hoi polloi vote for the next flavor of the day.

Having a limited menu to chose from isn't equivalent to not getting into the restaurant at all.

In America, it absolutely is. The gap between the rich and poor is growing with every generation, social mobility is decreasing, while the new aristocracy gains ever more influence over the government to go along with their increasing wealth.

Britain is not as far along in this as we are, but they are certainly headed in the same direction.

The austerity policies of the EU may yet visit this same problem in Europe. Your day may be coming.

 

[Bronzeage]

Killing Hitler then might have set off a much more vicious version of Crystalnacht, with possible outside intervention, so it might have been a mixed blessing. Mr Trump has definitely been selected, so that might be a bit different. The difficulty is, I think, that, Trump or no Trump, the Republicans are on a trajectory that must lead to their dictatorship or civil war, though I suppose it might employ one of those bang-bangs usefully for once. On the whole, though, I think I'd be against it.

If time travel were possible and we could change the past(we'd actually be changing the future), why waste it by killing Hitler, anyone else?

Go back to the peace talks at Versailles and work out a better agreement which would not give Hitler an opportunity. Better yet, why not stand on a street corner in Sarajevo with a pool cue and whack Gavrilo Princip on the arm as he is about to shoot the Arch Duke Ferdinand?

 

[fromderinside]

Today we have a similar situation. Trump is pretty much running on the same platform as Hitler did. He also seems to be about as crazy and narcissistic. Also... he might actually win the American election.

The question is, if killing Hitler would be moral, does that mean it would moral to kill Trump now.

Thoughts?

Stupid conjecture. Sure, though his rise to power came death and destruction of tens of millions. But there were fellow travelers every step of the way. Gonna kill them too?

Trump couldn't have risen to where he is now unless there was a tear in the American social fabric that permitted him to rise. All this future history stuff needs to be flushed along with walking dead, immortals, and other silly impossible stuff that fascinate idle young minds. Got it? Idle young minds.

 

[DBT]

Really? Do you really think that the landed nobility of old is equivalent to the educated elites of the post-industrial world? Back in the day the nobility were engaged in a kind of continuous terror of the population in order to keep them under their thumb. Today the people have to be persuaded to live on their knees. There's a big difference. Before the breaking point was when the peasantry rose up in revolt because the pain of life was too great. Today the breaking point is when the hoi polloi vote for the next flavor of the day.

Having a limited menu to chose from isn't equivalent to not getting into the restaurant at all.

In America, it absolutely is. The gap between the rich and poor is growing with every generation, social mobility is decreasing, while the new aristocracy gains ever more influence over the government to go along with their increasing wealth.

Britain is not as far along in this as we are, but they are certainly headed in the same direction.

The austerity policies of the EU may yet visit this same problem in Europe. Your day may be coming.

Yep. Australia is also heading in that direction.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Really? Do you really think that the landed nobility of old is equivalent to the educated elites of the post-industrial world? Back in the day the nobility were engaged in a kind of continuous terror of the population in order to keep them under their thumb. Today the people have to be persuaded to live on their knees. There's a big difference. Before the breaking point was when the peasantry rose up in revolt because the pain of life was too great. Today the breaking point is when the hoi polloi vote for the next flavor of the day.

Having a limited menu to chose from isn't equivalent to not getting into the restaurant at all.

In America, it absolutely is. The gap between the rich and poor is growing with every generation, social mobility is decreasing, while the new aristocracy gains ever more influence over the government to go along with their increasing wealth.

Britain is not as far along in this as we are, but they are certainly headed in the same direction.

The austerity policies of the EU may yet visit this same problem in Europe. Your day may be coming.

The more somebody else has, it isn't that you then have less. It's not a zero sum game. We have a more efficient market than ever before. This means that everybody is better off, even the poorest members of society.

I once took an economics course. At the start of the first lecture the lecturer (professor to Americans) asked what people would prefer to be, the Queen of England 1900, or a common laborer today. Everybody said they would prefer to be the Queen of England. At the end of that same lecture he asked the same question again and nobody wanted to be the Queen of England.

You're trying to make the case that a skewed democracy is worse than no democracy at all.

And for fucks sake... we're not heading into an economic abyss. There's no economic crisis. We're richer than we've ever been before. Every country on the entire planet. Granted that Syria has a bit of a slump right now. But everybody else is doing dandy (compared to just a couple of years ago). Even Greece is prosperous, comparatively, to how they were doing just 30 years ago.

Most of consumption in the west today is luxury consumption. Ie stuff we don't really need for our sustenance or survival. My brother blew €10 000 on rebuilding his bathroom, because he didn't like the tank to the toilet visible. He wanted it built into the wall. That's the kind of shit people are using their money on. His toilet was fine before this. Most people are not buying used cars. Most people buy new cars. Most used cars, that are just fine, are not being sold. They are mostly being ripped apart for scrap metal. How much money have you blown on stereos, TVs and computers? Did you need any of that? Really need?

The 1% have more money and buying power than any humans have ever had. You just can't compare them to the nobility of old.

 

[Bomb#20]

I once took an economics course. At the start of the first lecture the lecturer (professor to Americans) asked what people would prefer to be, the Queen of England 1900, or a common laborer today. Everybody said they would prefer to be the Queen of England. At the end of that same lecture he asked the same question again and nobody wanted to be the Queen of England.

Um, did his lecture mention that the Queen of England in 1900 was 81, crippled, and dying within a year?

 

[DrZoidberg]

I once took an economics course. At the start of the first lecture the lecturer (professor to Americans) asked what people would prefer to be, the Queen of England 1900, or a common laborer today. Everybody said they would prefer to be the Queen of England. At the end of that same lecture he asked the same question again and nobody wanted to be the Queen of England.

Um, did his lecture mention that the Queen of England in 1900 was 81, crippled, and dying within a year?

Funny that you should say that. After clicking post I remembered that he said king of England in 1901. I just couldn't be arsed to change it.

 

[DBT]

In America, it absolutely is. The gap between the rich and poor is growing with every generation, social mobility is decreasing, while the new aristocracy gains ever more influence over the government to go along with their increasing wealth.

Britain is not as far along in this as we are, but they are certainly headed in the same direction.

The austerity policies of the EU may yet visit this same problem in Europe. Your day may be coming.

The more somebody else has, it isn't that you then have less. It's not a zero sum game. We have a more efficient market than ever before. This means that everybody is better off, even the poorest members of society.

I once took an economics course. At the start of the first lecture the lecturer (professor to Americans) asked what people would prefer to be, the Queen of England 1900, or a common laborer today. Everybody said they would prefer to be the Queen of England. At the end of that same lecture he asked the same question again and nobody wanted to be the Queen of England.

You're trying to make the case that a skewed democracy is worse than no democracy at all.

And for fucks sake... we're not heading into an economic abyss. There's no economic crisis. We're richer than we've ever been before. Every country on the entire planet. Granted that Syria has a bit of a slump right now. But everybody else is doing dandy (compared to just a couple of years ago). Even Greece is prosperous, comparatively, to how they were doing just 30 years ago.

Most of consumption in the west today is luxury consumption. Ie stuff we don't really need for our sustenance or survival. My brother blew €10 000 on rebuilding his bathroom, because he didn't like the tank to the toilet visible. He wanted it built into the wall. That's the kind of shit people are using their money on. His toilet was fine before this. Most people are not buying used cars. Most people buy new cars. Most used cars, that are just fine, are not being sold. They are mostly being ripped apart for scrap metal. How much money have you blown on stereos, TVs and computers? Did you need any of that? Really need?

The 1% have more money and buying power than any humans have ever had. You just can't compare them to the nobility of old.

Do ordinary workers, the average Joe, the middle class, generally feel that their lives and incomes/buying power, etc, has improved in recent decades? Or, given the trend of computerised services and manufacturing, that it's likely to in coming decades?

 

[whichphilosophy]

Today we have a similar situation. Trump is pretty much running on the same platform as Hitler did. He also seems to be about as crazy and narcissistic. Also... he might actually win the American election.

The question is, if killing Hitler would be moral, does that mean it would moral to kill Trump now.

Thoughts?

His platform on border controls is hardly like firing people from jobs and closing down or boycotting their businesses simply on racial lines. In fact it sounds like he is in favour of legal immigration which the US has lost sight of by splashing out amnesties every so often. There are also Latino Americans who are pledging support for him.

Assassination on the basis of saying stupid things as some would things would not be justifiable. Nor is it likely that he will be elected, but who knows given who he is up against.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Today we have a similar situation. Trump is pretty much running on the same platform as Hitler did. He also seems to be about as crazy and narcissistic. Also... he might actually win the American election.

The question is, if killing Hitler would be moral, does that mean it would moral to kill Trump now.

Thoughts?

His platform on border controls is hardly like firing people from jobs and closing down or boycotting their businesses simply on racial lines.

This is so ignorant it's not even funny. The racist laws were introduced step by step. Just because he hasn't done it yet (because he can't) doesn't mean he won't. His political trajectory is pretty familiar.

His platform is empty. it's 100% pure rhetoric. When it turns out that he is unable to do anything that he has said he would and isn't even trying, that's when he'll turn to blaming all ills on the perceived external threat.

The way fascism works is that they create a stratified legal hierarchy where those at the bottom are not protected by the law. Certain members of the society are held up as "protectors" who go after the unwanted. As any group of volunteer citizens, some are good. Some are utter cunts. But since they're all "fighting the good fight" the bad one's are protected from scrutiny. This happens in any society anyway. It's just an unfortunate facet of human life. What makes fascism special is that it holds these people up as good citizens, and laws are put into place to protect these people (even the bad one's who don't waste time exploiting this). Remember what Trump has said about Muslims. It pretty much exactly mirrors the kind of things Hitler said about Jews.

At no point did Hitler ever say that the Jews should be exterminated. He never gave that order either. And as far as we know, he outsourced this function completely. He left it to people like Himler, to be creative and solve it in any way he can. He never visited a concentration camp. And whenever discussions about it came up he shut the discussion down. He most likely didn't know. It requires very little for Trump to do something similar. Hell, Bush jr has already set up the machinery for it. And Obama kept it well oiled.

So yes, it is exactly like Hitler.

In fact it sounds like he is in favour of legal immigration which the US has lost sight of by splashing out amnesties every so often. There are also Latino Americans who are pledging support for him.

Assassination on the basis of saying stupid things as some would things would not be justifiable. Nor is it likely that he will be elected, but who knows given who he is up against.

He is one out of two that can be elected and his opponent has more skeletons in her closet than Usama Bin Laden had. Clinton has a long and, well documented, history of letting herself be bought by all manner of shady characters. I'm not saying she's evil. I'm just saying her banner isn't pristine and shiny, which might make it hard for her to win over current Trump followers.

I think the risk of Trump being elected is a real risk. So we should treat it like a real risk. Hardly anybody thought Hitler would be elected either. Yet it happened.

 

[iolo]

I'd say that the stinking rich who run your plutocracy were immensely worse than any landed nobility since Ghengiz Khan's, whose robber chiefs they resemble in all but that those were at least efficient. By the way. 'hoi' means 'the'. Hoi polloi are the many.

How worse? They are disproportionately wealthy. But then again, there's more wealth to go around. Those at the bottom have never had it so good. Back in the good old days mortality rates were so high that life had very little value. Peasants were used up and discarded when their use had expired. Not to mention taxes. Even though the peasants of old earned a fraction of what people do today, they paid a hell of a lot more taxes.

Insanely greedy - it doesn't matter how much wealth there is, they want it all, even if that destroys their silly system and fries us all. We pay them a tax called profit on everything we buy and every job we do.

 

[iolo]

Killing Hitler then might have set off a much more vicious version of Crystalnacht, with possible outside intervention, so it might have been a mixed blessing. Mr Trump has definitely been selected, so that might be a bit different. The difficulty is, I think, that, Trump or no Trump, the Republicans are on a trajectory that must lead to their dictatorship or civil war, though I suppose it might employ one of those bang-bangs usefully for once. On the whole, though, I think I'd be against it.

If time travel were possible and we could change the past(we'd actually be changing the future), why waste it by killing Hitler, anyone else?

Go back to the peace talks at Versailles and work out a better agreement which would not give Hitler an opportunity. Better yet, why not stand on a street corner in Sarajevo with a pool cue and whack Gavrilo Princip on the arm as he is about to shoot the Arch Duke Ferdinand?

I doubt we can change the future that much, really. Imperialism was going to lead to war anyway, the Slump was going to happen anyway, and the system didn't care how many millions it killed to avoid socialism when it did.

 

[DBT]

How worse? They are disproportionately wealthy. But then again, there's more wealth to go around. Those at the bottom have never had it so good. Back in the good old days mortality rates were so high that life had very little value. Peasants were used up and discarded when their use had expired. Not to mention taxes. Even though the peasants of old earned a fraction of what people do today, they paid a hell of a lot more taxes.

Insanely greedy - it doesn't matter how much wealth there is, they want it all, even if that destroys their silly system and fries us all. We pay them a tax called profit on everything we buy and every job we do.

Yep. The Robber Barons are still with us. They call themselves executives and CEO's.

 

[davesteve]

It's never moral to kill, although sometimes it is necessary. Jeb Bush should have refused to answer a hypothetical nonsense question. Of coarse in this political atmosphere, he may have been labeled a "nazi lover" by Trump if he didn't answer affirmatively.
When Obama was elected, it only took a minority of senators to block almost everything he wanted to do (after the obamacare passage). If Trump does get elected (he won't), democrats AND many republicans will not allow him to get anything he wants. He will be alone and powerless, unlike Hitler. The comparison is silly. But conservatives have labeled Obama Hitler, Bin Laden, Stalin, Lenin and more. Liberals labeled Bush a nazi. The whole "you are like so and so" is pointless, as is hypothetical pondering and relating it to reality, although fine for those with time to kill. Mixing reality and fiction never produces anything useful except pop culture entertainment.
What's next then, "What if JFK had not been assassinated?"

 

[fast]

It's never moral to kill, although sometimes it is necessary.

It's sometimes moral to kill because some killings are justified.

 

[DBT]

Or is it justified but not necessarily a matter of morality, just necessity?

 

[Juma]

Or is it justified but not necessarily a matter of morality, just necessity?

Care to give an example?

 

[DBT]

Or is it justified but not necessarily a matter of morality, just necessity?

Care to give an example?

It was a question.