Talk:Adolf Hitler

This article used to be a good article. It was promoted on 26 July 2009 and demoted on 10 October 2011. This means the community feels this article was written very well, but is not now. You may see the vote that promoted the article here. You may see the vote that demoted the article here.

Aryan?

Factually incorrect. From the article: "Also, more people were born because Hitler wanted more people of the 'master race' (by that he meant Aryan, or those with blue eyes and blond hair)"

This is NOT what Hitler meant by "Aryan". If this were true, most Germanic people would not be considered "Aryan" by Nazi racial that time, 'Aryan' was a racial type defined by one's descent or heritage, NOT by a individual's hair or eye color. Understand that the Nazis idealized the Nordic race, which is defined by an interdependence of many features - coloring being of secondary importance to skull shape and morphological traits. There were many brown-eyed mothers in the Lebensborn. StacyMJC (talk) 11:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Polish people ommitted from the list of Holocaust victims

"6 million Jews, in an event called The Holocaust. Other people that he killed were Roma (Gypsies), homosexuals"

Who's missing?

3 milions of people. That's the number of polish victims.

Gypsies (about half a milion of victims) are mentioned.

Homosexuals (about 5000-15000 of people) are mentioned.

That's NPOV?

Why does it just say 6,000,000 jews were killed? What about the other 5 million people that were killed? 74.175.101.2 (talk) 15:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

If you bring up a ref, I'm willing to add it. -Barras ^talk 15:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

[1]Here...74.175.101.2 (talk) 15:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia is not a source. -Barras ^talk 17:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

[2]Happy now? The English wikipedia should be a "source" as far as consistency goes.72.144.168.62 (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Mein Kampf [...] called for the murder???

I just browsed "Mein Kampf" on my hard disc and I couldn't find one single statement where it calls for the murder of Jews. Unless somebody is able to substantiate this claim with a quote from Hitler's book, this statement should be removed.

That is inaccurate; but look at NSDAP 25 points manifesto, I translated the relevant points. --Eptalon 23:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, but there's no call for murdering Jews in NSDAP's program either, is it? Genocide was a consequence of Hitler's politics, but it doesn't change the fact that it was NOT presented as a part of their political program as early as in twenties (when both the manifesto and the book were written).

get out of economic problems?

Who wrote "Fucking Nazi" in caps in every sentence of the article? I mean it is n't necessary..we know that the nazis were bad.. o i just reloaded the page and the robot thing caught it.

"The military-industrial complex he made helped Germany get out of the economic problems after World War I.". Please compare them with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Economics_and_culture . For example especially with "The negative effects of this inflation were offset in later years by the acquisition of foreign gold from the treasuries of conquered nations."

The Qoute at top can be missunderstood and intepreted along a fascist way. -I havent a User Account yet 84.162.168.137 14:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

"war veteran, intellectual, painter"

I'm kind of uncomfortable with that introduction. I don't believe it's the right way to introduce Hitler in a encyclopedia that likely is read by children and learning disabled. Instead, the introduction of this article should concentrate on his poltical relevance, as in at least the English, German and French wikipedia as well. Thomas82d 10:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It is inadequate to introduce him this way. There are more important things to say. What's more: he was neither a real intellectual nor a real painter. -- Jo 84.168.213.113 16:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Had a stab at fixing it, not sure if it's not now too wordy, would be grateful for simplifications. 86.135.33.2 21:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

"Hitler is an important leader in world history."

The sentence: "Hitler is an important leader in world history." is at least disputable. The word "important" suggests to me that created something of valour for us, which he did not. He killed and destroyed. --Jo 84.168.239.197 13:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Yet he was still important. Adolf Hitler had a major effect on the world, bad or not. Mr.Hotkeys 18:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Importance is a metric of influence, not of virtue. This means that a man is important to history because he changed things a lot, not because he was good. 24.205.53.113 (talk) 08:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

"Hitler was Austrian not German."

He was born in Austria, so he was Austrian. He could only be elected as Chancellor, because he was elected to the city council of Braunschweig (as far as I know).

I think he went to Austria to work as a paintor, but as he was worse than a green fly's @$$, he started a war instead.  ←Kalajan→  19:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hitlers nationality was austrian. He was born in Braunau am Inn. He get the german nationality before he become the german chancellor. In 1925 he gave up the austrian nationality and was without any nationality. He get the german nationality at February 26, 1932 from the Free Staate of Braunschweig. --barras 20:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, right.  ←Kalajan→  20:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Attempts to strip Hitler of citizenship gained on 25 Feb 1932 Der Spiegel Bärliner 01:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hated?

"Hitler is one of the most famous and hated people in history." That doesn't sound like a fact more than opinion. He is hated by many, true, but who said most everyone does? —This unsigned comment was added by 70.45.86.29 (talk • contribs) .

Opinions, don`t have to be in an encyclopedia, so we have to delet these opinions. mfg --- ארגה · ‽ · Manecke 16:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well everyone hates Nazis. They were animals.  ←Kalajan→  20:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Article protected?

This article needs a lot of work, and I'd like to help. How do I get it unprotected? Simpleton 03:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• Answer taken to User talk page -- Creol(talk) 03:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

"He also believed that the god Jerame Maas was truly the leader of the Nazi's" - incorrect.

Who died first?

Who died first: Hitler or Eva Braun? 71.80.163.73 (talk) 04:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

That's not clear. They committed suicide alone. Nobody saw this. Bormann goes in the room after he heard the shoot. Eva Braun and Hitler was dead when Bormann came in the room. Barras (talk) 10:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Germany started WW2

Germany did not start WW2. I believe the Japanese invaded Manchuria first, which was part of the war. Germany may certainly have started the European portion of WW2.

Or, it could be that the generally held view is that Germany started the war — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.184.130 (talk • contribs)

Hi! Germany started WWII with the attack of Poland, on 1 September 1939. They attacked the radio station of Gleiwitz. Best Regards, Barras (talk) 15:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Correct, although the Japanese had invaded Manchuria several years earlier. The connection of Japan with Germany was a matter of mutual convenience. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Possibly complex words

A few words that I think could be further simplified include capitulation, territory, propaganda, overthrow, putsch, ideology, and expulsion. If you disagree, then please keep them, as I'm just providing my opinion. hmwithτ 14:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

• capitulation - is linked (redlink) - I'll create the page.
• territory - probably area - would this be easier?
• propaganda - is linked now and should be ok so.
• wikt:overthrow - now linked to wiktionary.
• putsch - is already linked. should be ok so.
• ideology - now linked, should be ok.
• expulsion - now displacement.

Thanks for the comments --Barras (talk) 18:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Let me see...

• capitulation - I did see that it was linked, and it could use a page. I'm not sure what word we could use to replace it if you don't. Surrendering?
• territory - I was thinking something like area would work.
• propaganda - This should be fine now. It's a concept that doesn't really have any exact synonyms.
• overthrow - You linked this to Wiktionary, but I feel that it could also work to say "take over", perhaps. Either way.
• putsch - I have no idea what that is, and the article doesn't help much... and I'm a native speaker of English.
• ideology - Yeah, it should be okay linked. I can't seem to find another way to word it where it doesn't lose its meaning.
• expulsion - Perfect.

Thanks for the quick fixes! Looks good. :) hmwithτ 19:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

• capitulation - will be created soon.
• territory - is changed to area
• propaganda - done
• overthrow - change to take over
• putsch means something like coup (putsch is German...) - changed
• rest is ok.

Thanks Barras (talk) 19:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thumbs up! Nice work. hmwithτ 19:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

GA comments

• Birth/Death should be separated by en-dash, not hyphen.
  •  Fixed
• "In what is called The Holocaust, the Nazis killed many of them." Reads strangely and loses the point about who "them" is. State it plainly.
  •  Fixed - no many Jews.
• "Because of Hitler, at least 50 million people were killed..." (1) the source doesn't actually say that and (2) what makes that source reliable? You should use one of the paper sources (and find the quote that blames it all on Hitler).
  •  Fixed - but not with a quote, because the book is in German.
• "Hitler's family is originally from ..." was originally from...
  •  Fixed
• "German speaking " needs a hyphen.
  •  Fixed
• "The German speaking people" - population rather than people.
  •  Fixed
• "The name was commonly in the 19th century" not English - perhaps just "common in ..."?
  •  Fixed - in the German-speaking area of Europe in...
• "The literature, says, that this name " why the commas? And what exactly is "The literature"?
  •  Fixed - commas removed. Literature is linked and says:"Literature is the collection of written works of a language, time, or culture."
• "20 April, 1889, " remove commas.
  •  Fixed
• "Adolf Hitler was born on 20 April, 1889, as the fourth child of six[6] in Braunau am Inn, a small town near Linz in the province of Upper Austria, close to the German border, in what was then Austria-Hungary" long, complex sentence. Split it up.
  •  Fixed
• "of the father's job" his father's job?
  •  Fixed
• "Klara Pölzl, was the third wife of Alois Hitler " who is Alois? Not mentioned before or after.
  •  Fixed - sentence added. Alois is the father.
• "The father of Hitler " just "Hitler's father..." is fine.
  •  Fixed
• "and made an entrance examination" no, in English you "take" exams, not "make" them.
  •  Fixed
• "because of that, he was depressed." needs a citation to prove this.
  •  Fixed
• "Hitler have been influenced " not grammatically correct.
  •  Fixed
• If "as a great warrior, a true statesman and a great reformer." is a quote, then put it in quotes.
  •  Fixed
• Would you really consider one of his "occupations" to be artist?
  • Sorry, but I don't know what you mean.
• "runner" this needs explanation or an article, especially as you say it was so dangerous.
  •  Fixed - explained.
• "In March 1914" must have 1915 or else he went back in time.
  •  Fixed- 1917.
• "Militärverdienstkreuz Third Class with swords" needs explanation.
  •  Fixed
• "... the jewish Hugo ..." you capitalise Jewish and Jew throughout so be consistent.
  •  Fixed
• "he was shocked" you've lost track of who "he" is here, restate it was Hitler.
  •  Fixed
• "5-12 " from 5 to 12.
  •  Fixed
• "1918-34" should use an en-dash so "1918–34".
  •  Fixed
• 5 years - five years. 9 months - nine months.
  •  Fixed
• NSDAP or DAP? Be consistent.
  • Where? Sorry, but I didn't found it.
• "The book said that Germany would take land from Poland and Russia. It also had many anti-semitic comments and called for the murder and displacement of Jews from Germany" these statements REALLY need sources.
  •  Fixed - removed, the sentence isn't directly related to Hitler. The only source is the whole book.
• "The start of the dictatorship" heading, just "Start of the dictatorship"
  •  Fixed
• Elected needs linking.
  •  Fixed
• "Aryanism was a myth, but Hitler and his friends believed it. They thought that people like the Jews and Slavs were inferior (less valuable) and should be killed." again - these really needs references.
  • I removed this sentence. not really sourceable. And it's imo an odd sentence, anyway.
• "They both committed suicide (killed themselves) in Berlin in 1945" not just 1945, it was the day after they got married.
  •  Fixed
• I assume some of the references are German, so they should have a language=German parameter.
  •  Fixed
• Unlink the accessdates in the references.
  • No, because this is the template of the Cite web.
• Can you explain what makes "remember.org" and "www.historylearningsite.co.uk" and "www.historyplace.com" reliable sources?
  • Yes, they all use books as sources. historylearn... is a quote by Adolf Hitler translated in english. remember uses sources: 1
• References should have publishers included.
  •  Fixed
• Ref 19 starts with two capital letters.
  •  Fixed
• Refs 20 and 21 have typos.
  •  Fixed

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. It was very helpful. I think I fixed all or wrote a statement here. Barras (talk) 16:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

The intro gets itself into trouble partly by trying to compress too much into a short space, and partly by getting too emotionally involved (IMO).

• I can't believe anyone thinks Hitler or the Nazis "started WWII". What they did was to start a chain of events which led to WWII. Or, caused WWII by invading Poland.
  •  Fixed OK
• The intro seems determined not to say that Hitler was the head of the democratically elected main party, and that his appointment (not election) to Chancellor was also constitutional.
  •  Fixed OK
• While it's true violence was used against his enemies, to say the violence was used to stay in power is to imply he no longer had (in the 1930s) sufficient popular support. I would say that is not correct, and in any event would need a convincing reference.
  • Removed - The related sentence sounded POV-ish, thus I removed it. OK
• The article completely lacks an account of his role as leader of the German forces in WWII. This is important because it was he, personally, who made the key decisions, often against advice. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
  •  Fixed - added two sentences with a ref.

I just tried to fix this. I hope it is better now. -Barras (talk) 14:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Here we are not yet fixed, I think. A bit later (I am away for a couple of weeks) I will suggest some military decisions should be mentioned. The purpose of this is to balance the "bad man, killed lots" content with up-and-down record of his major wartime decisions. Meanwhile, some specifics:

1. "At the end of World War II, Hitler wanted everyone to die, including himself". Who is everyone? And is it specifically supported by the reference? I believe, even in the bunker, most or all individuals made their own decisions to stay or go at the end.

   I've replaced the sentence with other stuff which is mentioned in the reference. -Barras (talk) 11:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

2. "She and Hitler both used cyanide. After this, Hitler shot himself in the face". Details not supported by ref. If I remember correctly, remains were not sufficient to make such an exact determination. Personally, I doubt if anyone could crush a cyanide capsule first, and then do anything. Perhaps do both simultaneously. Anyway, this particular reference is good for its reproduction of the will and testament, but not much else.

   I've reworded the things now and added another ref (credo). -Barras (talk) 11:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

However, these are small points, easily rectified. I regret I can't put more time into making suggestions on his wartime decisions, but I have to prepare for a journey. Return to this in a few weeks. Changes you made have solved the other issues, I think. Thanks, Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hitler's wartime decisions

What I had in mind was the contrast between critical decisions which had the consensus of both Hitler and his military leaders, and decisions which were taken by himself against advice. For the latter he must take personal responsibility. Here's some potential items:

1. Invasion of Poland: personal decision, but Hitler wrongly advised by Ribbentrop as to Britain's likely neutrality.
2. Battle of Britain:
   1. part one: this had support of Goering and Luftwaffe, and (I believe) the Army.
   2. part two: the switch to bombing cities was taken by Hitler alone.
3. Invasion of Russia: in general, Hitler's decision, but (see enWP) differences of opinion as to whether it was planned carefully or just an ad hoc decision.
   1. decision to split German forces into two armies, south to the oilfields and north to Leningrad and Moscow. Hitler's decision, which runs counter to established army warfare principles.
   2. decision not to establish defensive lines in case retreat was needed: Hitler.
4. decision to prevent Rommel using tank forces to support Normandy coast before D-Day: entirely Hitler's decision.

A passage on Germany's dilemma in mid-war: "On 7 December 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and four days later, Hitler's formal declaration of war against the United States officially engaged him in war against a coalition that included the world's largest empire (the British Empire), the world's greatest industrial and financial power (the United States), and the world's largest army (the Soviet Union)". [enWP]

We must at least say: 'many of the most important decisions were made by Hitler himself, often against the advice of his military leaders'. Also, I think we need to mention the main theatres of war for Germany. References are abundant in enWP version.

P/S: According to enWP, Eva took cyanide but Hitler shot himself, with refs. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

This last one should be fixed now, I think. -Barras (talk) 11:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Last point is now covered. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

• What remains is to write a proper section on Hitler's role in WWII. Here the enWP article could be consulted, and some (shorter and simplified, but not trivial) version prepared for this page. Elsewise, the page will likely fail as incomplete. Our page on Stalin has a similar weakness, but it is not put forward as a GA. If it was, I would make the same point! Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
  • OK, I will now work this WWII role out. I've for now copied this (quite long) section from enwiki to my subpage. I will cut this down and simplify it and try to include it in this page as soon as possible. -Barras (talk) 15:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Branau am Inn/ NOt many people speaking german!?!

This is in Upper Austria! Everyone spoke and speaks german there... And the source for this is not even a real source.

I have cut it our now. I can't see anything similar on English wiki. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

death toll of holocaust

The intro to this page seems to indicate that 6 million people were killed in the holocaust, including members of all of the groups mentioned. But I'm pretty sure the actual death toll is around 11-17 million, as indicated by the regular wikipedia article on the holocaust. I don't know how to make edits, so can someone change this? / should it be changed?

If by holocaust one means the extermination of Jews, then 6 million is about the right figure. If one talks about the total number of non-combatants the figure would be much higher. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

The term is normally used to refer to the entire event. "In what is called the Holocaust, the Nazis killed eleven million people, including six million Jews and five million gypsies, homosexuals and other groups of people." is my suggested edit. Predestiprestidigitation (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that the reference does not justify the figure it quotes of 11 million. It is not in itself a reliable source. The other issue is what is meant by 'holocaust'. The wider the net is thrown, the less able we are to quote a reasonably secure figure. Macdonald-ross (talk) 21:35, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Democratically elected

The NSDAP was never democratically elected. It achieved a greater number of votes than other parties in the Reichstag elections; however, the Reichstag was unworkable due to the fact that it was a negative majority(ie. a minority government) and the communists, the second leading party, were unwilling to form a coalition. Elections were not the method in which the NSDAP consolidated power. Only when Hitler was appointed (key word, appointed) as chancellor by president Hindenburg did the Nazi Party control the government.

Most European governments today do not have an overall majority. The question is whether Hitler's rise to power was legal, and the answer is 'yes'. It might not be legal under the present German constitution, but that is another issue. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to say, so, but in 1930, the NSDAP had 18% of the vote, and was the second party (after the SPD). On March 5, 1933, it was the strongest party (with 43% of the votes). All of this was fully legal (given the laws of the time). What you probably refer to is the Enabling Act of 1933. This changed the constitution, but was again legal given the laws of the time. After the war, legislation was passed to make such a change illegal. --Eptalon (talk) 21:23, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

A point on on Hitler using Mass Hypnosis?

Read very briefly that a Mr. Hansen(?) Who was a "Mystic".Knew Hypnosis taught Hitler techniques of convining people to do this or that! Is this true?Eddson storms (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Don't know: would need a source. I've read quite a bit about Mr H, and haven't come across this. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

1943 OSS Study of Hitler

https://archive.org/details/AnalysisOfThePersonalityOfAdolphHitler_240

Check statements

Don't let IPs make changes to key passages without checking with the En wiki version. This is a VIP page for understanding the first half of the 29th century, and needs to be kept in good condition. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross: Point 1: Better yet, check a reliable source. Enwiki is only as reliable as the sources it uses, and it can be vandalized, too. Point 2: Rather than singling out IPs as suspected vandals, how about being suspicious of any editor you're unfamiliar with? Lastly, how many people do you think will see this, here on an article talk page? --Auntof6 (talk) 08:37, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Well, in this case the En version is a GA, and will be watched closely. I don't usually write on such topics, but the intro had got to a ridiculous state. I think admins do check new registered users, but once they're seen to be OK, it becomes an issue of "how is my time best deployed?". I agree talk pages are often not read, but then... you read it! Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:48, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I read it because I have this page on my watch list. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 10:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I think that not all IPs are bad some vandals on EN such as KingFun626 are obvious vandals like what he did to Paul Biya here and when HJ Mitchell announced his vandalism to in the exact words, As you did at Paul Biya. 2601:1C2:200:B610:ED55:7FB:A458:6BD9 (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Page protected....

As we have seen a lot of (often low-key) vandalism, from mostly unnamed editors, and we have had some shorter edit protections, I have protected the page for six months. Only autoconfirmed users are able to edit it. ALl the other users can suggest changes here, and if approved, an autoconfirmed user can majke the change. --Eptalon (talk) 23:48, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Removed two categories...

Hello, I removed two categories:

• Discrimination: this category is for methods of discrimination, we do not find people there
• German War Criminals: Hitler committed suicide, on 30 April 1945 (by shooting himself); Karl Dönitz was his successor for the last few days - Hitler wasn't charged or convicted of war crimes, because he was dead at the end of the war. He is therefore not a war criminal.

Open for discussion--Eptalon (talk) 22:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's right as regards to Hitler, although he obviously was a war criminal in informal common sense. The point is that he was not tried in a formal court, did not have a defence counsel, and did not have the ability to call witnesses and mount a legal defence. Those safeguards are part of the democratic code rejected by Hitler, Stalin (Gulags etc), and the Japanese in WWII, Mao (starvation), Pol Pot, Laos,... It's not actually clear that democracy is winning this battle even today. The right to a defence is fundamental to democracy, but many countries are still not democracies. In Russia, still in so many ways like the Soviet Union, who would bet on any court finding against the wishes of the head of state? Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:06, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Did Hitler call for the murder of Jews in Mein Kampf?

Hello. This article claims that Hitler suggested that Jews should be killed in his book. I do not remember him even hinting at that in Mein Kampf. I don't want to change it myself because I don't agree with the standard narrative of the Holocaust and don't want to get in that issue, but maybe somebody else would want to take a look at the issue. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

 Comment: I am adding this from my talk page where the user RegrettingMistakes777 had also started the same conversation see diff here

Hitler (this was the heading title on my talk page)

I don't remember Hitler advocating murdering Jews in Mein Kampf. I have read the book. Although there is one passage where he talks about twelve or fifteen hundred of them being killed, he appears to be talking about a small minority among them, not the vast majority. I thought that his original plan was to expel them. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 02:54, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

[[..._called_for_the_murder???]] Eptalon stated here that Hitler did not call for the murder of Jews in Mein Kampf. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 02:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

In that post of mine, of 2007, I said that to my knowledge, he didn't. For those interested, there are electronic versions of the book, which are searchable. My point at the time was, that if there was such a call in the book, we'd likely need a reference for that.; and in that context, it was probably safer to remove the claim. Note, I am not a historian, but I am certain that many historians wrote about the subject. How history turned out, we all know. Eptalon (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

However, you put in your point of view, including in the edit summary where you stated "I don't believe that Hitler called for their murder in Mein Kampf" located here. That shows a point of view. If you are able to show a reference of where in a point of time he decided to kill off the Jewish population in his life, then it can be changed. I hope that helps you better understand why I reverted your addition. I did it as good faith so you are not in trouble, you just need the reference to prove what you stated you believed as every person has a different belief. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 02:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@RegrettingMistakes777 Let's move this conversation onto the talk page for the article where it will be better instead of my talk page. I will copy it over then add my comments. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 03:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@RegrettingMistakes777 I would reference NSDAP 25 points manifesto as the points in there allude me to believe he called or someone called for the genocide of the Jewish people. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 03:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

But the article says that he called for that in Mein Kampf. I do not believe that is true. Even if the NSDAP platform did. But the NSDAP 25 points I don't believe called for that. I believe that Hitler's original plan was to expel Jews from Germany and its colonies in Europe, not to murder them. Some of the Nazis, for example Eichmann, supported Zionism for this purpose even though Hitler was suspicious of the Zionists. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 03:14, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Well here is how I read it:

P4 - Only Germans may be citizens of the Germany. Only those of the German races may be members of the nation, their religion does not matter. No Jew may be a citizen.

P5 - Non-citizens may live in Germany, but there will be special laws for foreigners living in Germany.

P8 - No-one who is not of a German-race should be allowed to live in Germany. We want anyone who is not of a German-race who started living in Germany after 2 August 1914 to leave the country.

P1 8- To me, this would be the big one. The entire manifesto states what makes Germany, well, Germany. So Jewish peoples refusing to leave the land would be against the common interests which are a lot of points in the manifesto - Crimes against the common interest must be punished with death.

P24 - Another big one to me - We want to allow all religions in the State, unless they offend the moral feelings of the German race. The NSDAP is Christian, but does not belong to any denomination. The NSDAP will fight the Jewish self-interest spirit, and believes that our nation will be strongest only if everyone puts the common interest before self-interest.

There does appear to be some conflicting statements but they all basically come down to fight, kill, and/or exile the Jewish people from Germany. PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 03:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe that Hitler's original intention was to expel the Jews, not to murder them. At least he preferred expulsion when that policy was still possible. Edwin Black wrote about this in The Transfer Agreement. Francis Nicosia wrote about it in The Third Reich and the Palestine Question. Those are mainstream sources. Although Mark Weber is a Hitler apologist, his article 'Zionism and the Third Reich,' is based mostly on mainstream sources, including the ones I mentioned. [[3]] I realize that this article cannot be used as a source because it comes from a far right publication, but the sources it uses are mostly ones that could be used as sources on this site. And they all say that Hitler's regime supported Zionism as a means of getting Jews out of Germany. John Lukacs wrote in The Last European War that Hitler's original intent was to expel Jews, not murder them. I will see if I can get the google books preview for Lukacs' quote. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 04:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

'Hitler's original was to expel, not exterminate. To force Jews out of Germany rather than kill them.' John Lukacs The Last European War Page 428 [[4]] RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 04:05, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

But that is written by someone else. I thought we were looking for something he wrote based on the beginning of this chat: "This article claims that Hitler suggested that Jews should be killed in his book." PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 04:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, then one of us would have to read Hitler's book again. I'm not inclined to do it, too long and boring. Maybe I can though. A Hitler admirer posted the book online, so I could pipelink to that post and you could search it and judge for yourself [[5]] If you do not want to read the whole book you could just search for certain words in chapters. RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 04:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@RegrettingMistakes777 I am still looking into this. Just wanted to let you know. I’m trying to find where it was stated that he wanted the concentration camps. I found some references that they immediately went under his control when he took over of which Jewish peoples started be including but nothing yet that points the finger at him (other than the obvious assumptions). PDL^{Talk to me!}_{OMG, What have I done?} 01:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

The Spared Jews during Hitler's Reign

During Hitler's Reign, there were some spared jews. The only one I knew of is Eduard Bloch, who was the family doctor for Adolf Hitler. GreenlandicWristband (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)