View Single Post
  #106  
Old 12-01-2019, 05:44 AM
pakputeh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webfoot75 View Post
... no different to any other charismatic megalomaniac from Genghis Khan onwards, and backwards, who wanted to rule the world, and brought ruin and death to half the world. My question is, in 200 or so years what will the hoi polloi think of Hitler?
Genghis Khan was vilified for centuries in the West, even in academia. Starting in the 60s and into the 90s, there was a backlash against what Edward Said called Orientalism. This term refers to the academic tendency to simplify or misinterpret "Eastern" culture and history.

This led to numerous popular works which praised GK's legacy, or at least painted a more complete picture of Mongol expansion and rule. Some have called this period a 'whitewash' of the atrocities committed by the Mongols during this time.

Hitler will not being mentioned in the same context as leaders such as Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Bolivar, or Caesar Augustus, however, revisionism or no.

Even though the territorial gains of Napoleon and the state established by Bolivar largely disintegrated during and after their rule, their impact can still be seen and felt today. The Napoleonic code alone has been enormously influential. We still have a month named after Augustus.

Hitler left nothing behind. The nation he lead was shattered and broken. Nearly nothing he planned lasted beyond his death. Should we balance the construction of an interstate highway system against the deaths of millions?

One cannot rehabilitate a legacy when millions dead is the only legacy.

Last edited by pakputeh; 12-01-2019 at 05:48 AM. Reason: clarification