# Why Was The Nazi Leadership So Mediocre? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 11, 2013, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103 "2013-12-11T21:13:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/41 "2013-12-15T00:55:45Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > When you read the history of WWII, you realize that Hitler had some pretty bad people working for him For example: > -Head of the Airforce (Goering): had been a unit commander in WWI-never promoted to general > -Head of the Foreign Ministry : (Ribbentrop)-he was a former wine salesman, with just a HS education > -head of propaganda (Goebbels): had a Ph.D (philosophy) but no real world experience > -head of the SS (Himmler): former teacher, no experience > How was it that such a regime promoted such mediocrity? Hitler himself had never been promoted past corporal, and had worked as a painter and artist. > The German Army had good leadership, as did the navy-but how did all the other duffers get their jobs? Based on initial performance, I’d say that he had some pretty _good_ people working for him. Perhaps military education and experience aren’t all that valuable if you have other assets and advantages. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/42 "2013-12-15T01:06:17Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Based on initial performance, I’d say that he had some pretty _good_ people working for him. > > Perhaps military education and experience aren’t all that valuable if you have other assets and advantages. Like having militarily educated people running the war? I mean seriously, the Nazi’s main claim was rabble rousing/raising Nationalism. That is useful indeed to stock a war machine with money and canon fodder. He had “pretty good people working for him” because the military was happy working for whatever government was in place. They most certainly could have used their assets more intelligently. People here are saying “Well, they took most of Europe, they must have been good!”. No. Good means taking what you can frigging hold. Jeez. Otherwise I need to tell you about a bunch of totally awesome bankrobbers who got shot or arrested after stealing a bunch of money. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/43 "2013-12-15T03:26:26Z")
> [@DeptfordX](#): > > Myth i’m afraid. An earlier descision to use it as a fighter and not as a high speed bomber wouldn’t have made a shred of difference. The Me262 engines were just barely the right side of possible with 40’s materials technology/engineering. They weren’t able to solve the technical issues and start production of it until 1944 anyway. _Solving_ here meaning 20+ hours of engine life if you were lucky, 12 if you weren’t. They would have made considerably more progress if they had been able to devote more resources to solving the problem earlier than they did; Hitler originally wasn’t interested, because he was expecting a much shorter war. The forced redesign of the airplane set the whole program back another year. Even less-than-perfect fighters would have given Allied air command the heebie-jeebies in 1943, and rightly so, especially if their production had been given priority. Something similar happened with the V-2 (though that was the Heer, not the Luftwaffe). When first informed of the program, Hitler expressed little interest in it. Later, Himmler tried to bring it under the control of the SS, further complicating things. The missile could also have gone into production much sooner than it did. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/44 "2013-12-15T04:12:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > My point is that these guys were all skilled and experienced operators in the Nazi political organization and when the Nazis became the national government it wasn’t a huge transition for them to step into national politics. (Ribbentrop was the exception. He joined the Nazis late - in 1933 - and didn’t rise up through the ranks like the others did. And for that reason, he never had the kind of power the others had.) > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I’ve said before that the key factor in the outcome of WWII is this: every time the Russians lost a battle, it made Stalin more willing to listen to his generals next time. But every time the Germans lost a battle, it made Hitler less willing to listen to his generals next time. **Little Nimo** and I famously disagree about everything on the Pacific theater, but he’s right on for both of these. In large organizations, having an inside with the powers that be will get resources for your organization. You have to be able to listen to the people who actually know their shit within the organization, and more importantly, be able to discern who knows their shit and who doesn’t, but it’s also of extreme importance for the dictator on the top to trust you. On the second point, Hitler was cursed with better than expected success early in the war. Like fund managers in a bull market where even monkeys throwing darts at charts can make money, he thought he was a military genius. With the enemy in disarray, pushing forward was a damn good idea, and caution wasn’t as necessary. > [@CarnalK](#): > > People here are saying “Well, they took most of Europe, they must have been good!”. No. Good means taking what you can frigging hold. Jeez. Otherwise I need to tell you about a bunch of totally awesome bankrobbers who got shot or arrested after stealing a bunch of money. You are setting the bar too high. Once the US got involved and was able to get up to speed on military production, it was doomed. The best of the best couldn’t have competed against the combined Allied strength. For your analogy, not everyone can rob banks. Many can rob one or two, or a half-a-dozen, but there were a few who were really good and got a whole bunch before they eventually got caught. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/45 "2013-12-15T06:41:03Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > Hitler attracted a certain kind of people. Generally failures at other things or at least not as successful as they had hoped. They weren’t really failures, even tho they had failed. It was the fact that they had been in a nation that was decimated by the loss of the war and the horrendous inflation, etc… Just about everybody in Germany was not as successful as they had hoped. People liked to call Himmler a ‘failed chicken farmer’, but, the fact is that he had studied at a college in re: animal husbandry (or some such). People like to think that the original Nazis were a bunch of mindless thugs, fresh out of a Beer Hall Putsch, or Beer Hall anything, rustics that listened to the first joker that came along and promised them Beer. Most of them had professional/academic credentials that were as sound as any that we have today. The idea that Hitler’s people were mediocre/substandard was just an attempt to demonize them. After all, we let Eastern Europe go to Stalin without fighting him, so, we must have a reason. That reason was that Stalin is much better than Hitler because Hitler used a bunch of thugs (how many thugs go to University?) and hooligans. Compare the Hitler crew with JFK’s. You had the academics along with the fighters from the WW2 trenches. Kennedy’s appeal was that he had fought in the war, and he pimped this out in his campaigns, and had his staff push it, just as the Fuhrer did. Most of his supporters didn’t have the Harvard education, so, could one say the same thing for JFK’s crowd? McNamara had exactly zero experience as a SecState, etc… ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/46 "2013-12-15T06:52:52Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > McNamara had exactly zero experience as a SecState, etc… Which worked out quite well, since he was SecDefense!:smack: ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2013, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103/47 "2013-12-15T17:17:19Z")
At the risk of invoking Godwin, Nazi management in the Germany of the 1930s and 40s was doomed from the start. Every time one of them got promoted, they just had another asshole boss. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-the-nazi-leadership-so-mediocre/676103.md?page=2)