I remember a short book called "The Spider Web" or something writed by a german dude in ~1925 predicting the nazi party.

    • Missinger [it/its]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Being anti-Great Man Theory doesn't mean you have to discount any and all individual actions. It's not unreasonable to think that a Nazi Party under different leadership would've failed to take power as they did.

        • Missinger [it/its]
          ·
          3 years ago

          I don't think he was the deciding factor, but he could have quite possibly been a deciding factor.

          Hitler under different material conditions wouldn't have done what he did, but the same conditions with a different Nazi leader could quite easily have led to a different historical outcome.

          • SerLava [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            Similar chance of a worse outcome as a better outcome.

            • Missinger [it/its]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Nah I'm pretty sure the Holocaust was pretty close to the worst possible outcome.

          • JuneFall [none/use name]
            ·
            3 years ago

            could quite easily have led to a different historical outcome

            That is a bit vague and a lot speculation. The red army would've fought the Nazis anyhow. That much was inevitable.

            • Missinger [it/its]
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              I don't think there's any guarantee that the Nazis would even come to power. They barely managed it in real life, another leader could've failed where Hitler was lucky to succeed.

              Maybe in the absence of a successful Nazi Party a revanchist conservative Germany would've fought the Soviets in a similar WWII but yeah that's all speculation. Doubt a Hindenburg would go all exterminationist in that scenario though.

              • JuneFall [none/use name]
                ·
                3 years ago

                You know, you really are pushing the "Great Man Theory" of history bit here. I recommend not to do that. Neither the Nazi party organization, nor the contradictions of the Fascists in the parliamentary system are explained by one person.

                The parliamentarians would've given any major party official the same rights as Hitler and even if they wouldn't have gotten the legality they would've taken the power. The only counter defense were leftists and those were killed and crushed by the reactionaries and social democratic elites.

                Look at Italy in which Mussolini was just given the leadership of the country. There is little reason to believe that a "milder man" wouldn't have started an war of aggression, too. This was inevitable for many reasons, some are economic, some are to deliver on debt.

                I don't want to talk any further, but really implore you to give us clear references for your opinions, who came to those conclusions, why and if you reference books, tell us the pages and paragraphs (which isn't possible tbh).

                • Missinger [it/its]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 years ago

                  You know, you really are pushing the “Great Man Theory” of history bit here.

                  Nah I'm not, Chapos are just over-inclusive of what counts as 'Great Man Theory'.

                  They're not the primary drivers of history as GMT claims, but individuals and their actions can still heavily influence history.

                  • JuneFall [none/use name]
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    Hitler had nothing to do with Prussia and yet the Nazi police force kicked down the doors of my socialists grand grand parents.

                    • Missinger [it/its]
                      ·
                      edit-2
                      3 years ago

                      Hitler had nothing to do with Prussia

                      Hitler was the Fuhrer of Prussia.

                      • JuneFall [none/use name]
                        ·
                        3 years ago

                        You are too historically illiterate to lead this discussion. Papen was the leader of Prussia during the Preußenschlag.

                        • Missinger [it/its]
                          ·
                          edit-2
                          3 years ago

                          Not my fault you're being too vague about what you're talking about for me to respond properly, and I don't see how your point is relevant anyway?

                • sam5673 [none/use name]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  No Hitler's public speaking ability did have a large effect on the success of the Nazi party.

      • ABigguhPizzahPieh [none/use name,any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I said “no nazi party” not that they could’ve have failed without Hitler. Though that’s still hard to believe since the fascist reaction happened every where so clearly didn’t rely on Hitler being Hitler

        • sam5673 [none/use name]
          ·
          3 years ago

          yeah but there was also a communist reaction in Germany at the time the Nazi's gained power of similar size

    • RandomAccessKhemri [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I generally agree, but I think it’s not the wisest move to discount the notion of everyone being a unique person some of whom are rarer combinations of things and as such history would be different if certain prominent figures had a heart attack or healthier home life.

      Sure the overall forces and trends remain, but the details would inevitably differ to a noticeable degree in the most minor altered timelines, unless the forces are so monumental and focused free will might as well not exist.

      I’m not convinced freewill exists anyways, but if it does I think horseshoe theory applies to the “great man libs” and the “humans are cookie dough and societal trends are the cookie cutter” types.