Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is an honest question, no racist undertones are meant at all. I'm by no means any expert in either man's life.

Pretty much everything I read about Genghis Khan is positive, he was brilliant, smart, lady's man, conquered lots of land, etc. But he really was a terrible person, killing people as brutally as possible for the sake of being evil and even salting the Earth so people couldn't regrow their crops after their population was destroyed.

Everything about Hitler, rightly so, is negative. He basically did the same thing as Genghis Khan, but by different means. If we were living in the shadow of Genghis Khan's destruction, I'm sure we'd think there was a special type of hell just for him.

So, I pose the question, in a couple hundred years, how will Hitler be regarded?

Genghis Khan was successful in the long term. Hitler only ruled Germany for 12 years, the rest of his empire for a lot less.

Dying in a bunker while illiterate peasants pound your forces is not how I'd want to go out.

Why not read some biographies before you ask these sorts of questions?

I think the fact that there is alot more stuff on hitler on record will prevent us from forgetting the evil. same with the holocaust. it was nto the biggest genocide in the 20th century. But it was the most chonologed

Polonius wrote:Genghis Khan was successful in the long term. Hitler only ruled Germany for 12 years, the rest of his empire for a lot less.

Dying in a bunker while illiterate peasants pound your forces is not how I'd want to go out.

Actually, have you read the Conn Iggulden series? Genghis Khan was stabbed by his Chinese mistress...

Kilkrazy wrote:Why not read some biographies before you ask these sorts of questions?

I, myself, didn't ask any questions at all. I wanted to see Dakka's response to this, because reddit's was quite amusing. I found the proposed question amusing because I have read biographies on both men.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cr9s4/will_hitler_eventually_be_revered_the_same_way_as/

Will Hitler eventually be revered the same way as Genghis Khan?

Short answer : No.

Long answer : Feth NO!

Reasons / justification : Go ask the millions of Jews he's killed

PS : WTF kind of question is that anyway?

I think that's unfair aka_tizz, Genghis Khan caused just as much pain and death as Hitler, I think it's a valid OP. However, I think the development of our global society has at last come to a point where doing the 'Genghis Khan thing' is not 'acceptable' as it once was in the middle ages and earlier.

Genghis Khan is remembered for the empire achieved and the long legacy after, much of it not fondly remembered (but most of those people, like died). They brought down the most powerful Muslim nation up to the Ottomans, but helped the world by taking out the assassins.

Mongols conjure up many images - murderous hordes is still one of them. Tyhe mists of time soften their image.

Before knee jerk reactions occur, read the OP's question, stop, and take a couple breaths, then respond. From the tone of the OP, I don't believe his title matches what he is actually asking. Perhaps revere would be better replaced by "viewed as a significant world leader of his time". Also, keep in mind that there are people who don't at all "revere" Genghis. I doubt you will find many Poles or Russians who know their own history who would revere him.

The question is undoubtedly yes, in my opinion. As far as the positives or negatives, you really can't make assumptions at all. How can you know what the *moral* views of people 500 years from now? While I don't particularly think genocide is in any way acceptable, I have no idea what people existing long after I am gone will feel about it.

I was going to make some sort of analysis from what I've read, but I just can't seem to get motivated. I just wish everyone would remember this doesn't have to turn into a flame fest.

Very eloquent of you Frazzled but one point, the assasins were not actually completely wiped out, there hilltop fortress was but the order survived.

Grignard wrote: Before knee jerk reactions occur, read the OP's question, stop, and take a couple breaths, then respond. From the tone of the OP, I don't believe his title matches what he is actually asking. Perhaps revere would be better replaced by "viewed as a significant world leader of his time". Also, keep in mind that there are people who don't at all "revere" Genghis. I doubt you will find many Poles or Russians who know their own history who would revere him.

The question is undoubtedly yes, in my opinion. As far as the positives or negatives, you really can't make assumptions at all. How can you know what the *moral* views of people 500 years from now? While I don't particularly think genocide is in any way acceptable, I have no idea what people existing long after I am gone will feel about it.

I was going to make some sort of analysis from what I've read, but I just can't seem to get motivated. I just wish everyone would remember this doesn't have to turn into a flame fest.

on Dakka it's always a flame war, it seems.

Cadet_Commissar_Ludd wrote:Very eloquent of you Frazzled but one point, the assasins were not actually completely wiped out, there hilltop fortress was but the order survived.

well you know, you have to reapply pest control.

We have Hitler to thank for many modern advances and America's place as a world power. Without Hitler we would not be where we are today. That being said, I do believe people in the future (if they exist) will see him as a figure with a lot of duality, both a murderer but someone who strived to push the world forward.

Take a moment and think of Hitler. Now remove from your mind the fact that he killed so many people simply because they were Jewish. You'll come to see he did a lot of good for the world.

Typeline wrote:We have Hitler to thank for many modern advances and America's place as a world power. Without Hitler we would not be where we are today. That being said, I do believe people in the future (if they exist) will see him as a figure with a lot of duality, both a murderer but someone who strived to push the world forward.

Take a moment and think of Hitler. Now remove from your mind the fact that he killed so many people simply because they were Jewish. You'll come to see he did a lot of good for the world.

Please please tell me you're being saracastic or, or something?

Germany utterly destroyed.
Europe in ruins.
The Soviets hyper paranoid with armies to central Europe to keep it from happening again.
Cold War.

Ok the VW Bug did come along. That was a cool car.

Frazzled wrote:Germany utterly destroyed.
Europe in ruins.
The Soviets hyper paranoid with armies to central Europe to keep it from happening again.
Cold War.

Europe and Germany rebuilt.
Cold War did wonders for us.

Last time I turned on the history channel and watched something about Hitler, I felt like the program was singing him praises for the invention of the autobahn. America responded to it by building our super highway system. That large public works project reinvigorated our nation. The Nazi's also brought everyone up to speed on how to fight a modern war. The biggest strives in nuclear energy came out of WW2. We owe Hitler something, he gave us the enemy we needed an enemy we haven't had in a long time.

Typeline wrote:We have Hitler to thank for many modern advances and America's place as a world power. Without Hitler we would not be where we are today. That being said, I do believe people in the future (if they exist) will see him as a figure with a lot of duality, both a murderer but someone who strived to push the world forward.

Take a moment and think of Hitler. Now remove from your mind the fact that he killed so many people simply because they were Jewish. You'll come to see he did a lot of good for the world.

Yeah, because a country with lots of land mass, people, natural resources and isolation from the rest of the world couldn't possibly acheive the status of world power, if it weren't for

Hitler.

Cadet_Commissar_Ludd wrote:

Polonius wrote:Genghis Khan was successful in the long term. Hitler only ruled Germany for 12 years, the rest of his empire for a lot less.

Dying in a bunker while illiterate peasants pound your forces is not how I'd want to go out.

Actually, have you read the Conn Iggulden series? Genghis Khan was stabbed by his Chinese mistress...

That was actually only Conn Igguldens rendition of it. Other accounts say he died after falling off his horse. Still, those are some fantastic books, highly recommended.

It's an interesting question tbh. None of us really know what's going to happen. I don't think he will though, as he was a genocidal maniac and history is recorded far better these days. Nothing short of world destruction will remove the amount of resentment (to put it lightly) felt towards hitler and Nazi Germany in historical accounts. By contrast, the main source of history we have on the mongol empire comes from a time when history was passed on by word of mouth, and the only decent histories were kept by the Chinese, who were subsequently curbstomped by the Mongol Empire.

History is written by the winners. Hitler lost. Ghengis Khan won.

Nazi Germany will forever be remembered as the evil regime it was. (unless aforementioned world destruction happens of course)

typeline wrote:Europe and Germany rebuilt.
Cold War did wonders for us.

You're kidding right? The cold war established a culture of fear within global politics that lasts to this day. Particularly between Russia and the USA, who still both mantain enourmous nuclear aresenals just to make sure the other can't kill them - despite the fact that we should be mature enough to live peacefully together. It'll never happen though, not until someone is stupid enough to press the button. Then everyone will regret it.

I think the "reverence" of Ghengis Kahn is a result of location. The West thinks he's neato because he was super powerful, fast and aggro, and never really attacked our ancestors. I don't think the Chinese are such fans.

A while back, I read an article about a restaurant that wanted to open in India, which was Nazi themed. The claim was that they just thought it was cool visually (which it is), and they didn't really realize it was a bad deal. Perhaps that's a fabrication on their part, and they were trying to be edgy and missed the calculation, but I think on some level they probably just don't really know how the West views Hitler.

In time, that effect will only be more pronounced.

We have Hu Hots in the US, after all. They invite you to "raid" your hunger and "pillage" their snack bar, or whatever. I'm sure that would seem pretty insensitive to whatever Chinese peasants got to eat arrows a thousand years ago.

People revere Genghis because he was the single most successful military commander in history and in one lifetime carved out the largest human empire that has ever existed. As soon as it's discovered that Hitler actually managed to conquer europe asia and africa come in here and tell me. Until then this debate is ludicrous.

ShumaGorath wrote:People revere Genghis because he was the single most successful military commander in history and in one lifetime carved out the largest human empire that has ever existed. As soon as it's discovered that Hitler actually managed to conquer europe asia and africa come in here and tell me. Until then this debate is ludicrous.

Wasn't the British Empire larger?

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:People revere Genghis because he was the single most successful military commander in history and in one lifetime carved out the largest human empire that has ever existed. As soon as it's discovered that Hitler actually managed to conquer europe asia and africa come in here and tell me. Until then this debate is ludicrous.

Wasn't the British Empire larger?

No, it was composed of largely semiautonomous colonies and the governing presence of the british and the fealty of their "subjects" was always suspect. Given that all of australia is highlighted there (as well as canada but no part of america?) as well as the entirety of India that map is pretty suspicious. The Empire was big, but colonial empires are a whole-nother animal governed largely by claimed land ownership or native fealty rather than any sort of actual empire building.



The Mongolians just ruled one giant blob, and Demanded fealty from every surrounding kingdom.

ShumaGorath wrote:People revere Genghis because he was the single most successful military commander in history and in one lifetime carved out the largest human empire that has ever existed. As soon as it's discovered that Hitler actually managed to conquer europe asia and africa come in here and tell me. Until then this debate is ludicrous.

is it really THAT ludicrous? I mean if you think so that is cool, but I think that once the pain of the event has faded into the generations, humanity may look at the situation in a new light...who knows?

Grignard wrote:How can you know what the *moral* views of people 500 years from now?

is it really THAT ludicrous?

Yes.

your opinion is noted.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:People revere Genghis because he was the single most successful military commander in history and in one lifetime carved out the largest human empire that has ever existed. As soon as it's discovered that Hitler actually managed to conquer europe asia and africa come in here and tell me. Until then this debate is ludicrous.

Wasn't the British Empire larger?

No, it was composed of largely semiautonomous colonies and the governing presence of the british and the fealty of their "subjects" was always suspect. Given that all of australia is highlighted there (as well as canada but no part of america?) as well as the entirety of India that map is pretty suspicious. The Empire was big, but colonial empires are a whole-nother animal governed largely by claimed land ownership or native fealty rather than any sort of actual empire building.



The Mongolians just ruled one giant blob, and Demanded fealty from every surrounding kingdom.

Well, the map says 1920's so that's probably why the US isn't highlighted, and Canada was no longer a colony after the Canada Act in April 17, 1982 (At least in Brtiains eyes,

technically we gained independence in 1867).

Phryxis wrote:I don't think the Chinese are such fans.

That depends on who you talk to. Genghis' descendant, Kublai, went on to found the Yuan dynasty and unite China for the first time since the Han.

The people that really hate Genghis Khan are the Russians, Eastern Europeans, and Eastern Muslims; particularly Iranians and Iraqis. Of course, a lot of those people also hate Alexander the Great, so to some extent a mixed reputation follows naturally from military success.

I gotta be honest, Shuma has a point. I'm not saying the conversation needs to end, but there are really no serious comparisons to be made between hitler and Ghengis.

the OP did not have anything to do with comparing the two in their lives, it has to do with comparing the ways humanity may remember them in the coming century....