Poll: Would You Kill Baby Hitler?
- Thread starter Poofs
- Start date
No, I wouldn't kill Baby Hitler. I'd instead wait until he was about in his mid-to-late teens, but I still wouldn't kill him.
Why, you may be asking? Let's travel back in history and learn about how he became what he was shall we? Now, I'm not a history buff by any means so my details might be a bit off if not flat out wrong...
If I recall, the main reason Hitler came under such intense hatred for Jews is because his mother died while the care of one (and yes, I meant to word it like that). But check it out: to my knowledge, Hitler's mother suffered a brain hemorrhage or aneurysm or something of that nature, and the young desperately sought to find a doctor. By the time he did however, the doctor in question just happening to be Jewish, the damage was too extensive and the doctor couldn't really do anything. Longer story abbreviated, Mother Hitler dies, Young Hitler snaps, blames Jews for everything, the Holocaust kicks off, so on and so on, or something like that.
Taking that into consideration (and after cramming as much German into my skull as humanly possible), I'd visit him, maybe even console him. Who knows? Maybe WW2 would never have happened (or at least Germany and perhaps a few other Axis countries wouldn't have been involved). Maybe the world today would be a much simpler place to live. The possibilities are nigh infinite really.
Just saying.
Why, you may be asking? Let's travel back in history and learn about how he became what he was shall we? Now, I'm not a history buff by any means so my details might be a bit off if not flat out wrong...
If I recall, the main reason Hitler came under such intense hatred for Jews is because his mother died while the care of one (and yes, I meant to word it like that). But check it out: to my knowledge, Hitler's mother suffered a brain hemorrhage or aneurysm or something of that nature, and the young desperately sought to find a doctor. By the time he did however, the doctor in question just happening to be Jewish, the damage was too extensive and the doctor couldn't really do anything. Longer story abbreviated, Mother Hitler dies, Young Hitler snaps, blames Jews for everything, the Holocaust kicks off, so on and so on, or something like that.
Taking that into consideration (and after cramming as much German into my skull as humanly possible), I'd visit him, maybe even console him. Who knows? Maybe WW2 would never have happened (or at least Germany and perhaps a few other Axis countries wouldn't have been involved). Maybe the world today would be a much simpler place to live. The possibilities are nigh infinite really.
Just saying.
Most of us (indeed, perhaps all of us) would probably not be born if World War 2 had not occurred. I see no reason to believe that events would be fixed in time just to be convenient to a foolhardy time traveller. Time travelling to do a huge act like that is much more about playing god than creating a clone. It is very unwise to believe that everything would be better if Hitler didn't exist. You cannot actually know that. Random streams of events without the rise of that man could easily lead to worse outcomes.
One example of a worse outcome: atomic war, due to a more competent leader of an equivalent Nazi force without Hitler at the wheel, drawing out the war, and keeping post-war tensions running for longer if the war ends in more of a stalemate. This leader then focuses all resources on catching up to the Allies scientifically and makes their own, better, nuclear weapons. You know what happens next. One fires, and everyone does in return. Or in table RPG terms: "rocks fall, everybody dies."
Here's another interesting thought. If, as in this hypothetical situation, time travelling were already possible, it could easily be covered up by the fact that travellers keep nullifying their own existence by mistake. It's not considered physically possible right now, of course, but there's a scary possibility for when humanity thinks it's getting closer to that capability (I'm sure it was "impossible" to play music on a tiny box in the Middle Ages, too, let alone play video games or movies).
One example of a worse outcome: atomic war, due to a more competent leader of an equivalent Nazi force without Hitler at the wheel, drawing out the war, and keeping post-war tensions running for longer if the war ends in more of a stalemate. This leader then focuses all resources on catching up to the Allies scientifically and makes their own, better, nuclear weapons. You know what happens next. One fires, and everyone does in return. Or in table RPG terms: "rocks fall, everybody dies."
Here's another interesting thought. If, as in this hypothetical situation, time travelling were already possible, it could easily be covered up by the fact that travellers keep nullifying their own existence by mistake. It's not considered physically possible right now, of course, but there's a scary possibility for when humanity thinks it's getting closer to that capability (I'm sure it was "impossible" to play music on a tiny box in the Middle Ages, too, let alone play video games or movies).
No, I'd leave history alone the way it went. Could easily go worse that it went before, and that's all in the past now anyway. We got to where we are from what happened then. At least back then there was a real bad guy that could be identified for everyone to unite against. Since then wars have just been a way for those in power to manipulate things and ensure they remain in power.
Those Who Ignore History Are Bound To Repeat It
Everything happens for a purpose....not sure the purpose of Hitler was...but something more sinister always takes over...
Everything happens for a purpose....not sure the purpose of Hitler was...but something more sinister always takes over...
Time paradox, dude. If I killed him I'd have no reason to travel in the past. And if I had no reason to travel in the past he'd live and still cause WW2. Then I'd have the abilities and REPEAT THAT SHIT FOR ETERNITY.
No.
EDIT: FUCK YES 5,000 POSTS
No.
EDIT: FUCK YES 5,000 POSTS
Despite, (or possibly because) of the fact that I am a Doctor Who fan, I believe that the timeline is constant and immutable. Everything that has or will happened is supposed to happen and it is impossible to change it because your actions helped cause it. That Wild Stallyns bucket fell on your head because the The Wild Stallyns bucket fell on your head, letting them escape to set up the Wild Stallyns bucket. If I tried to kill li'l Hitler, some other time traveler would show up and stop me because thats not how its supposed to happen. Heck, that other time traveler could be a me that was shunted to a parallel universe because he already killed Hitler and didn't like how the world looked after his actions.
On the other hand, if none of that is the case, I'd kill him just so I could "cross it off my list of things I thought I'd never get to do. Hey Hank, killed Hitler."
On the other hand, if none of that is the case, I'd kill him just so I could "cross it off my list of things I thought I'd never get to do. Hey Hank, killed Hitler."
Could I bring myself to do it? Yes.
Would I do it? Probably not. No Hitler means big, big changes to the time line. Yes, WW2 was a tragic, tragic thing but it was also a hugely important event particularly in a temporal sense.
Easy example. You like your computer? Heck, you like electronics in general? Because no World War 2 means no rocketry programs and no wartime development of the Enigma project. Means a huge divergence in how electronics develop.
Would I do it? Probably not. No Hitler means big, big changes to the time line. Yes, WW2 was a tragic, tragic thing but it was also a hugely important event particularly in a temporal sense.
Easy example. You like your computer? Heck, you like electronics in general? Because no World War 2 means no rocketry programs and no wartime development of the Enigma project. Means a huge divergence in how electronics develop.
Pretty much something like that. As has been said, it's likely that someone else would then rise up and take his place, but still. You don't kill a baby.kaveradeo said:
No. If I would have killed him I might prevent the Holocaust, but what horrors would replace all the disasters of WWII? Could there be an even more horrible and devastating Holocaust if another person replaced Hitler? Would the Jews, or even another group, be completely exterminated because I killed Hitler? Would there be a nuclear war if it were not for Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Killing Hitler would present an unknown alternative, a possibly even more destructive alternative. I do not want to be responsible for the unforeseen consequences.
No. I could never kill a child. Even knowing what he'd grow up to do, as soon as I saw him as a baby I would be physically unable to kill him.
Fuck, anyone who can kill an innocent child is fucked up in the head (he may not be innocent later but at that stage in his life he'd done nothing wrong).
Fuck, anyone who can kill an innocent child is fucked up in the head (he may not be innocent later but at that stage in his life he'd done nothing wrong).
