Thursday, March 26, 2009

Replaceable?

In response to Danielle’s post, I do think it would have been very different. However, It is true, especially in Hitler’s case, that there was a very strong sense of anti-Semitism and a general feeling of betrayal emanating throughout Germany. Hitler was definitely not personally responsible for the millions of deaths, I would actually point as much of the Blame at Heinrich Himmler, who actually oversaw the concentration and extermination camps. Though he might have been as ruthless and evil, Himmler was in charge of the SS and may not have had the manipulative skills which Hitler possessed. In response to Danielle’s question about whether another Frenchman would have stepped in if Napoleon were absent, I believe the answer is no. I believe that Napoleon was unique, though at the time of his rise to power France was ripe for change, nobody expected Napoleon to take on the kind of power which he did, he had originally been chosen to be a figurehead, only to go on and stage a coup d'état. I have never considered Napoleon to be a tyrant, even after studying him this year; I consider him to be a brilliant, but egotistical leader who could not have been replaced by anybody, let alone another Frenchman.

No comments:

Post a Comment