Adolf Hitler's house to be torn down

[Novus America]

A combination of historical documentaries, books, various teachers, and a couple of quite excellent history professors.

Finally. Was it really necessary to make it that difficult?

Historical documentaries and books can easily be represented in a visual context in a museum. The input of teachers and professors can be offered as testimony to historical events in a museum setting. All of the information you learned can be offered in a museum, with no risk of somehow "celebrating" Hitler just by recognizing that he once existed.

Exactly. Auschwitz is a museum. So is the Holocaust Museum. Neither celebrate the Holocaust at all. Tearing down his house would be like tearing down Auschwitz. Sure we can erase the memories of horror, but this is not a good thing. Better we remember not hide the horrors of the past.

Make it a museum, but one that shows Hitler to be who he really was.

I would no be surprised Austria would do this though. (But they are not actually doing it at this time) Austria has long portrayed themselves as innocent victim ms of foreign invasion, literally claiming to be "Hitler's first victims". The have never come to terms with the truth, and want to hide as much as possible the fact that Hitler was an Austrian, and many Austrians Nazis or Nazi supporters.

[Uiiop]

He was a horrible person, demonic. But still, this is a piece of history, a remnant of what has happened. Demolishing the house would be like dismissing his rise to power, we need to remember history, so we don't repeat it.

Again how come demolishing it must mean forgetting what has happened? How would that dismiss his rise?

[Ogrien]

I mostly agree with all of your points, and for the most part I agree that I don't care about the building. I don't like, however, that it is being used as a shrine to Hitler by Neo-Nazis, and would gleefully deprive them of such a place. I wouldn't necessarily propose that it be destroyed, but I liked the idea, and was kind of sorry to see the Austrian government cave

Have there actually been instances of neo-Nazis using the house as a shrine? That would be some pretty fucking weird "hero" worship...

It is apparently a stop on whatever fucked up pilgrimage Neo-Nazis will engage in to places of Nazi significance, which was what motivated this whole thing in the first place

[Salus Maior]

Tearing down his house is like tearing down Auschwitz.

Except it really isn't "his house", he was just born there.

[Ogrien]

Finally. Was it really necessary to make it that difficult?

Historical documentaries and books can easily be represented in a visual context in a museum. The input of teachers and professors can be offered as testimony to historical events in a museum setting. All of the information you learned can be offered in a museum, with no risk of somehow "celebrating" Hitler just by recognizing that he once existed.

Exactly. Auschwitz is a museum. So is the Holocaust Museum. Neither celebrate the Holocaust at all. Tearing down his house is like tearing down Auschwitz. Sure we can erase the memories of horror, but this is not a good thing. Better we remember not hide the horrors of the past.

Make it a museum, but one that shows Hitler to be who he really was.

I would no be surprised Austria would do this though. Austria has long portrayed themselves as innocent victim ms of foreign invasion, literally claiming to be "Hitler's first victims". The have never come to terms with the truth, and want to hide as much as possible the fact that Hitler was an Austrian, and many Austrians Nazis or Nazi supporters.

Yeah, Anschluss was cheered in the fucking streets after an overwhelming plebiscite victory

EDIT: Also, Auschwitz is what shows who Hitler really is. The actual places will do far more to reveal the man's character than his childhood abode

[Novus America]

Tearing down his house is like tearing down Auschwitz.

Except it really isn't "his house", he was just born there.

Well, that would be "his house of birth". It is still an old historical building.

[Ararat Mountain]

He was a horrible person, demonic. But still, this is a piece of history, a remnant of what has happened. Demolishing the house would be like dismissing his rise to power, we need to remember history, so we don't repeat it.

Again how come demolishing it must mean forgetting what has happened? How would that dismiss his rise?

It is a sort of physical remnant of what is left of Hitler, WWII, it's a monument, (monuments can stand for good and bad reasons). What is the point of demolishing it? You know, apart from feelings, what about actual historical importance?

Why go out of the government's way, using tax dollars, just to seize Hitler's birth house and tear it down? What is the point? What legitimate reason?

[Novus America]

Exactly. Auschwitz is a museum. So is the Holocaust Museum. Neither celebrate the Holocaust at all. Tearing down his house is like tearing down Auschwitz. Sure we can erase the memories of horror, but this is not a good thing. Better we remember not hide the horrors of the past.

Make it a museum, but one that shows Hitler to be who he really was.

I would no be surprised Austria would do this though. Austria has long portrayed themselves as innocent victim ms of foreign invasion, literally claiming to be "Hitler's first victims". The have never come to terms with the truth, and want to hide as much as possible the fact that Hitler was an Austrian, and many Austrians Nazis or Nazi supporters.

Yeah, Anschluss was cheered in the fucking streets after an overwhelming plebiscite victory

EDIT: Also, Auschwitz is what shows who Hitler really is. The actual places will do far more to reveal the man's character than his childhood abode

True, the Austrian government has long had a policy of trying to rewrite history.

And true Auschwitz shows Hitler's worst horrors, there was more to Hitler's horrors than just the death camps.

[Novus America]

Again how come demolishing it must mean forgetting what has happened? How would that dismiss his rise?

It is a sort of physical remnant of what is left of Hitler, WWII, it's a monument, (monuments can stand for good and bad reasons). What is the point of demolishing it? You know, apart from feelings, what about actual historical importance?

Why go out of the government's way, using tax dollars, just to seize Hitler's birth house and tear it down? What is the point? What legitimate reason?

The Austrian government has a policy of pretending Hitler was not really Austrian. That Austria was an innocent victim of Nazism and they even have the gall to compare Austria to Poland.

The Austrian government's gross historical revisionism is the reason.

[Ogrien]

Yeah, Anschluss was cheered in the fucking streets after an overwhelming plebiscite victory

EDIT: Also, Auschwitz is what shows who Hitler really is. The actual places will do far more to reveal the man's character than his childhood abode

True, the Austrian government has long had a policy of trying to rewrite history.

And true Auschwitz shows Hitler's worst horrors, there was more to Hitler's horrors than just the death camps.

I know that. My point is that, while a museum showcasing Hitler's crimes might not be a bad idea (I'd rather the victims be the focus rather than the perpetrator, but still), I think that placing it in his home would undermine the image of Hitler the War Criminal by making the visitor think of Hitler the child. I don't want to create a situation which my create empathy for a monster of a man, and I think his home would do that.

[Novus America]

And here I'll refer you back to the point I was trying to make with that last post

All right then.

Sorry, misread your post. And I understand that there is objectively a way to teach Hitler's past in the context it deserves, but I fail to see why a museum specifically about Hitler would be necessary for that. A full museum on World War II could teach the entire context, as well as show the horrors of what Hitler did, rather than remind us that he happened to have parents and was at one point a child, which is all I see a museum in his home doing.

I have been to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. I can assure you that the exhibits there deserve their own museum, and ought not to be crammed in with the rest of WWII.

I get that it is important to fully understand the contexts in which these people came into prominence. However, I don't think we have to preserve the birthplace of every historical figure. How far down the chain do we have to go before someone's birthplace has no historical significance. Should Himmler's home be preserved? Goebbels?

Nobody is saying to preserve the home of everyone who ever so much as made a blip on the historical radar. However, we're talking about perhaps the most evil man in all of history, responsible for the most deadly war in history and one of the most deadly genocides in history. He fundamentally shaped our world as it is today, and that's not something to take lightly.

How important is this site to understanding what Hitler did and how awful a person he was? Not very, in my opinion. The only people I see being served by the place are people who wish to humanize Hitler in a way I feel uncomfortable with, and so I wish to see the building destroyed.

To be honest, I agree that this particular building is rather unimportant. I'd understand more preserving buildings he worked in as dictator, things like that. I just don't see a reason that it ought to be destroyed. It's just a house. I don't see why any of us should care that Hitler's parents conceived him there.

Even if it is just a house, (but it has more historical importance than that) it should not be torn down. I dislike tearing down even old ordinary houses. In fact most US cities try to protect even ordinary old houses from being torn down. To preserve architectural history and the character of the city. I do not like the Chinese or Saudi philosophy that all old buildings except a select few should be demolished. (I know you are not saying they should be).

[Ogrien]

All right then.

I have been to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. I can assure you that the exhibits there deserve their own museum, and ought not to be crammed in with the rest of WWII.

Nobody is saying to preserve the home of everyone who ever so much as made a blip on the historical radar. However, we're talking about perhaps the most evil man in all of history, responsible for the most deadly war in history and one of the most deadly genocides in history. He fundamentally shaped our world as it is today, and that's not something to take lightly.

To be honest, I agree that this particular building is rather unimportant. I'd understand more preserving buildings he worked in as dictator, things like that. I just don't see a reason that it ought to be destroyed. It's just a house. I don't see why any of us should care that Hitler's parents conceived him there.

Even if it is just a house, (but it has more historical importance than that) it should not be torn down. I dislike tearing down even old ordinary houses. In fact most US cities try to protect even ordinary old houses from being torn down. To preserve architectural history and the character of the city. I do not like the Chinese or Saudi philosophy that all old buildings except a select few should be demolished. (I know you are not saying they should be).

Well, by European standards this building isn't that old, but I take your point. And I wouldn't advocate for its destruction if it weren't for the Neo-Nazis today

[Novus America]

True, the Austrian government has long had a policy of trying to rewrite history.

And true Auschwitz shows Hitler's worst horrors, there was more to Hitler's horrors than just the death camps.

I know that. My point is that, while a museum showcasing Hitler's crimes might not be a bad idea (I'd rather the victims be the focus rather than the perpetrator, but still), I think that placing it in his home would undermine the image of Hitler the War Criminal by making the visitor think of Hitler the child. I don't want to create a situation which my create empathy for a monster of a man, and I think his home would do that.

I can see your concern, but understanding why he did what he did, why he became what he became is important. To show that he was a man, an evil man but a man.
To prevent future Hitlers we must understand why people become Hitlers.

And to show the human potential for horror. I dislike the portrayal of Hitler as some demon aberration rather than the logical conclusion of Humanity's ability to do evil.

We should not hide from humanity's dark tendencies. We must acknowledge and control them.

[Redsection]

It's history leave it be , Spain has the same issue , they want to remove Franco and Jose Antonios tombs , and they have already renamed most streets that bore the names of Falangists , and Francoists.

[Ogrien]

I know that. My point is that, while a museum showcasing Hitler's crimes might not be a bad idea (I'd rather the victims be the focus rather than the perpetrator, but still), I think that placing it in his home would undermine the image of Hitler the War Criminal by making the visitor think of Hitler the child. I don't want to create a situation which my create empathy for a monster of a man, and I think his home would do that.

I can see your concern, but understanding why he did what he did, why he became what he became is important. To show that he was a man, an evil man but a man. And to show the human pontential for horror. I dislike the portrayal of Hitler as some demon aberration rather than the logical conclusion of Humanity's ability to do evil.

I agree that Hitler should not be presented as the devil incarnate, and I have taken great pains throughout this thread to avoid using language which in my minds does so. But I don't think you need to see his baby pictures to paint the picture of an ordinary man who did horrendous things. Too often I see people try to humanize Germans who committed terrible crimes, starting with the Clean Wehrmacht mythology and the attempt to push everything onto the SS, the desire to represent the Holocaust as a political decision which the military minds were not in favor of but simple couldn't stop because of some twisted loyalty to the Fatherland, right or wrong. Lately I've seen people try to defend the Waffen-SS, blaming all the crimes on the SS camp guards or some bullshit. Humanizing Hitler too much feels like it plays into this trend, and I will oppose it on those grounds

[Minzerland II]

There are also a plethora of museums for WW2, a plethora of memorials too. Why not have another one, which has a connection to the person in question?

We're at an impasse because I don't see any reason to be attached to it, and I don't see it as historically significant, so the only thing I can think of is:

"Hitler was born here"
"Huh"

Well, I see a wonderful opportunity and repurposing for teaching history, it's connection to the person is just a cherry on top.

Maybe you ought not to strawman your opposition like a child screaming that I said something that I didn't? Obviously how Jews should be killed en masse. /sarc

Fine. What exactly should be taught at this center if we're going through all this trouble to preserve it?

Hitler, his reign, his life and WW2 perhaps?

And how do you teach about Hitler's life in a way that it doesn't become a worshipful shrine to Hitler, even moreso than it already is?

Staying impartial in the account of history? I mean, this last question is pretty hyperbolic.

[Herskerstad]

These op's man . . .

Anyhow, against tearing it down as I do indeed find it to fit the criteria as a place of history. I don't think it should be within the prerogative of nations to tear down their 'bad' history, even as dark a chapter as Adolf himself.

[Socialist Tera]

Who cares? It is just a house which an insane madman was born in. Nothing more

[Slavaryia]

What's that? People are getting triggered over a historical house?

Stop being oversensitive, kids.

[Stormaen]

Personally, I don't think it should be torn down. Places of international historic interest, such as this, should be preserved. Perhaps turn it into a holocaust museum..?

Personally, I think Austria has a lot more to offer. Mozart's house, for instance.

[Camicon]

On the one hand, I am hesitant about destroying places that might hold significant historical value.

On the other hand, I have never seen or heard anything that would suggest to me the place where Hitler was born does hold significant historical value. Nobody gives a shit about Hitler because of where he was born, they give a shit about him because of the horrific things he did. There is no need to keep the building standing in order to educate anyone about the abhorrent things that scum did.

If it wasn't so important to neo-Nazis I wouldn't give a shit about it; but, given that they're crying salty tears at the prospect of it being torn down, I'm all for it. My jar needs refilling.

[Novus America]

I can see your concern, but understanding why he did what he did, why he became what he became is important. To show that he was a man, an evil man but a man. And to show the human pontential for horror. I dislike the portrayal of Hitler as some demon aberration rather than the logical conclusion of Humanity's ability to do evil.

I agree that Hitler should not be presented as the devil incarnate, and I have taken great pains throughout this thread to avoid using language which in my minds does so. But I don't think you need to see his baby pictures to paint the picture of an ordinary man who did horrendous things. Too often I see people try to humanize Germans who committed terrible crimes, starting with the Clean Wehrmacht mythology and the attempt to push everything onto the SS, the desire to represent the Holocaust as a political decision which the military minds were not in favor of but simple couldn't stop because of some twisted loyalty to the Fatherland, right or wrong. Lately I've seen people try to defend the Waffen-SS, blaming all the crimes on the SS camp guards or some bullshit. Humanizing Hitler too much feels like it plays into this trend, and I will oppose it on those grounds

Well, that is the point. Humanizing them should NOT make them look good. Humans are not inherently good. Or evil. But both. A fear of humanizing them is a fear of recognizing out true natures, our capacity to to truly wonderful and horrible things. It is important to realize we all have a bit of Hitler, of the SS in us. Hitler and the Holocaust are what happens when we let the beast inside of all of us run free. It is important to realize you or me could be the next Hitler or more likely those German officers. Or the ordinary Germans who backed Hitler.

It is important to remember we, you, me and everyone else is capable of the same evil if we fail to tame the beast within us.

[Novus America]

Who cares? It is just a house which an insane madman was born in. Nothing more

Again it important to realize that insane madman was ONE OF US. That we are all capable of the same type of evil.

That Hitler was not just some aberration that just happened. That Hitler is humanities dark side taken to its logical conclusion. That Hitler or the other Nazis could happen again. That it could be you or me. That you and me and everyone else is capable of being just as evil.

[Socialist Tera]

Who cares? It is just a house which an insane madman was born in. Nothing more

Again it important to realize that insane madman was ONE OF US. That we are all capable of the same type of evil.

That Hitler was not just some aberration that just happened. That Hitler is humanities dark side taken to its logical conclusion. That Hitler or the other Nazis could happen again. That it could be you or me. That you and me and everyone else is capable of being just as evil.

It can be also used a place of pilgrimage for neo nazis and fascists. Everyone is capable of being evil but you can tell how people will act by their behaviour and what they say. They are different due to what they have seen in life.

[Salus Maior]

Who cares? It is just a house which an insane madman was born in. Nothing more

Again it important to realize that insane madman was ONE OF US. That we are all capable of the same type of evil.

That Hitler was not just some aberration that just happened. That Hitler is humanities dark side taken to its logical conclusion. That Hitler or the other Nazis could happen again. That it could be you or me. That you and me and everyone else is capable of being just as evil.

Making things a little more dramatic than they are.

No, not everyone is capable of doing the things Hitler did. Not everyone is a product of the Nationalist/Racist culture that was common in Imperial Europe (and Germany in particular) tied together with a lust for vengeance after WWI.

I'm not a product of that and I assume neither are you or most educated people.