> In your opinion, what were his redeeming values and how are you defining redeeming?
“Redeeming” in this case would mean any traits that weren’t inherently evil.
IMO, Hitler had these “redeeming” traits:
1) he was an impressive public speaker
2) he was visionary
3) he could inspire followers to buy into his vision
4) he could assemble a capable team of acolytes to implement his vision
5) he was an astute politician, using the frailties of the human condition to his best advantage
The middle three traits are important leadership skills. When added to the last trait they describe nearly any successful politician ever. When added to the first skill, they describe every “great” politician ever.
(I use “great” in the Lord Acton sense of the word: “great men are almost always bad men.”)
What you call “redeeming” traits, can not be called redeeming in the way that Hitler used them. He lacked character and goodness, so all his actions led to destruction and death—his speeches, his visions, his devoted followers, his political machinations. Things done for evil purposes can ultimately never be redeeming.
What you call “redeeming” traits, can not be called redeeming in the way that Hitler used them. He lacked character and goodness, so all his actions led to destruction and death—his speeches, his visions, his devoted followers, his political machinations. Things done for evil purposes can ultimately never be redeeming.
Using your abilities for evil is not redeeming.