Hitler's rise to power and intelligence vs Stalin's rise to power and intelligence.

[Sunforged General]

Hitler's rise to power was rather mundane compared to Stalin's. Yes Hitler had charisma, but thats practically all he had. During the beer hall putsch, not enough people supported his little revolt, and thus it failed. Thus Hitler fate was always at the whim of his supporters. (at least until he solidified his grip on power and turned Germany into an autocratic dictatorship.)

Basically he Managed to use Charisma to convince a bunch of revenge blinded sheep to follow him to an unwinnable war. It speaks volumes to his lack of intelligence when he invaded the Soviet Union, then declared war on the US 6 months later. Putting Germany into a literally unwinnable war by fighting the worlds two greatest superpowers at once while still being at war with the British Empire as well.

Now lets look at Stalin's Brilliant rise to power. He was placed into the position of General Secretary of the CPSU, this position was originally not powerful or relevant. He was put into this position to effectively get him out of the way. But the position did have the ability to appoint some party officials. Stalin used this to place people loyal to him into high ranking positions, including into leadership of the Cheka secret police. These officials, owing their jobs to Stalin, and under threat of execution by Stalin's newly controlled secret police, had no choice but to be loyal to him.

Eventually the General Secretary of the CPSU was turned by Stalin into the most powerful position in the Soviet Union. But it did not start off that way. Stalin had effectively been given lemons, and made lemonade out of them. Stalin, unlike Hitler, was never at the mercy of his supporters, they were at his mercy at all times.

It shows his intelligence that Stalin also once in power, never took unnecessary risks like Hitler. Hitler invaded Poland, taking the risk that France and Britain would back down, they did not. The USSR invaded Finland only once Germany was at war with France and Britain, meaning they could not intervene against the USSR. He also did the same to the Baltic Countries, for the same reason at a similar time.

Finally once at war with Germany, Stalin made every effort possible to gain as many allies as possible, while Hitler seemingly made every effort possible to gain as many enemies as possible, Sinking neutral trade ships, forcing Mexico and Brazil and most of South America to join the allies for example.

 

[Cavalry]

the big part of Stalin rise to power is fighting and winning for the Soviet himself. He was a successful general in.. Stalingrad, well before 1942.
Also he was already Number Two when Lenin still alive.

War with US and Mexico, Brazil is no thing special. Germans knew what the US do in WW I, and had redundant reasons to believe they would repeat in WW II.
The British treat "neutral ships" the same if they head to Mainland Europe, but they don't need to sink many ships because no one wanted to mess with British Navy.

Soviet Union also sunk a lot of Sweden and Turkish ships that heading to Axis land.

 

[JodelDiplom]

Hitler's rise to power was rather mundane compared to Stalin's. Yes Hitler had charisma, but thats practically all he had. [...]

Basically he Managed to use Charisma to convince a bunch of revenge blinded sheep to follow him to an unwinnable war. It speaks volumes to his lack of intelligence when he invaded the Soviet Union, then declared war on the US 6 months later.

Really? That's you analysis on Hitler and the whole third Reich?

 

[nuarbnellaffej]

I can’t now comment on how “intelligent” Hitler was, but it’s worth pointing out that intelligence and judgment are two seperate things. I.E. you could have someone who is technically “intelligent” but also have poor judgment/risk assessment. But it seems evident that all of Hitlers faculties degraded as time went on.

 

[Sunforged General]

Really? That's you analysis on Hitler and the whole third Reich?

Its my analysis on Hitler the persons intelligence. Sure I glossed over a lot of things, but I focused on the most important. Germany was in an unwinnable war, and Hitler made it worse by pouring gasoline on the fire and making the US, Mexico and all of South America join the allies.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

Its my analysis on Hitler the persons intelligence. Sure I glossed over a lot of things, but I focused on the most important. Germany was in an unwinnable war, and Hitler made it worse by pouring gasoline on the fire and making the US, Mexico and all of South America join the allies.

If I am correct, you are rather young; yes?

I'm happy to explain this to you, and show you the massive hole in your argument, but I want to know if it is worth my time or not.

But, short answer, you could not be more wrong about Hitler's intelligence and his ability to not only hit his goals but to extract maximum effort from a nation under maximum suppression. From one perspective, the Nazis won; big. The key is focusing on what they actually did rather than what you think they were doing, or should have done if you were in their place.

 

[Sunforged General]

If I am correct, you are rather young; yes?

I'm happy to explain this to you, and show you the massive hole in your argument, but I want to know if it is worth my time or not.

But, short answer, you could not be more wrong about Hitler's intelligence and his ability to not only hit his goals but to extract maximum effort from a nation under maximum suppression. From one perspective, the Nazis won; big. The key is focusing on what they actually did rather than what you think they were doing, or should have done if you were in their place.

What they actually did? The only long term goal they accomplished was killing off most of Europe's Jews, not any sort of victory as all it did is make the world hate Germany, and the Jews have repopulated since then.

 

[Herbert West]

Oooh, two conspiracists in a discussion.

opcorn:

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

Oooh, two conspiracists in a discussion.

opcorn:

I appreciate the enthusiasm, but a discussion requires both parties to know what they are talking about. I am not sure this is worth the effort.

 

[viola]

From one perspective, the Nazis won; big.

That's an interesting thing to say.
What makes you think so?

 

[ForzaA]

To be honest, your conclusions seem rather informed by outcome bias.
Hitler lost, Stalin won, undeniable. But to ascribe that (primarily) to their respective genius seems rather shortsighted.

Was, e.g. the Great Purge a stroke of genius? Or was Stalin "lucky" that noone tested the Soviet Army until it had at least somewhat recovered from the purges?
Were the 1939 Poland and 1940 France campaigns abysmal failures, or was Germany merely "unlucky" that Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill in May, rather than, say, after the fall of France, or Halifax rather than Churchill replacing Chamberlain?


And to particularly address one point (Hitler seeking to antagonise, Stalin to find allies) - even ignoring "puppet regimes", Hitler found allies in Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland.
How many countries declared their support for the Soviets? (aside from the ones already at war with Germany anyway)

 

[Kovax]

Bear in mind that Hitler only got most of those allies either by coercion, or by being seen as "marginally less terrible" than the alternative: Stalin. As one Pole put it: "The Germans will steal our land, but the Russians will steal our souls".

Italy was firmly set on helping defend Austria against any invasion by Hitler, and took a clear anti-Hitler stand until some kind of deal was reached, after which Mussolini gave Hitler free reign to annex Austria. Italy later saw which way the wind was blowing, and decided to jump into the war against France in order to get a share of the spoils.

Hungary's regent, Miklos Horthy, was very much opposed to Hitler on a personal level, and relations were strained, but he had to choose between relenting under pressure or having the country occupied by its sudden new neighbor. Ultimately, his constant foot-dragging on Hitler's demands, and later, discovered overtures to the Allies to get out of the war, led to Hungary being fully occupied anyway.

Romania initially opposed Hitler, but when Stalin took Bessarabia, they decided to deal with what they considered the "lesser evil" and began negotiations with Hitler.

I'm not entirely familiar with Bulgaria's situation, but it's clear that Stalin had some intentions there, and Bulgaria chose possible German oppression over likely Soviet oppression.

Finland was initially very much in favor of the Allies, but when the UK and France left Finland hanging high and dry while the Soviets invaded, that left only one path of recourse: deal with Hitler.

Hitler didn't sweet-talk those countries into happily joining his dreams of a "new world order", they were left with no acceptable choices (either due to proximity to Germany, bigger fear of Stalin, and/or by tragically inept statesmanship by the Allies), and took what they considered to be the least disastrous option.

 

[Cavalry]

To be honest, your conclusions seem rather informed by outcome bias.
Hitler lost, Stalin won, undeniable. But to ascribe that (primarily) to their respective genius seems rather shortsighted.

Were the 1939 Poland and 1940 France campaigns abysmal failures, or was Germany merely "unlucky" that Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill in May, rather than, say, after the fall of France, or Halifax rather than Churchill replacing Chamberlain?


And to particularly address one point (Hitler seeking to antagonise, Stalin to find allies) - even ignoring "puppet regimes", Hitler found allies in Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland.
How many countries declared their support for the Soviets? (aside from the ones already at war with Germany anyway)

Hitler was not just lost. Germany get the biggest catastrophe in history under him, losing huge land and people.
France Surrender is quite a lucky for him, France still had millions of soldiers at that time, and huge land and industries.

Was, e.g. the Great Purge a stroke of genius? Or was Stalin "lucky" that noone tested the Soviet Army until it had at least somewhat recovered from the purges?

Great Purge is a work of multiple men under Stalin. There was mistakes but it is hard to blame Stalin for the fate of every low rank officers.
I think the effect is somewhat exaggerated. Soviet can won against the best force of Japan no problem. Some may point to Finland but Soviet won that too (Real life Finland is not weak like in HOI) Anyway Soviet was prepared for war those days, just count their huge number of tanks and troops!

 

[Herbert West]

Great Purge is a work of multiple men under Stalin. There was mistakes but it is hard to blame Stalin for the fate of every low rank officers.

It the Tzar only knew what his horrible boyars are doing, he would surely stop it.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

That's an interesting thing to say.
What makes you think so?

It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the SS; the Brotherhood, the Kameraden. They were not defeated. They played a game outside the physical war according to their own rules. When Germany was defeated they shed their skin, cast their honors into the sacred lake when possible at the beginning of their primary Ratline, and walked the path to freedom under the protection of their hidden allies. They reform in safe havens long prepared for them, and start anew by tapping into the massive reserve of flight capital hidden by Bormann. Yes, a few sacrificial lambs were left behind to satisfy the anger of the world (Kaltenbrunner sitting in Wilderness Hut waiting to be pinched, for example); but a powerful and battle hardened cadre of intelligent men remains when all is said and done.

They were forever stating Germany owed them a great debt of gratitude for making the hard choices, doing the dark deeds that needed doing, and turning Germany into the Wunderland it is today.

 

[viola]

It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the SS; the Brotherhood, the Kameraden. They were not defeated. They played a game outside the physical war according to their own rules. When Germany was defeated they shed their skin, cast their honors into the sacred lake when possible at the beginning of their primary Ratline, and walked the path to freedom under the protection of their hidden allies. They reform in safe havens long prepared for them, and start anew by tapping into the massive reserve of flight capital hidden by Bormann. Yes, a few sacrificial lambs were left behind to satisfy the anger of the world (Kaltenbrunner sitting in Wilderness Hut waiting to be pinched, for example); but a powerful and battle hardened cadre of intelligent men remains when all is said and done.

They were forever stating Germany owed them a great debt of gratitude for making the hard choices, doing the dark deeds that needed doing, and turning Germany into the Wunderland it is today.

Well, if these former SS think so they're positively out of their minds.

National Socialism's core beliefs and Nazi Germany's geopolitics were mostly based in Lebensraum and the idea that Germany needed a huge amount of fertile land in order to support its growth, and without this land Germany would have been unable to compete with physically larger nations. They thought that Eastern Europe and Ukraine's fields would have been the ideal targets for German colonization and they planned to turn much of Eastern Europe into farming land owned by German soldier-peasants to support Germany's growth.

Nazi Germany then lost WW2, resulting in the devastation of the country's economy, further territorial loss and eve the loss of national unity for a very long time. In spite of this West Germany alone was able to rebuild the country from the devastation of WW2 and bring it to levels of prosperity that were never seen before, showing how wrong the "Living Space" idea was and how National Socialism's ideology was running on 19th century bollocks that romanticized peasants and agriculture.
Nazi Germany didn't just lost the war, in time every aspect of their ideology was proven to be hilariously wrong or misguided.

At this point one has to wonder how prosperous Germany could have been if it only realized this earlier instead of throwing itself into another losing, devastating war.
Modern Germany exists in spite of Nazi Germany and the things it accomplished were accomplished on its own. If some of the Nazi leadership who ended up avoiding punishment after the war believes that the country owes them a favour for the things they did, at least in my personal opinion, they are completely deluded.
Nazism just brought devastation to Germany and the rest of Europe.

 

[IsadorBG]

To be honest, your conclusions seem rather informed by outcome bias.
Hitler lost, Stalin won, undeniable. But to ascribe that (primarily) to their respective genius seems rather shortsighted.

Was, e.g. the Great Purge a stroke of genius? Or was Stalin "lucky" that noone tested the Soviet Army until it had at least somewhat recovered from the purges?
Were the 1939 Poland and 1940 France campaigns abysmal failures, or was Germany merely "unlucky" that Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill in May, rather than, say, after the fall of France, or Halifax rather than Churchill replacing Chamberlain?

Depends before the Great Purge, Stalin was just the leader of the SU always at risk to be removed if enough in the party wished to do so.
After it he was a totalitarian dictator that suffered no opposition.

Wasn't it worth it ? Maybe, maybe not.

And to particularly address one point (Hitler seeking to antagonise, Stalin to find allies) - even ignoring "puppet regimes", Hitler found allies in Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland.
How many countries declared their support for the Soviets? (aside from the ones already at war with Germany anyway)

It can be unbelievably hard to find allies when you official ideology (which you actually adheres to) is to eventually overthrow anyone that does not share your own ideology and everyone knows that.

Also having many countries suffer from red insurgencies in one form or another and former allies support ideological enemies during the civil war does not help fostering trust either.

I mean let's be fair to Big Joe. Almost everyone thought he was the worse choice when compared to Hit-man.

 

[JodelDiplom]

Its my analysis on Hitler the persons intelligence. Sure I glossed over a lot of things, but I focused on the most important. Germany was in an unwinnable war, and Hitler made it worse by pouring gasoline on the fire and making the US, Mexico and all of South America join the allies.

Several things to note here (these are general observations about how organizations work)

Rarely are organizational failures the result of lack of intelligence among the leaders of the organization. All else being equal, large organizations always attract intelligent and ambitious people just because leadership is prestigious and respected. Competition ensures that the dullards do not rise to the top.

Intelligence is not the only ingredient to success in leadership. You also need some charisma, you need a deep understanding and appreciation of politics and the laws of power, and you need to WANT to be surrounded by people all the time. These are not things that anyone can learn intuitively or from books. There are enormous numbers of intelligent people who have no understanding of politics just because they never bothered to learn it, or found out that they have a much easier time in life in fields where politics is not so much of an issue. Or who simply can't stand having people around them with what they consider urgent matters every waking hour of their life.

Well, if these former SS think so they're positively out of their minds.

National Socialism's core beliefs and Nazi Germany's geopolitics were mostly based in Lebensraum and the idea that Germany needed a huge amount of fertile land in order to support its growth, and without this land Germany would have been unable to compete with physically larger nations. They thought that Eastern Europe and Ukraine's fields would have been the ideal targets for German colonization and they planned to turn much of Eastern Europe into farming land owned by German soldier-peasants to support Germany's growth.

Nazi Germany then lost WW2, resulting in the devastation of the country's economy, further territorial loss and eve the loss of national unity for a very long time. In spite of this West Germany alone was able to rebuild the country from the devastation of WW2 and bring it to levels of prosperity that were never seen before, showing how wrong the "Living Space" idea was and how National Socialism's ideology was running on 19th century bollocks that romanticized peasants and agriculture.
Nazi Germany didn't just lost the war, in time every aspect of their ideology was proven to be hilariously wrong or misguided.

At this point one has to wonder how prosperous Germany could have been if it only realized this earlier instead of throwing itself into another losing, devastating war.
Modern Germany exists in spite of Nazi Germany and the things it accomplished were accomplished on its own. If some of the Nazi leadership who ended up avoiding punishment after the war believes that the country owes them a favour for the things they did, at least in my personal opinion, they are completely deluded.
Nazism just brought devastation to Germany and the rest of Europe.

You are misrepresenting the Nazis. The core idea of nazism was not that Germany under all circumstances needed the vast farmlands (and mineral resources!) of western Russia in order to become a prosperous nation. The idea was that they needed them to become prosperous, and powerful, and totally independent from the rest of the world i.e. not in need of political compromises with Britain, USA or other world powers possessing vast mineral and food resources.

Which actually was 100% correct, and still is.

Western Germany after WW2 became prosperous and, in a way, powerful again but that was (and still is) because we trade our industrial products and various services for raw materials and foodstuffs from other continents. We can do that because we (Adenauer mostly) chose to integrate Germany as closely as possible into the US led western world after WW2. If we could not buy the produce of the farmlands of Canada, Argentina, Brazil and the USA, or mineral ores and and hydrocarbons from mines and wells of Asia, Russia and Latin America, we would be very poor again and back to Lebensraum thinking.

 

[Semper Victor]

You are misrepresenting the Nazis. The core idea of nazism was not that Germany under all circumstances needed the vast farmlands (and mineral resources!) of western Russia in order to become a prosperous nation. The idea was that they needed them to become prosperous, and powerful, and totally independent from the rest of the world i.e. not in need of political compromises with Britain, USA or other world powers possessing vast mineral and food resources.

Which actually was 100% correct, and still is.

Western Germany after WW2 became prosperous and, in a way, powerful again but that was (and still is) because we trade our industrial products and various services for raw materials and foodstuffs from other continents. We can do that because we (Adenauer mostly) chose to integrate Germany as closely as possible into the US led western world after WW2. If we could not buy the produce of the farmlands of Canada, Argentina, Brazil and the USA, or mineral ores and and hydrocarbons from mines and wells of Asia, Russia and Latin America, we would be very poor again and back to Lebensraum thinking.

Couldn’t agree more. The Nazis would have found the actual Federal Republic of Germany a completely abhorrent polity. Their main goal was total, complete and utter autarky, so that no other state would ever be in the position to strangle the Reich with an economic blockade like it had happened in WWI.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

Couldn’t agree more. The Nazis would have found the actual Federal Republic of Germany a completely abhorrent polity. Their main goal was total, complete and utter autarchy, so that no other state would ever be in the position to strangle the Reich with an economic blockade like it had happened in WWI.

And yet the True Believers of the Nazi party worked hand in glove with the German state - the government, its intelligence services, its corporate entities and their offshore assets - to rebuild Germany into the great nation it is today. And Adenaeur went out of his way to clear the path for their rehabilitation.