[Previous entry: "More thoughts on debt reduction"] [Next entry: "CSIS says "Too much secrecy is bad""]

01/05/2007: "Hitler and the need for war"

When discussing the necessity of war, many have pointed to the atrocities of Hitler as the ultimate example. If Hitler had not been stopped by war, what would have happened to the world as we know it?

This line of reasoning completely ignores the factors that propelled Hitler into a place of influence in the first place. Hitler took power at the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party in 1933 after the collapse of the Weimar Republic in Germany caused at least in part by the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I. Without this treaty, it is unlikely that the necessary conditions (popular resentment against outside nations, etc) would have existed.

That treaty, in turn, was punishment for another war that Germany got involved in as a result of a combination of factors, most notably its agressive arms race against Great Britain and the imperial nature of the governments involved. Although the factors that led to WWI were more complex than just these two, without them the war would likely not have happened.

So to summarize, imperial agression led to war led to resentment figureheaded by Hitler led to another war. And this is used as an example of why we should preemptively start more wars and cause more resentment? It just doesn't work that way.