Adolf Hitler - Time 'Person Of The Year' - 1938

[align=center][atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b69e96e8f025.jpg[/atsimg][/align]

TIME’s cover (above) showed Organist Adolf Hitler playing his hymn of hate in a desecrated cathedral while victims dangle on a St. Catherine’s wheel and the Nazi hierarchy looks on, was drawn by Baron Rudolph Charles von Ripper, a Catholic who found Germany intolerable.

1938 Adolf Hitler FROM THE TIME ARCHIVE Jan. 2, 1939 Greatest single news event of 1938 took place on September 29, when four statesmen met at the Fuhrerhaus, in Munich, to redraw the map of Europe. The three visiting statesmen at that historic conference were Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of Great Britain, Premier Edouard Daladier of France, and Dictator Benito Mussolini of Italy. But by all odds the dominating figure at Munich was the German host, Adolf Hitler.

Fuhrer of the German people, Commander-in-Chief of the German Army, Navy & Air Force, Chancellor of the Third Reich, Herr Hitler reaped on that day at Munich the harvest of an audacious, defiant, ruthless foreign policy he had pursued for five and a half years. He had torn the Treaty of Versailles to shreds. He had rearmed Germany to the teeth—or as close to the tooth as he was able. He had stolen Austria before the eyes of a horrified and apparently impotent world.

All these events were shocking to nations which had defeated Germany on the battlefield only 20 years before, but nothing so terrified the world as the ruthless, methodical, Nazi-directed events which during late summer and early autumn threatened a world war over Czechoslovakia. When without loss of blood he reduced Czechoslovakia to a German puppet state, forced a drastic revision of Europe's defensive alliances, and won a free hand for himself in Eastern Europe by getting a "hands-off" promise from powerful Britain (and later France), Adolf Hitler without doubt became 1938's Man of the Year.

What Adolf Hitler & Co. did to Germany in less than six years was applaudeldly and ecstatically by most Germans. He lifted the nation from post-War defeatism. Under the swastika Germany was unified. His was no ordinary dictatorship, but rather one of great energy and magnificent planning. The "socialist" part of National Socialism might be scoffed at by hard-&-fast Marxists, but the Nazi movement nevertheless had a mass basis. The 1,500 miles of magnificent highways built, schemes for cheap cars and simple workers' benefits, grandiose plans for rebuilding German cities made Germans burst with pride. Germans might eat many substitute foods or wear ersatz clothes but they did eat.

Meanwhile, Germany has become a nation of uniforms, goose- stepping to Hitler's tune, where boys of ten are taught to throw hand grenades, where women are regarded as breeding machines. Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism.

But other nations have emphatically joined the armaments race and among military men the poser is: "Will Hitler fight when it becomes definitely certain that he is losing that race?" The dynamics of dictatorship are such that few who have studied Fascism and its leaders can envision sexless, restless, instinctive Adolf Hitler rounding out a mellow middle age in his mountain chalet at Berchtesgaden while a satisfied German people drink beer and sing folk songs. There is no guarantee that the have-not nations will go to sleep when they have taken what they now want from the haves. To those who watched the closing events of the year it seemed more than probable that the Man of 1938 may make 1939 a year to be remembered.

Source




[align=center][atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a97d1b1f7511.jpg[/atsimg][/align]

The year 1942 was a year of blood and strength. The man whose name means steel in Russian, whose few words of English include the American expression "tough guy" was the man of 1942. Only Joseph Stalin fully knew how close Russia stood to defeat in 1942, and only Joseph Stalin fully knew how he brought Russia through.

But the whole world knew what the alternative would have been. The man who knew it best of all was Adolf Hitler, who found his past accomplishments turning into dust.

Had German legions swept past steel-stubborn Stalingrad and liquidated Russia's power of attack, Hitler would have been not only man of the year, but he would have been undisputed master of Europe, looking for other continents to conquer. He could have diverted at least 250 victorious divisions to new conquests in Asia and Africa. But Joseph Stalin stopped him. Stalin had done it before—in 1941—when he started with all of Russia intact. But Stalin's achievement of 1942 was far greater. All that Hitler could give he took—for the second time.

What other war aims Stalin has are not officially known, but there are reports in high circles that he wants no new territories except at points needed to make Russia impregnable against invasion. There is also a story in high places that, in keeping with the "tough-guy" tradition, credits Stalin with one other desire: permission from his allies to raze Berlin, as a lesson in psychology to the Germans and as a burnt offering to his own heroic people.

Source

Controversy

Despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary, the designation is often regarded as an honor, and spoken of as an award or prize, simply based on many previous selections of admirable people.

However Time magazine points out those such as Adolf Hitler in 1938, and Joseph Stalin in 1939 and again in 1942.

Is it really right to honor these men with an award/prize for their actions?

Now i understand that Time selects its "winners" on the stipulation that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year."

But i still have a problem with people like Hitler and Stalin being called "Person of the Year".

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1930)...yes.
John F. Kennedy (1961)...yes.
Martin Luther King (1963)...yes.

All individuals who are worthy of the title 'Person Of The Year' in my opinion.

It also seems that Time like to pick and choose when their "for better or worse" stipulation occurs.

Time's Person of the Year 2001—immediately following the September 11, 2001 attacks—was New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani, although the rules of selection, the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news, made Osama bin Laden a more likely choice. The issue that declared Giuliani the Person of the Year included an article that mentioned Time's earlier decision to elect the Ayatollah Khomeini and the 1999 rejection of Hitler as Person of the Century. The article seemed to imply that Osama bin Laden was a stronger candidate than Giuliani, as Adolf Hitler was a stronger candidate than Albert Einstein. The selections were ultimately based on what the magazine describes as who they believed had a stronger influence on history.

Source

Also...

It was debated whether Adolf Hitler, German Chancellor and Fuhrer responsible for World War II and the Holocaust should have been made Person of the Century for his impact on the 20th Century. The argument was based on Time's criteria that the person chosen should have the greatest impact on this century, for better or worse.[3] However, it was decided that since Hitler's goals were defeated and the century ended on a positive note, he was not as influential as Einstein, Roosevelt or Gandhi, though he did still make the list.

Person Of The Century?
Going from Times definition, i would argue Hitler was in with a real shout. And its this point alone that should convince you that things need to change.

I couldn't believe it when i first found this out. I really think Time need to change their definition for who is eligible for the title of Person Of The Year.

There are so many people more worthy of this title who are being blatently overlooked in favor of monsters who are responsible for the killing of millions of innocents, the killing of freedom of speech and the killing of democracy.

When i saw this i really had to question Times motives.
But even more so i had to question society, who seem to let this happen again and again......George W. Bush has also won this 'award'......TWICE!


[align=center][atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0e5b5a74bb1b.jpg[/atsimg][/align]


Time Will Tell......

As i recalled, a few years ago they actually (TIME) came out and explained that the Person Of The Year didnt have to be named THAT because of good deeds or popularity. They explained that they could name who ever was the most in the public eye during the time frame, and it could be a hated person as well as a beloved one.

We often think a maniac can some how explain our position on one issue or anouther. Look into your heart. Is what this nut job speaks about make sense to you?. For those who have not yet done this yet done it, when you read what Hitler wrote, does it make you feel good or make you throw up ? I have had enough of these crazes. What scares me no end is the idea that someone with a gift of oratory, can get us all to act like barbarians

Work on it people we have a long way to to go.

For someone who isn't into Propaganda, sticking Obama into a thread with pictures of Hitler and Stalin is kind of ironic... don't you think?

haha but they still said Moot from 4chan was too evil to be Time person of the year! Or something like that, or did he make it on the cover in the end? i forget.

let us not forget how well liked the man was prior to mein kampf:

"Yes, Heil Hitler. I, too, say that because he is truly a great man." --David Lloyd George, Prime Minister, UK

Originally posted by neformore
For someone who isn't into Propaganda, sticking Obama into a thread with pictures of Hitler and Stalin is kind of ironic... don't you think?

Oh now. You know better than THAT. It's only propaganda when 'they' use it against 'us.'

Don't be muddying up the waters.

oh....who was 'they' again?

Originally posted by neformore
For someone who isn't into Propaganda, sticking Obama into a thread with pictures of Hitler and Stalin is kind of ironic... don't you think?

'The nation was in shambles. A previous ruler had led the country into an unnecessary war, the economy was failing, and a sense of depression filled the air.

Then, a new leader emerged.

He was a powerful speaker, offering hope, change, and a fix to the economy. He wrote two books about his experiences and used his literary work to propel him to success. He was an open christian with some muslim friends. He called for unity and considered himself an advocate of peace. Some of his political opponents cast him as naive and inexperienced. He also had alot of radical ties, but the media, and ultimately the voters, were willing to overlook that.'