Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Arts & HumanitiesHistory · 6 months ago

Would the Holocaust likely have been avoided if Hitler had been accepted into the art school in Vienna?

If he had been accepted, it's unlikely Hitler would have been in Germany for World War 1.

In our time line, Adolf Hitler the decorated world war 1 veteran gained a massive following.

But would the German people have followed some artist from Austria?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    Yes and it would also have been avoided if the USA had not Put hitler in power and funded him up to 1945

    http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/randy/swas1.h...

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Truth
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    no, but the nazi uniforms would have been nicer

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    That is too hard to say. It could be very likely that he would drop out of art school and went into the political career and still wouldnt' have change anything. Too many possiblities to know what could happen, it may have not reallly changed anything.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Tina
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Midnight Run/Dave you say:

    "The history books leave out details like the 1915-1939 Zionist media campaign about 6 million Jews being persecuted and threatened with extermination"

    They certainly do, because there was no such campaign. The press did report on the persecution of Jews in E Europe and Russia both before and after the Revolution, which sadly caused some to see refuge in Germany, but to say this was invented by the Zionists is a ridiculous distortion of history.

    You say:

    "In many cases, the Zionist cause Jewish persecution just so they can feign horror to justify their own existence."

    Do they indeed? in many cases? then you will have no problem in quoting a couple, with evidence. And make up your mind if you are claiming that there was no persecution of the Jews in E Europe and Russia, or that there was but it was caused by the Zionists.

    Neither is true by the way, but which are you going for? - with examples.

    And finally you say:

    "almost every time they accuse someone of antisemitism, the "crime" has nothing to do with the religious aspect of the Jews themselves - it's usually political in nature."

    I find this statement very difficult to understand. What is 'usually political in nature'?are you saying that claims that the Jews run the banks, get rich at the expense of poor Gentiles, committed treason against Germany, 'introduced decadance' into Germany between the wars, mysteriously causing whole families to to take to prostitution, and are striving for world domination, are political and therefore all right, like your revolting claims that Jews are inherently 'dirty' and had only themselves to blame for the filthy conditions in Hitler's camps.

    What exactly would you call 'anti semitic,' then?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 months ago

    If things were completely different, would they still be the same? What a silly question.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    Removing Hitler from the picture doesn't remove the massive anti-semitism that existed throughout Europe, not just in Germany, so it could have happened any number of other ways, or not at all. There is no satisfactory answer either way and it can be argued until the end of time without a sure conclusion. Likewise it can be argued that if the Romans hadn't been defeated in the Battle of of the Teutoburg Forest in the 9th Century that Germany might never have existed. In other words, any change in history large or small could have incalculable consequences. If the mass of a proton had only been 2 percent different during the 'big bang'' the universe itself might not exist or would be so different we wouldn't exist, so where does one stop with these foolish ''what-if'' scenarios?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    Yes, I think this a good question because it is questioning how we look at history nowadays. We now look at broad social trends and so on, in this case the Treaty of Versailles, the Great Depression and so on that enabled Hitler. However, take Hitler out of the equation and history is completely different. This tends to support the old-fashioned Great Man theory of history, albeit with "great" here in the sense of terrible.

    • ...Show all comments
    • michinoku2001
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Of course it is all about Hitler, no other party figure could convince the Wehrmacht that Barbarossa was good idea. Not Goering the decadent, not Goebbels the intellectual, not Himmler the chicken farmer not Hess the mystic, not Roehm the homosexual, and Ribbentrop was certainly against Barbarossa.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    Pointless speculation.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Lv 4
    6 months ago

    I doubt it, as it never happened so doesn't matter

    • Tina
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      What never happened? Hitler failed the entrance examination to the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna twice. Or do you mean the Holocaust never happened, which is a piece of nonsense because it happened in Europe and everyone saw it and felt the effects?

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.