Home & Garden50 mins ago
Was Hitler Good At Public Speaking?
127 Answers
http://
Strange that this hasn't been entered up for ridicule, by the anti-UKIP brigade?
Strange that this hasn't been entered up for ridicule, by the anti-UKIP brigade?
Answers
separating art from artist is always awkward. Refuse to listen to Wagner because he was anti-
13:57 Sun 10th Aug 2014
I don't think it's petty. As I said earlier, Hitler's speeches were not effective because he used dramatic pauses whatsoever, they were effective because they were masterworks of scaremongering.
I think it's highly likely that Mr. Etheridge knows this. Why? Because UKIP has been using the same rhetorical principles time and time again. Hitler was not plucked out of the air because he happened to be good at crowd control - they could have chosen any number of people for that. He may even mentioned other names in the same context. But UKIP are not addressing any stadiums any time soon.
Hitler was chosen because his style of scapegoating and scaremongering is exactly what UKIP does. It's a tactic the party has absolutely no shame in using.
I think it's highly likely that Mr. Etheridge knows this. Why? Because UKIP has been using the same rhetorical principles time and time again. Hitler was not plucked out of the air because he happened to be good at crowd control - they could have chosen any number of people for that. He may even mentioned other names in the same context. But UKIP are not addressing any stadiums any time soon.
Hitler was chosen because his style of scapegoating and scaremongering is exactly what UKIP does. It's a tactic the party has absolutely no shame in using.
wake up !
Not strange at all
Mikey was first off the blocks - see other thread
// separating art from arteest - jno.... //
do we refuse to look at Tuke:
https:/
because we now think it is pornographic
and yet we discuss whether someone who was responsible for at least 30 million deaths ( 29 million in the Russian war and a million to equal things) was a good speaker
which is more pornographic - UKIP or Tuke ?
Not strange at all
Mikey was first off the blocks - see other thread
// separating art from arteest - jno.... //
do we refuse to look at Tuke:
https:/
because we now think it is pornographic
and yet we discuss whether someone who was responsible for at least 30 million deaths ( 29 million in the Russian war and a million to equal things) was a good speaker
which is more pornographic - UKIP or Tuke ?
Kromovaracun
/// Hitler was chosen because his style of scapegoating and scaremongering is exactly what UKIP does. It's a tactic the party has absolutely no shame in
using. ///
Scapegoating and Scaremongering is what politicians of all political parties do all the time it is their stock in trade.
"What will befall us if we come out of the EU"? "What will happen to Scotland if they come out of the UK"? etc, etc.
/// Hitler was chosen because his style of scapegoating and scaremongering is exactly what UKIP does. It's a tactic the party has absolutely no shame in
using. ///
Scapegoating and Scaremongering is what politicians of all political parties do all the time it is their stock in trade.
"What will befall us if we come out of the EU"? "What will happen to Scotland if they come out of the UK"? etc, etc.
mikey4444
/// Kromo...if you and I can see that, I am at a loss to understand why more people can't. ///
It is no wonder you are at a loss, the answer is simple, others just do not agree with you?
/// It is peoples inability to use logic and simple common sense which must explain why UKIP is popular at all. ///
You are not trying to tell us that those of us who endured 13 disastrous years of Blair and Brown's Labour Government, will also lack logic and simple common sense, simply because we decide never to vote for Labour again?
/// Kromo...if you and I can see that, I am at a loss to understand why more people can't. ///
It is no wonder you are at a loss, the answer is simple, others just do not agree with you?
/// It is peoples inability to use logic and simple common sense which must explain why UKIP is popular at all. ///
You are not trying to tell us that those of us who endured 13 disastrous years of Blair and Brown's Labour Government, will also lack logic and simple common sense, simply because we decide never to vote for Labour again?
// Hitler's speeches were not effective because he used dramatic pauses whatsoever, they were effective because they were masterworks of scaremongering. //
They were both - masterworks of scaremongering delivered by a 'charismatic' orator.
This bloke's an idiot to use him as an example of a good public speaker though. He's an idiot at best. At worst it's something more sinister.
They were both - masterworks of scaremongering delivered by a 'charismatic' orator.
This bloke's an idiot to use him as an example of a good public speaker though. He's an idiot at best. At worst it's something more sinister.
There is nothing remotely pornographic about the paintings of Henry Scott Tuke, RA RWS ::::
http://
If Tuke was a pornographer, then so was Cezanne, Renoir, Gauguin, Durer, et al. is he being labeled a Pornographer because he painted nude male figures, instead of nude female figures.
What bally rot ! We will be covering up the piano legs again at this rate !
This painting has hung in the waiting room of my Dentist for 50 years I know.
http://
http://
If Tuke was a pornographer, then so was Cezanne, Renoir, Gauguin, Durer, et al. is he being labeled a Pornographer because he painted nude male figures, instead of nude female figures.
What bally rot ! We will be covering up the piano legs again at this rate !
This painting has hung in the waiting room of my Dentist for 50 years I know.
http://
I think sp1814 has (as he usually does) got to the heart of the issue early on, and stuck to his argument in spite of some serious sidetracking.
Essentially, the issue is this, as i see it.
Was Hitler good at public speaking? Yes. In the same way that Gary Glitter was a good pop star, and Jonathan King was a good producer, and Harold Shipman was a good GP.
The fact is, all these individuals had a deep dark side to their personalities which is not in any way mitigated by those skills.
Therefore, if you try and point out the skills of such people - regardless of how valid your argument is objectively, it will instantly be buried under the scorching scorn and derision that the very mention of their name creates, due to thier huge infamy which eclipses anything else about them in the eyes and minds of the public.
So, with the simple fact in mind, it can be seen as monumentally foolish to try and use any of these individuals a 'good example' in any context.
For a politician to use Hitler in this conext is so stupid as to beggar belief.
No-one would dispute the truth of what he has said, but the truth is not the issue, it's the infamy that has buried it too deep to be seen ever again.
This politician is guilty of startsospheric misjudgement at a level which makes him unfit for public office - not for being wrong in what he said, but for the crass thoughtlessness with which he said it.
As advised, there are other orators to quote who do not have the history that Hitler carries - use of their names is likely to keep the matter in hand and not score such a massive own-goal.
Essentially, the issue is this, as i see it.
Was Hitler good at public speaking? Yes. In the same way that Gary Glitter was a good pop star, and Jonathan King was a good producer, and Harold Shipman was a good GP.
The fact is, all these individuals had a deep dark side to their personalities which is not in any way mitigated by those skills.
Therefore, if you try and point out the skills of such people - regardless of how valid your argument is objectively, it will instantly be buried under the scorching scorn and derision that the very mention of their name creates, due to thier huge infamy which eclipses anything else about them in the eyes and minds of the public.
So, with the simple fact in mind, it can be seen as monumentally foolish to try and use any of these individuals a 'good example' in any context.
For a politician to use Hitler in this conext is so stupid as to beggar belief.
No-one would dispute the truth of what he has said, but the truth is not the issue, it's the infamy that has buried it too deep to be seen ever again.
This politician is guilty of startsospheric misjudgement at a level which makes him unfit for public office - not for being wrong in what he said, but for the crass thoughtlessness with which he said it.
As advised, there are other orators to quote who do not have the history that Hitler carries - use of their names is likely to keep the matter in hand and not score such a massive own-goal.
Mikey, I'm getting rather tired of you repeatedly declaring that anyone who disagrees with you is illogical and lacks common sense. I refer you to Svejk's post at 08.10 today which you appear to have conveniently ignored.
Krom, the reason I say it's petty is because this man gave examples of several other people who are considered to be good public speakers, including Churchill, all of whom seem to have been forgotten in the resulting melee. As usual the moment Hitler is credited with something praiseworthy everyone bristles with indignation and it's potty. Despite declaring that Adolf Hitler was an "evil, monstrous tyrant", Bill Etheridge may well have shot himself in the political foot but that's completely irrelevant to this question because whatever the content of Hitler's orations, he had the ability to hold the attention of his audiences - and that's what good public speaking is all about.
Krom, the reason I say it's petty is because this man gave examples of several other people who are considered to be good public speakers, including Churchill, all of whom seem to have been forgotten in the resulting melee. As usual the moment Hitler is credited with something praiseworthy everyone bristles with indignation and it's potty. Despite declaring that Adolf Hitler was an "evil, monstrous tyrant", Bill Etheridge may well have shot himself in the political foot but that's completely irrelevant to this question because whatever the content of Hitler's orations, he had the ability to hold the attention of his audiences - and that's what good public speaking is all about.
Naomi...many people on here agree that it was an error to invoke Hitler in any way whatsoever. I always ignore one or two posters on AB but I would recommend that you read Kromo's excellent replies under this heading, as well as the others.
The simple truth is that UKIP has shot itself in the foot once again, and its just common sense to realise that. I think we have shaken this bone enough and I shall not be commenting in this again.
Unless UKIP repeat their error again in the future, so that means that I probably will, as the Party has every appearance of being unable to stop behaving foolishly. Complete shower, as Terry Thomas would have said.
The simple truth is that UKIP has shot itself in the foot once again, and its just common sense to realise that. I think we have shaken this bone enough and I shall not be commenting in this again.
Unless UKIP repeat their error again in the future, so that means that I probably will, as the Party has every appearance of being unable to stop behaving foolishly. Complete shower, as Terry Thomas would have said.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank66 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles94 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles167 mins ago
Are We Heading Towards Another...
Politics167 mins ago
ChatterBank172 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.