Hitler's table talk - rushtermpapers

Hitler’s table talk

Hitler’s Table Talk was the title given to certain statements in a conversation that was made by Adolf Hitler and later recorded by other people in different languages. It is also referred to as the private conversations that have many secrets in it. Hitler’s Table Talk from 1941 to 1944 was about the informal conversations of the man who destroyed the western world. Hitler’s Table Talk was primarily about the narrator’s secret dreams, his failures and ambitions, his enemies and friends that he associated with during the time of war. During his infamous reign of tyranny, Hitler attempted to bring humanity into a terrible darkness by using his ideas and personality. Hitler’s Table Talk further reveals his private thoughts about Christianity and the way different historians reacted to them.

In this conversation, Hitler allegedly denounced religion. It is the only source in which he criticizes Christianity, thus indicating that Hitler was not a Christian. The source of his conversation on religion was translated from English to French by Norman Cameron with an introduction by Trevor Roper. His private conversations about the religion have some sayings such as “I shall not come to terms with the Christian lie” (Hitler and Trevor-Roper, 2000). He talks about Christianity as a disease that should end, showing how he hated Christianity. However, the German translations do not include his private conversation of anti-Christianity but they are only available in other languages such as Francois, English and French.

In addition, even though Hitler was against Christianity, he did not speak anything against Jesus. On the contrary, his private conversations portray Hitler admiring the character of Jesus. However, he criticized Christianity in a political way but not in a religious way as many Christianity do in the present situations. The problems associated with using Hitler’s Table Talk conversations as evidence of Hitler being against Christianity result from bias by the translators, source reliability and multiple source translations.

Trevor Roper reveals that Hitler’s private conversations were not recorded anywhere because he refused any recording items brought into his room. Hitler only allowed Martin Bormann to record his conversations. Many quotes about Hitler’s thoughts about Christianity are attributed by Bormann who worked secretly against the Catholic movement without Hitler’s permission. Bormann fought against the organizations of the church instead of persuading Hitler to take action against churches. Nobody could seek the truth about the Hitler’s Table Talk because the entire record of conversations was kept and edited by Bormann who was against Catholicism.

Some historians such as Richard Carrier argue that the English translations about Hitler’s comments on Christianity are actually misleading. Richard argues based on the comparison between the German translations and that of French. He uses other languages translations so that anybody who quotes his private conversations should quote exactly what Hitler said. Many of the Genoud translations by Trevor Roper emphasize on his anti-Christianity, something that Richard Carrier rejects. Carrier reacts on the biased translations and comments that Roper has untrustworthy translations of Hitler’s Table Talk. However, Carrier admits that Hitler denounces the church and the different Christian doctrines in his private conversations.

In addition, even though Carrier admits these criticisms, he suggests that they apply to Roman Catholicism during the translation of Hitler’s Table Talk in around 1941 to 1944. This was the period when Hitler’s friends quoted him expressing negative assertions about Christianity in that era. Nevertheless, Nazi General ironically quoted Hitler emphasizing that he was the remnant true catholic, “I am now as before a catholic and will always remain so” (Hitler and Trevor-Roper, 2000). Carrier and other historians such as Werner Jochman and Steigmann-Gall argue that Hitler was somehow religious. This is because of his table talk about divinity whereby he puts man ahead of other creatures. In fact, despite his private conversations against Christianity, Hitler understands that there is a creator responsible for life.

Steigmann reacts towards those talking against Hitler’s private conversations against Christianity. He argues that no matter how he denounced Christianity or other religions, he did not indicate that he was now an atheist. Hitler was still attached to the beliefs of God and he even indicated how he liked the attributes of Jesus. Stegmann’s studies about the attitudes of Nazi towards Christianity reveals his reactions of creating bias in Hitler’s private conversations. Steigmann reveals that Hitler’s Table Talk reflects his newly formed approaches that were an inconsistent to his earlier views on non-Christianity. This was in early 1937 when Hitler failed to unite the German Protestant believers. Regardless of his private conversations against Christianity at that time, he kept holding high the respect for Jesus.

The views of Hitler in his private conversations have been expressed by some of the historians as the true Christian while others regards him as non-Christian. Some historians who support Hitler’s private conversations reveal that he wished all the German Christian believers a continued unity. Hitler’s Table Talk was directed to some Christians such as Paul who wanted the Roman Empires to emphasize equality in men but initiated all kinds of slavery against workers’ masters. Most of Hitler’s talks were destroyed in 1945 from the record books by the officials of Alfred Rosenberg. However, some of the conversational remarks were established in 1941 by David Irving.

Another historian known as Alan Bullock reacts toward the conflicting statements of Hitler’s Table Talk to prove on Hitler’s anti-Christianity. He argues that it is because of political issues that made Hitler to attack the church privately due to incitation from Bormann and Nazis. However, Hitler wanted to solve his problems with the priests from different Christian beliefs once his time arrives. Hitler’s Christianity views were a myth that was created by the Jews under the Romans laws. Bullock’s notion about this myth reveals the conflicts that he regards to be the doctrines of the Christians that he believes scientific evolution will eventually destroy.

In contrast, Bullock argues that even though Hitler’s Table Talk suggests his believes in God, his actions were differently. Hitler, spoke about God and condemned agnosticism in his conversations but he refused Himmler to rebuild a pre-Christian pagan myths. Even the followers of Himmler like Hess who chose an atheist in order to succeed the official Nazi movement, was rejected by Hitler. Bullock portrays Hitler as somebody who is not different from the deeds of Napoleon who was speaking of destiny that gave people justification and freedom. Bullock quotes the saying of Hitler “the Russians had no right to assail the idea of supreme force” (Hitler and Trevor-Roper, 2000).

In conclusion, Hitler’s Table Talk does not agree with his actions and views about Christianity. Many historians reacted strongly on certain translations that depicted Hitler’s thoughts about Christianity. Some historians supported him that he was a Christian because he believed in God and he liked the attitudes of Jesus. While other historians does not agree that Hitler was a Christian because of his political issues that were directed against the Christianity religion. However, the thoughts of Hitler were translated into many languages by many translators, which contributed to different views about Hitler’s table talk on religion.

Reference

Hitler, A., & Trevor-Roper, H. R. (2000). Hitler’s table talk, 1941-1944: His private conversations. New York, NY: Enigma Books.