Would it have been ethical to kill baby Hitler?

Things could have been even worse

It would have stopped many deaths

 Getty: Hulton Archive / Stringer

The assertion that killing Hitler as a baby would have benefited humanity is wrong, believes Matt Ford of The Atlantic. The violence and horror that he spread reflected the era and mindset that he lived in. His absence from history would not guarantee the absence of the Second World War or the Holocaust. The pre-war West still largely believed in eugenics, racial superiority and anti-Semitism, even in the United States. Oppressive colonial empires spanned the globe. Without Hitler, history could have gone in different, more violent ways. The atomic bomb could have ended up starting a war instead of ending one.

Keep on reading at The Atlantic

It is likely that killing baby Hitler would have made the world a better place, argues Colby Corsh of The National Post. Chances are that another man would not have enacted such destruction in his place. He had many unique personal traits that set him apart from others. Hitler had a strong gambling personality; it was this that led to his many early successes as well as losing everything he had in the end. His particularly mad touch made Nazism so terribly corrosive. Killing him as a baby could have seen a lot of bloodshed avoided. Few other autocrats were so personally instrumental in horrors on such a large scale.

Keep on reading at The National Post
Where do you stand?
Write a response...
See what else you’re missing