I love this recording and the longer recordings of Hitler speeches because all that is left in popular memory is the wild screams and crescendos that he would use at the end of his speeches. When you read accounts at the time people would talk about Hitler always starting quietly making you listen, and then slowly building up the pitch in the further of his meetings. They described as almost hypnotic. There’s a great fictional series that was done on Amazon – the man in the high castle – where they really leaned into this with their portrayal of Hitler.
There’s a lot of value in studying how leaders convince and control the masses.
If i recall correctly, there is also a part in the transcript where he admits he just didn’t know Russias true strength, and he never would have invaded had he known. Remarkably different language than he used at the time.
> If i recall correctly, there is also a part in the transcript where he admits he just didn’t know Russias true strength, and he never would have invaded had he known. Remarkably different language than he used at the time.
In the recording linked here he says (around the 8 min mark), while talking about Russia's strength in terms of the amount of tanks: "Had I known this my heart would have been even heavier but I would have made the decision even more so because I did not have another option".
Hitler had (poor) intelligence that the Soviets had thousands of tanks (they actually had more than the germans thought); he refused to believe that such a 'backwards' country could have such a strong modern military however.
Just to expand on that - we sent multiple millions of tons of aid - probably $120-150 billion, in current dollars. Thousands of tanks, thousands of planes, plus trains (locomotives and cars), food, fuel, anmmo, explosives, and industrial supplies. Not to minimize the tremendous price the Soviets paid in lives (soldier and civilian), but they almost certainly would've lost the war without lend-lease.
They are clearly two different clips though (just listen to the first 30 seconds and you will see... your transcript only matches the YouTube video), so what am I missing? Is one edited?
Ah, I haven't come across this recording in some time - it's good to be reminded of it. The phrase is overused but given the rarity of hearing the man in anything other than full-tilt harangue, the recording really does represent the "banality of evil," comparatively speaking.
Put another way, it truly is strange (and a bit chilling, almost) to hear Hitler without mustache.
I understand what you mean citing Arendt, but unlike Eichmann, what strikes me about this recording of Hitler is how eerily charismatic he comes across with the deep and sober voice, contrasted by Mannerheim's accented and presumably somewhat strained German. Hitler really respected Mannerheim though, as I understand. Maybe that plays a part too.
In some ways, but in relatively different ways. Hitler played the charismatic warrior figure; Stalin wrote books and tried to talk like a scholar (whilst promoting the likes of Lysenko).
Stalin was very well read and and could recall his sources quickly. He was also reckless and good looking - his career path is not that of your typical bank robber. Simon Sebag Montefiore has written some worthwhile books on his life. ‘Young Stalin’ is an interesting read [1].
So this article claims the conversation was covertly recorded, while the Wikipedia-article claims the opposite : the clearly visible microphone was used for an official recording and the recorder(!) kept it running afterwards.
Open mic recording after people expected to be closed is definitely a thing. The Russians in particular are famous for ensuring that Mike’s are almost always hot recorded, and then distributed to friendly sources after events of big meetings have occurred. Condi Rice, apparently read Putin the riot act, which was one of the things that soured the American/Russian relationship early on. They also did it to Hillary Clinton, who had a very similar response.
Might be because the secretary of state during Bush was a woman, as well as Obama. Both women pitched a "return to normalcy" with Russia - and both women were incredibly disappointed when their plans came to naught.
Because he didn't want to be recorded in a natural setting. His public image was very well managed.
* In the early years of his leadership of the NSDAP there were no pictures of him because he didn't let people take pictures of him.
* He never married (until the end) because he thought he would appeal more to women if he was a bachelor and would enhanced the idea that he was fully dedicated to Germany.
* There are pictures of him practicing his dramatic expressions. His photographer was supposed to destroy them, but he disobeyed and kept the photos. That is, he wasn't spontaneous, he practiced his poses a lot.
* He would exercise his right arm. Apparently holding your arm up is quite exhausting and he wanted to give strong and long salutes at marches.
(BTW, the reason he had a toothbrush mustache (even though many advised him to shave it because it provided cannon fodder for caricaturists) is because he thought his nose was big and a mustache distracted from it.)
> (BTW, the reason he had a toothbrush mustache (even though many advised him to shave it because it provided cannon fodder for caricaturists) is because he thought his nose was big and a mustache distracted from it.)
Actually it was a common mustache style through the 1940s. It marked the wearer as a WWI trench veteran as it would fit under the gas mask. Until the outbreak of conflict with Germany in 1938 it was quite common in the UK and France as well as Germany, Austria, and Italy, as can easily be verified by any number of contemporaneous photos. Note that the toothbrush mustache was worn by veterans of all classes in Peaky Blinders, for example.
The small mustache actually accentuated the size of his nose, but he was proud (and it was valuable) for him to be a veteran.
The mustache was branding. It was a fashion trend, made so by Charlie Chaplin. Of course, it became so much associated with Hitler, that any mustache now is immediately hitleresque.
Came to say the same. Another example: While H. was (at least at times) wearing glasses, I don't think there's a single photo or film recording showing him with glasses.
Back in 1812 Napoleon overestimated the abilities of his army which was perfectly suited for fighting in Western & Central Europe (Grande Armée) but had virtually no experience in the middle of the East European plain [0] the horrific outcome is one of the best studied in the history of military campaigns [1].
So, obviously Hitler and his military advisors were well aware of the huge risk, nonetheless they took it.
The explanation given in the recording (Who could have known that they could have produced over 35.000 tanks? Of which we have destroyed 34.000.) is an obvious exaggeration (the total number of all armored fighting vehicles was around 25.000 [2] at the time of the invasion) to deflect from major failures in strategic considerations e.g. underestimating the ruthless adaptability of the Soviets given their gigantic resources of land, oil and fighting men.
Because it is only when the Soviets got invaded they really began to ramp up the production of the legendary T-34 (from 3000 in 1941 to 15.000/year (!) until the end of the war in 1945) and their vast geography helped them to relocate more than half of the production sites from the West to the Ural Mountains way out of the reach for the Germans. So, the Blitzkrieg which worked brilliantly in Western & Central Europe got stuck at Stalingrad into a slow grind. Resulting into the broadest land front in military history with about 10 million military deaths on the Soviet side and about 5 million on the German/Axis side.[3]
Again, why the high risk? The necessity to secure oil fields?[4] Yes, but only paired with the pathological paranoia towards anything "bolshevik" as is evident in the recording.
So the recording is not only superficially remarkable as we hear Hitler's normal voice but also quite revealing about the rationalization taking place at a crucial point on the Eastern Front in 1942.
He was anti Russia and anyone who opposes Russia is a good guy.At least according to contemporary Western liberal logic.
I mean, if Bin Laden, came back to life and offered to send al qaeda to fight in Ukraine against the Russians, his 911 sins would be forgiven.The Canadian parliament would even probably fete him
I believe there is a renewed interest in Hitler's speeches due to alleged support of Palestine/Arabs and the encroachment of US/UK interests in the middle east/north Africa pre-ww2, for example, take this speech from the Reichstag in 1939: https://archive.is/BsJ1T
So I guess we should expect Trudeau to distract Canadians on their collapsing relationship with India by having the CBC launch a series of documentaries on the letters Hitler exchanged with Gandhi.
