Would you kill baby Hitler?

[Jumpin]

SpokenTruth said:

Jumpin said:

This goes beyond the scope of the question. It's not "How would you raise baby Hitler" it's would you kill or not kill him. The question ceases to be interesting if you change the path of history in any other way. So, choosing not to kill Hitler means 6 million Jews and 79 million others will die; killing baby Hitler takes a key genocidal figure out of history; keep in mind, without Hitler, it's very possible Nazis would not have risen in Germany - it was not German nature to be fascist or anti-Semitic relative to the rest of the world (Russia was the anti-Semitic nation pre-Hitler). Hitler forged the country in that way during a period of vulnerability.

But you can't have that scenario.  If you elect to kill him, you are doing so with the knowledge of his future actions (otherwise you are killing a random baby for no reason).  And if you have knowledge of his future actions, you have the power to change those actions.

These strict hypotheticals are always premised as a no win situation. I prefer to take the Kobayashi Maru route.

There is not a "no win" situation. It's a scenario A or scenario B scenario where scenario A is to repeat history and scenario B is removing a specific historical figure which will have a fundamental effect on the future since Hitler most certainly did have a profound influence.

Yes you are killing Hitler with the knowledge of his future actions, that's the point. But going outside of the boundaries of the question, as I mentioned, makes the question uninteresting, because then it changes the nature of the question into "What would you do with Baby Hitler?"

A vote for "No" is a vote to kill 6 million Jews and 79 million others in the war inevitably started; having any other outcome invalidates the question. Killing Baby Hitler is only a dilemma if it is the only way to change history.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 02 April 2019