Is murder ever justified? Consider any kind, including assassination

No. And ask yourself.
Do you really have the guts to look someone in the eye and end their life?

Killing other people simply goes against human instincts.

>baby Hitler killed
>nationalism doesn't become vilified and right-wing politics remain intact throughout the West

I'll take it

Depends on if I knew the outcome ahead of time. If it'd actually prevent massive loss of life, yes. If I didn't, I might just flip a coin desu.

Yes, personally I probably couldn't do it unless it was with a gun or some other desensitised method.
I think I'd let him live a little first. Like till mid 20s.

No.
If I built a time machine I'd have better things to do than kill Hitler.
If someone took me back in time and told me that some baby was Hitler I honestly wouldn't believe him.

>Do you really have the guts to look someone in the eye and end their life?
why do i have to look them in the eye?

Ultimately yes, since the lives of the millions killed by Hitler outweigh the life of one baby. However, I think every effort should be made to condition the child against his genocidal beliefs first.

Checkmate liberals

Of course I could kill baby Hitler. He's a baby, just drop a pillow on his face.
Easy.

I have never heard a good reason to consider the killing of innocent human beings morally acceptable. The strongest reason I've run into is in regards to abortion where a pro-lifer would agree that the unborn are biologically human beings but say that it's okay to kill them anyways because they're more likely to be poor, black, mentally defective, a product of rape, may have bad parents or a combination of these. They'll rarely hold this principle consistently though. For example they won't support the killing of an innocent adult man that was conceived by rape but they'll support the killing of an innocent unborn human that was conceived of rape.

I never understood the whole "time travel and kill hitler"
I mean, no one goes back in time to kill djengis khan. Why the hell would someone from the future care about a failed Austrian warlord?

because genghis khan victims have no face... while all of us have seen the faces of the victims of nazism

also, some of them have large beaks which helps a lot when we're talking about the propaganda masters

History channel documentaries don't count

>implying killing Hitler prevents WW2

lol

Almost everyone I've known resolves most of the complexities by declaring moral consideration contingent on powers of cognizance rather than DNA.
They will deny that they'd be okay with infanticide, but this is only because they don't want to be pariahs.

Because the western "enlightened" public school never teaches anybody of the legacy of rape, blood, fire, and destruction that Genghis has

>nationalism not causing several conflicts in areas like the Balkans and Palestine, causing the West to hate it anyways
Nationalism is a cancer anyways. You don't venerate the tools you use to build your achievements, you venerate the achievements you build with your tools. Although a good craftsman always should take care of his tools.

Yes. Some persons can't function in a society and just cause suffering or will cause suffering to people.

Just ship him to an orphanage in the US, he'l become a homesteader and become that weird old man who talks about the Jews too much but makes good enough moonshine that he can say what he wants.

It's a drain on society and there is a chance those people are set free.
And maybe I'm mentally ill or something but I find imprisoning someone for decades is far more cruel than just ending his life, quick and painless.
Some people can't be rehabilitated.

What? You know what a homestead is, right?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts
Hitler would just fuck off to Montana or something and live in a stick hut.

lrn2paralleluniverses

For high test warrior gene men its quite often in their instincts

>If I built a time machine I'd have better things to do than kill Hitler.
Like what?

I wouldn't because by definition he wouldn't have done anything at that point to be given the death penalty. It's like convicting someone of rape when they haven't even done the actual act, even though he would do it eventually a decade later. I would probably change his enviornment so that he wouldn't grow up to be the man he's infamous for. That or prevent the Treaty of Versailles, which gave him leverage to become the political figure he became.

I would do nothing. I would attempt to become a hermit so as to not interrupt the flow of time.

If we're talking some magical parallel universe device then I'd probably kidnap him or something to see how the world pans out without Hitler to lead the Nazi party.

Like telling him what he should have done better.

Bunch of fucking psychopaths. If you have the power to go back in time and have access to a baby Hitler then just take him with you and raise him yourself.

Who the fuck respond no to that question when millions of non-hitler babies are killed every year by a process accepted of the majority (abortion)?

>That or prevent the Treaty of Versailles, which gave him leverage to become the political figure he became.

Or just make Versailles actually be harsh and punish Germany as much as Post-WW2 peace did (country divided and militarily occupied)
This way, even if Hitler gets butthurt, he'll never have the means to chimp out

Sometimes I wonder, why doesn't alternate historical fiction take butterfly effect into account? This is the exact reason why it's shit - I've read several althis novels where one event changes (for example, the CSA wins the war or something) and everything else magically remains the same. It's just lazy as fuck writing.

...

>If you have the power to go back in time and have access to a baby Hitler then just take him with you and raise him yourself.
That sounds like a great plot for a Slice of Life manga! Man goes back in time to kill baby Hitler, but can't bring himself to actually do it and decides to stay in the 1890s, kidnap and raise him himself instead.

You'd need to make Hitler a girl, though.

I also just noticed that this Kill Me Baby reaction image I randomly chose has a fitting name.

Imagine if Hitler was accepted into the Vienna art school.

>Sometimes I wonder, why doesn't alternate historical fiction take butterfly effect into account?
Are you retarded? That is exactly what it is doing, it's a simple time travel paradox. You cannot go back in time to change the future because in the future you already went back in time and the 'future' events are those set up by you travelling back in time.

Fate and all that. It's why the current model of time travel is broken, and mine is sound. Literally has no paradox.

The universe has a circle and an 'ending' but it doesn't need one. The ending implies the end of existence and everything. The image really need to be updated, in between every line there is an infinite amount off lines and paths the 'wick' can take, that's just really illustrative and says it goes until it's stopped.

No, it doesn't. For example:

>Confederate states win the civil war and gain independence
>such major event has absolutely zero impact on the rest of the world, everything still happens the same way, the USSR, Hitler, WW2 and all of that shit

I'm not talking about any fucking paradoxes.

>leaving out literally every single other step which leads from a to z but only talking about step a and z
Yes, yes you are.

Yes, murder can be justified. As a self-defence, as the execution of a criminal or a traitor/spy.
>Baby Hitler
No. Because since history and people's behavior are determined by material factors, then some other person would be a Hitler's replacement. German monopolists would easily find another scapegoat who will multify their profits and then die as the greatest known villian so far.

Yes.

Yes, it's ok to kill evil people. Hitler did nothing wrong though so killing him wouldn't be justified.

>murder
'No'. Murder is defined as unlawful killing, meaning there is some form of lawful killing totally justifiable by the state (war).

Murder - no, by definition.
Killing - yes, depending on the circumstance and who is saying what.

>As a self-defence, as the execution of a criminal or a traitor/spy.
Oh, I forgot to mention war and guerrilla actions involving murder of collaborators and hostile officials.

Well let's see:

>America gets balkanized between USA and CSA
>America is now degraded to a second rate power, with no means of interventioning in major European wars
>if WW1 even happens, Germany likely comes out victorious
>German victory means no Versailles treaty
>no American WW1 victory means no Dawes and Young plan
>no Dawes and Young plan means Great depression doesn't skullfuck Germany
>no Great depression + no Versaillers treaty means no Hitler

etc

Althis fiction doesn't take this into account in any way whatsoever, they just think shit like Hitler or communism existed in a vacuum unaffected by the rest of the planet.

>You don't venerate the tools you use to build your achievements

That's completely fucking false.

>You could also travel backwards in time by simply traveling forward to the point where you find the universe you want but stop short of where you were in the timeline

Wasn't there a Futurama episode with this premise?

Killing a baby Hitler would do nothing to change the conditions that created his adult self. It would merely create a space that a similar person would inevitably fill, who is as likely to be worse as they are to be better.

Depends on the mechanics of time travel, but I'd probably kill Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, Confucius, Plato, and Lao Tze in their cribs to see what happens, and then go back in time to stop myself to get the control universe back.

Why is Hitler seen as the personification of evil?

go back to ribbit

>Hitler didn't like jews very much
>Jews rule the world
Add two and two together and what do you get?

Fuck.

Yeah.

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is Morality Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Shoot Him In The Back Of The Head Like Nigga Close Your Eyes Haha

>and then go back in time to stop myself to get the control universe back.
You went too far.

I'd go straight for Abraham.

Him too.
Isn't he probably not real though?

Events come and go but the ebb and flow of nations and empires doesn't change famalam

>implying history can be changed
>implying time isn't a flat circle
>implying you aren't living in bad faith by not embracing and loving your fate

Maybe it's because althis is a gay meme in the first place

>time flat circle meme

REEE why do you normies have to shit up my 'szche

>time isn't a flat circle

Wew lads.

>The greatest weight.-- What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: "This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!"
Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?

Vindicating your own life--or even just a moment of it--in your own eyes entails endorsing all the atrocities that have ever and will ever occur. Continually, repeatedly, indefinitely. To refuse to countenance this is simple cowardice.

Everything becomes and recurs eternally - escape is impossible! - Supposing we could judge value, what follows? The idea of recurrence as a selective principle, in the service of strength (and barbarism!!)...

To endure the idea of the recurrence one needs: freedom from morality; new means against the fact of pain ( pain conceived as a tool, as the father of pleasure...); the enjoyment of all kinds of uncertainty, experimentalism, as a counterweight to this extreme fatalism; abolition of the concept of necessity; abolition of the "will"; abolition of "knowledge-in-itself."

>'a' baby Hitler

Somehow the plural implication here makes me kek. Just how many baby Hitlers are there in this scenario. Do you get to pick or something?

This is awful and the yes answers vindicate Hitler's actions.
They would crush one dream for the sake of 6 million, but then how can they fault Hitler for crushing 6 million for the sake of 6 gorillion?
How many Jews have gained positions of wealth and power because anti-semitism became the greatest taboo?
How many Jews live in the state of Israel and now evade all criticism?
People are idiots.

it's the same principle, to kill a lesser number for a greater number's gain.
Where did the heroes go?

Imagine if he went into architecture like they had suggested?

Indefinite article just means hypothetical scenario

Nope because i have two better plans. Instead of killing Hitler when he is a baby, i would infiltrate the art school he applied to, and have him get accepted so he would be busy with art pursuits over military fascinations. Also if that doesn't work, i would take over for the CO that ordered Hitler to infiltrate the Nazi party and have him infiltrate a knitting club full of old ladies instead. No blood, and no guilt.

I would kill the Rotschilds if i had a time machine.