Differences Between Hitler And Eisenhower

Hitler, the political leader of Germany during WW2, strived to create a “perfect race”. The building of this race was at the expense of Jews and other minorities he thought of as inferior. Since the minorities were less than human in Hitler’s eyes, he imagined that the art did not belong to them. Rather than Hitler stealing their art, in his eyes the Jews stole his art. This perspective differs greatly from Eisenhower’s, the Commander-in-Chief of the US army during WW2. Eisenhower thought hat the art belonged to the culture and people in it. Despite their differences, both Eisenhower’s memo and Hitler’s “Decree of the Fuhrer” had a distinct motive and used rhetoric persuasive appeals. Their views heavily influenced people under their command

They both shared the overarching need to inform the people they ruled and get a certain job done. However, while Eisenhower was focused on retrieving the art in order to preserve culture, Hitler’s focus was more for retrieving art in order to uphold his “Weltanschauung,”, or worldview. Eisenhower expresses his concern for the art in the very first lines of his memo he states, “Today we [Americans] are fighting in a country which has contributed a great deal to our cultural inheritance, a country rich in monuments which by their creation helped and now in their old age illustrate the growth of the civilization which is ours. We are bound to respect those monuments so far as war allows” (Eisenhower 1) . By this comment, Eisenhower makes clear that cultural inheritance lays the foundation for one’s civilization. It is the backbone of a society, and helps us prosper. Without the preservation of art, a civilization’s culture will be diminished. Eisenhower and Hitler both share a wish for protecting art from war, but Hitler’s wish is much more sinister. Hitler, like Eisenhower makes his motive clear in the first couple of lines. In “Decree of the Fuhrer” he states, “Jews, Free Masons, and those opponents of National Socialism who are affiliated with them on the basis of “Weltanschauung”, are the authors of the present war against the Reich [German state]. The systematic spiritual battle against these forces is a

They used ethos, logos, and pathos which were Aristotle’s 3 persuasive audience appeals. These tactics reflect a similar point of view, despite their differences in the war. There was extensive use of ethos which can be depicted through the associations mentioned and the position the writer held. In the “Decree of the Fuhre”, associations like “Chief of the Wehrmacht High Command” and “NSDAP” are mentioned which assert ethos. In the Eisenhower memo, mentions of “A.M.G officers” and the military serve the same purpose. The associations mentioned create a sense of authority and formality which both authors wanted to convey. A document from someone who was under the command of either officers would be helpful. It could give exact insight on how the audience reacted to these different persuasive appeals and whether or not the commander was able to conjure the duty they wanted to conjure. Hitler and Eisenhower also both used logos. They gave logical reasons to support why they sent out their command. Hitler supported his order for confiscating Jewish art, with the claim that the art was interfering with his “Weltanschauung”. Likewise, Eisenhower supported his order for salvaging art with the claim that art and culture help a civilization flourish. This use of logos shows that both authors believed and wanted others to believe that their command was moral and a