Compare And Contrast Hitler And Stalin

Hitler and Stalin rose to power after WWI and became known for their dictatorships that affected the lives of millions. They are examples of people who should not be leading a country. If, in fact, we imagine that we have these two individuals to choose from as President of the United States, we have to weigh the odds to decide who might do less damage to our country. Hitler would be a better President of the United States than Stalin because he was chosen by the people, he worked to privatize the industry, and he had the goal of using his power to improve Germany for the citizens.

Hitler was a charismatic leader who rose to power because the people liked him. He made policies on behalf of his followers and worked with the system to get what

Stalin was able to manipulate the system and gain trust from the higher power to secure his position. This is not how the U.S. government operates. We elect officials, similar to Germany at the time that Hitler came to power. Hitler was already a powerful speaker and used the existing Nazi Party to work his way up to the top of the Weimar Republic. Hitler was elected as Chancellor in an existing political system. He won the position due to his popularity based on promises he made to the populace of Germany, similar to how American Presidents are elected to power SOURCE???. The American system of Government has certain checks and balances built into it to prevent an elected leader from becoming a dictator or from modifying the government using strong-arm tactics. It would be less detrimental for the United States to have a leader who is willing to work within an established government system, as the checks and balances set forth in the U.S. Constitution would likely prevent that person from obtaining absolute power. Hitler used the people’s trust and an established system to gain power, while Stalin used force to push himself into