Is Hitler misunderstood?
It depends on when we are talking aboutI think its pretty hard to misunderstand Hitler, he laid out his vision and prejudices pretty clearly in his book Mein Kampf long before he came to powerI think Hitler was underestimated right up until the start of World War 2 , many believed that once in power he would moderate his views. he had extensive support for a lot of his policies and people chose to ignore some of his more uncomfortable views. Even as late as September 1939 it was thought he could be talked round.After the war Hitler has been one of the most studied individuals of the 20th century, there are numerous biographies about him as well as his own works to study, anyone wanting to understand Hitler has a wealth of evidence available. Admittedly many of these were written post war but there are many works that predate this.Popular portrayals of Hitler as a raving lunatic may have led to a certain degree of misunderstanding of his true character, but I think today he is fairly well understood
Napoleon: Tyrant, or misunderstood?
You are essentially correct about Napoleon. In the early years, the wars he fought, and won were defensive in nature. Whenever a coalition army rose and threatened Republican France, Napoleon went out to meet them. Mostly he fought in other countries, to prevent France itself from suffering the ravages of war. Even after the battle of Lodi, when he was reputed to have led the charge across the bridge to gain the victory, Napoleon repeatedly denied it, giving the credit to Lannes, one of his favorite officers, and without a doubt one of the most courageous. Although it is often referred to as an act of madness, or a move to tyrany, Napoleon had himself crowned emperor in an attempt to appease the European royalists, who viewed the republic as a threat to their very existance. Napoleon admitted that the peninsular war might have been a mistake, but the Spanish royals were also of the House of Bourbon, related to the deposed king of France, and had violated various agreements with Napoleon. He was threatened from the south and didn't have much choice. It is difficult to know all of Bonaparte's motives nearly two hundred years later. Unfortunately history is most often written by the victor. We can only go by what we find in the literature and make our judgements from there. The most fascinating fact is that the French people themselves, and especially the army, never viewed Napoleon as a tyrant. Only his enemies made that kind of accusation.
Was Hitler misunderstood?
Yes, no one understood he was pure evil until it was too late.
Is the Prophet Muhammad the most misunderstood person in history by non-Muslims? Why or why not?
Whether he is “misunderstood” by non-Muslims depends entirely on whether Muslims are correct in their perceptions of him.A person who is everything for over a billion followers must have been so great as human being but today many people talk negatively about him but they are not as critical to Jesus or Buddha.Well, first off, the number of people today who follow Muhammad proves nothing at all about how good or bad he was as a living man - the “over a billion followers” never met him and are merely believing that he was a great man.In the year 1000, over 350 years after Muhammad’s death, there were still only roughly 400 million people in the world, and fewer than 10% of those were Muslims. In the year 700, the Muslim population reached roughly 1% of the world population - we don’t have a firm total for that century, but extrapolating, we can estimate roughly 300 million… meaning roughly 3 million Muslims. And this is after roughly 75 years of rapid and aggressive proselytizing by the caliphate after Muhammad’s death - so we can fairly estimate that far fewer than 1 million Muslims actually knew Muhammad while he was alive.Secondly, millions were drawn in by Adolf Hitler’s charisma, and followed him fanatically, but that doesn’t mean he was a great man. I’m not saying Muhammad was like Hitler - just pointing out that widespread popularity doesn’t prove anything about a man’s character.Thirdly, the things people criticize about Muhammad (e.g., violent conquest, forced conversions, marrying a six-year-old) simply don’t apply to Jesus or Buddha. It’s like asking, “Why are some people so critical of John Brown, but not of Harriet Tubman?” Well, because the thing people criticize about Brown is that he led a bloody insurrection… which Tubman never did.So, in other words, your question will really only reveal one thing: whether a given person answering is or is not an orthodox Muslim.Muslims will all (or at least mostly) say, “Yes, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is grievously misunderstood by non-Muslims.” Non-Muslims will say, “No, he’s not misunderstood - he just had a lot of flaws.”
Who was the worst ever communist: Karl Marx, Stalin or Hitler?
Hitler was no communist - he hated communism. Stalin was worst, because he took a theory (Marx's) and twisted it and used it as justification to create a totalitarian regime that bastardized the theory and enriched a small group of followers at the expense of the freedom and human rights of his people.
Was Hitler the most powerfull person of all time?
He was successful, but I don’t think that equates to power, necessarily. He just did a lot bigger things than most others in his capacity ever have.More powerful candidates? Well, Stalin certainly gave him a run for his money, both during & after the war - he annexed many new territories into the USSR, forming the largest country the world has ever seen. He even did this as his countrymen were exhausted from WWII, as Russia took probably the worst beating of any country in the war.