Why You Need to Listen to Hitler’s Speech

On November 9th, 1942, Adolf Hitler took the stage to deliver a speech reflecting on Germany’s recent actions. Toward the end of his address, he specifically referenced the invasion and decimation of Warsaw, the capital of Poland. You can find the full translation of that speech, completed in the 1940s, here. Recently, an alternate AI-generated translation, mimicking Hitler’s voice and using more modern and colloquial language, went viral on TikTok. While the platform swiftly removed the audio, the excerpt and the recording remain accessible, capturing the following unsettling passage: 

“You know I didn’t do that for months. I didn’t drop a bomb on Paris. I asked for surrender 5 times before we attacked Warsaw, everything was refused. I asked that the women and children be sent out of the area. Not even the parliamentarian was received, everything was rejected. And only then did I decide to do what is permitted under any martial law. 

When the English started dropping bombs, I waited a month or two and did nothing. We–we were already strong enough to do it. I waited. I thought maybe reason would return after all. It was different. You think it’s not different today?” 

The audio in the viral video included intense, cinematic background music, the kind you might hear in an action movie, amplifying the impact of the speech. Listening to the audio was far more compelling than merely reading the words. When I first came across the TikTok, it was paired with a Star Wars: The Clone Wars edit, and I was immediately captivated. The combination of modern vernacular with the speaker’s passionate delivery, his strategic use of tone, volume, and emphasis, drew me in. The speech’s logic appeared straightforward and coherent. It wasn’t until I opened the comments that I realized, to my horror, that the speech I had been unconsciously listening to was Hitler’s defense of the atrocities committed in Warsaw, Poland.

Many other TikTokers—in the comments section and on other videos—had the same reaction, expressing shock at how logical, convincing, and, most disturbingly, normal he sounded. This experience left me deeply concerned about humanity’s vulnerability to future demagogues—political leaders who gain support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than through sound, rational argument. The history of demagoguery is filled with names like Benito Mussolini, Joseph McCarthy, and even more modern figures such as Vladimir Putin and Jair Bolsonaro—leaders whose charismatic oratory and strategic manipulation of public sentiment allowed them to gain and maintain power. While our education system emphasizes the dangers of demagogues like Hitler, it often fails to highlight their most powerful weapon: the art of rhetoric and oratory.

When studying oratory and rhetoric in high school, we are typically exposed to the works of renowned figures such as Aristotle, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and perhaps even Cicero—some of the greatest orators in history, but also among the most politically and morally commendable. While analyzing these speeches is undoubtedly valuable, focusing solely on the words of “good” leaders can create an implicit association between rhetorical excellence and moral righteousness. It can lead us to believe that a powerful or well-constructed speech is inherently aligned with truth and logic. The reality, however, is far more complicated. Many demagogues throughout history were not necessarily logical or rational in their beliefs, but their mastery of rhetoric allowed them to make their arguments seem both logical and rational.

As someone with seven years of speech and debate experience, I can confidently share a widely accepted truth in the debate community: if you want to understand and solve a debate, you must rely on logic and reason. However, if you want to win a debate, you simply have to perform as if you did—especially when the audience listening is, to put it simply, filled with “laymen” who aren’t there to analyze the logic and rationality behind the topic. The distinction is critical, and it is often lost on audiences who equate confidence and charisma with correctness. This makes mankind especially vulnerable to demagogues as they focus primarily around winning an election rather than solving the problems they were elected to fix. 

Schools, understandably, are reluctant to showcase speeches by dangerous demagogues. Many of these speeches, including those by Hitler, are laced with hate speech and dangerous ideologies that could corrupt young minds. However, avoiding them entirely does a disservice to future generations. By studying the speeches of demagogues, students could learn to discern when a speech is merely convincing as opposed to actually logical and rational. They could develop the critical thinking skills necessary to differentiate between manipulative persuasion and sound argumentation.

In a world increasingly influenced by powerful voices across social media, politics, and entertainment, this skill is not merely academic—it is essential. The ability to recognize when an argument appeals to emotions and prejudices rather than reason and evidence can safeguard us from falling victim to charismatic leaders with dangerous agendas. Teaching our youth to analyze not only who is speaking but how and why they are speaking could be the difference between a society that upholds truth and one that is led astray by false prophets. As history has shown, the latter is a path fraught with peril—and it is our responsibility to ensure that history does not repeat itself. In conclusion? You need to listen to Hitler’s speech.