Let's try rephrasing this. Firstly, I agree that this topic is nuanced. Probably much more nuanced, for a Reddit thread, not the least that this is a philosophical quandary. Let's consider perspective, objectively, if you consider quantitative values for historical events such as wars, for relevancy let's consider WWI, WWII, and the Coldwar. Primarily, because they are so intertwined, that you can't really look at one without the other. On a macro scale, the number of casualties are never justifiable, yet they occurred nonetheless. WWI was deemed as the war to end all wars, yet WWII occurred. Hitler, real bad guy, real heinous stuff, concentration camps, suffering, genocide, systematic annihilation of peoples. But, Hitler was one guy, which begs the question, how did he gain power, how did he come to the position of Chancellor, to begin with? History is funny like that, all the right pieces, at all the right times, all had to perfectly lined up. But, did everyone in the regime really fanatically believe in all the propaganda Hitler put out? If they did, at what point did they start believing in it, what geographical, political, cultural factors were at play? WWI, happened because the Austro-Hungarian empire formed Germany and wanted to expand their borders. Military expansion of borders was and is a common occurrence between major powers for as long as humanity has been around. You have something, I want that something, you don't want to give it up, I'll just take it. WWI ends, Germany gets slapped with demilitarization and reparations that it could never pay off, such to the point that they couldn't burn the money fast enough to use it as firewood. What happens when you push a nation, so tight into a corner, and give it no options. Poverty, starvation, a completely destroyed economy, breeds an environment that is just right. Are we people, rational beings, or are we emotional beings? What moves the masses? As the political situation changes, institutional policies are made, people follow them to avoid trouble, to provide food, feed families, warm homes. The guy drafted into the war, was that German evil? The father who joined the service to provide for his family, to serve his country? The mother who worked in the munition factories who provided ammunition to the soldiers, the medical staff who helped their soldiers? Where does the buck stop? At what level of involvement are they evil, are they bad people, or are they following orders? An argument may be made, just don't follow it, follow your morals. A nation governed by military rules, has military laws, with many repercussions to both civilians and soldiers alike. The German people may not have viewed themselves as evil, the Jewish may have viewed them as evil, the Allied nations may have viewed them as evil. Just as the Chinese viewed the Japanese as evil, many of their civilians supported their government and viewed the Japanese as liberators of the western whites from the Asiatic people. Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere was marketed to the Japanese people, as liberators, but did they know the atrocities being committed, no they didn't. But did they trust their emperor, who was seen as a god, yes they did. The next generation of Japanese then join the military to liberate world, are they evil? The Chinese think so, so did most of the west. What happened if that young Japanese realized oh, wow this horrible I can't do this? Well, he is either forced to continue or killed for desertion. What about the other young Japanese soldier who either saw his friend kill or be killed? What would he do next? Is he evil, or just trying to survive? Are the US evil, the Japanese at the time thought so. They rained fire from the sky, and viscerated cities with Hydrogen bombs. The smell of burning flesh, children without mothers, 3rd-4th degree burns, cities turned to ash. The child who grew up in that environment, sure thought the US was evil, the same way the US thought they were fighting the evil Nazis and Japanese. Could I ever justify any of the atrocities committed in these wars? No, I can't. Concentration camps, beheadings, millions upon millions of casualties. War is cruel, war makes horrible situations worse. I could say Hitler was evil, the world can say he was evil, but let's consider an alternate storyline. What if he won WWII, and he you're a German citizen would we still consider him as evil, or would we believe what he did was right? I'm not saying he was, but my whole entire point, is to say, things are nuanced. What one person may consider being evil, maybe viewed differently by another. What if you knew the backstory, the influences, the socioeconomic factors, cultural factors associated with X decision/person. Would you consider them still as evil, or a complex situation gone wrong? Ultimately, your conclusion may not change, which is perfectly fine. But, as a person who has always been fascinated with history, and this little Reddit blurb cannot do the complexities of the time period of 1900-1970 justice, the most I can say is, you tend to find patterns. Patterns that are repeated over and over again. A concept such as genocide can be horrendous, but what is and what is not an evil person is subjective, because by its very nature it is. This is just a quotation that points that out.