You can argue with a philosopher over that. But certain historical events can be over-determined, with enough causal factors prompting them that a given outcome is functionally inevitable.
Perhaps odds may favor “macro” events like “war”. They do not predict which countries are invaded, the brutality of the leader, the alliances, who the leader is, concentration camps, etc. but not a “Hitler”.
If you want to go back in time and prevent the Holocaust specifically, your time would be better well spent killing Henry Ford or Arthur de Gobineau or Martin Luther. Mass murder of Jews in Europe had been common place for centuries. It was a sentiment the Nazis capitalized on, not one they invented.
Similarly, if you wanted to deter shape of European politics that lead to the World Wars, temporal assassination of Bismark or Napoleon III would be far more effective. Those battle lines had been drawn well in advance of 1932.
You can argue with a philosopher over that. But certain historical events can be over-determined, with enough causal factors prompting them that a given outcome is functionally inevitable.
Perhaps odds may favor “macro” events like “war”. They do not predict which countries are invaded, the brutality of the leader, the alliances, who the leader is, concentration camps, etc. but not a “Hitler”.
If you want to go back in time and prevent the Holocaust specifically, your time would be better well spent killing Henry Ford or Arthur de Gobineau or Martin Luther. Mass murder of Jews in Europe had been common place for centuries. It was a sentiment the Nazis capitalized on, not one they invented.
Similarly, if you wanted to deter shape of European politics that lead to the World Wars, temporal assassination of Bismark or Napoleon III would be far more effective. Those battle lines had been drawn well in advance of 1932.
You’re simultaneously arguing that history cannot be deflected, yet are offering candidates for hypothetical assassination that would do just that.
Pick one.