....it was totally despicable and wrong.....
Then don't you see how you just contradicted yourself ? You're saying that it was "wrong". If all that is , is only a subjective opinion to you and your present society,
then why should Hitler care what you think ? It's only wrong to YOU. It wasn't wrong for THEM. And perhaps they don't care what you think ? They liked Chocolate, you like Vanilla.
So on your view, Hitler wasn't objectively wrong. They were free to set their own moral code, and no one from the outside , like yourself, can say : "That's objectively always wrong to murder people".
I suspect that when you say the Nazi's were "wrong", you DON'T mean that subjectively. Instead you mean .... that they were
TRULY *wrong* and shouldn't have killed those innocent people. Right ? If so, then you DO believe in objective moral absolutes, that transcend what anyone thinks. And thus just contradicted yourself.
Are you not seeing it ?
.....The fact that history happened as it did backs the claim that morals are subjective....
Then why are you now contradicting yourself and saying they were "wrong". Because it's only wrong to YOUR flavor and opinion, not their's. To you it might be "evil", but not to them. So who are you to push your morals on them by calling their behavior "wrong" ? Don't you see how you're contradicting yourself ??
....What trumped the 3rd Reich's tyranny was the fact that their power to exercise moral authority was taken away by the allies who along with a world of non-Nazi's determined that the trustworthiness to make decisions that are right and good was not something the regime should be allowed to continue having.....
Then on your view, if Hitler had won the war.... Like if his scientists had invented the atom bomb first, and had brought America, Russia, and Britain to our knees. Then, just like he did so well in Germany in the 1930s, the indoctrination starts for all his conquered countries (and the others he chose to conquer, conceivably the entire world he had in mind). And so now, 3 generations later, let's say we all believe (by majority vote) that murder of Jews in gas chambers is good. Therefore , on your view, in that turn of world events : It would be good to murder Jews. Right ? After all, moral values, on your view, are subjective. And there is no "outside scoring card" we can call on to adjudicate. It's strictly what society's majority decides is "good".
Can't you see the folly of your view ?
....Don't conflate the idea of right and wrong being subjective with the idea that they are not real. Right and wrong are real concepts that do exist that humans give definition to that are sometimes malleable.....
Wait, you're contradicting yourself again. On the one hand, you say they're subjective and relative. Right ?
BUT NOW look closely at what you've written. You are NOW saying that "Right and wrong are
real" (which I take to mean "objectively" real).
And as for "malleable", let's take that for a test drive : Truth-OT : Would you include the following moral values to be "malleable", or "absolute" 1) murder of innocent people. 2) Rape. If you say that these two things are always wrong and not malleable, then you DO BELIEVE IN [some] OBJECTIVE MORAL ABSOLUTES and have thus contradicted yourself. Care to try to pull yourself out of this pickle ? Unless of course you say that murder and rape are sometimes cool, if a society votes that it is.
.... People within societies together determine what behaviors are acceptable and not acceptable for members of the society to engage in...
Correct. And that exactly what the Nazi's did. So on your view, that was ok for them . They did indeed "determine what behaviors were acceptable", didn't they ? And now your saying it was "wrong", is really only saying "I don't prefer it" (like ice cream flavors). Yet Nazi's thought otherwise, so for them, it wasn't "wrong". ok ?