NationStates Jolt Archive

Question: who do you think is more cruel and unusual: Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Hussain? Please give reasons!

I think it was Hitler; he did so much more ethnic cleansing than the other three (don't get me wrong, the others did do some, but not to the same extent as Hitler)

Ridiculous thread.

I just want to know what people think so: if you've got nothing worth saying, don't say anything and it'll just go away

I just want to know what people think so: if you've got nothing worth saying, don't say anything and it'll just go away

Seriously though how can you compare evil?!

Seriously though how can you compare evil?!
cruel and unusal then; is that better?

cruel and unusal then; is that better?

No!

I just want to know what people think so: if you've got nothing worth saying, don't say anything and it'll just go away

I know Sean has a tendency to slag off threads he has no interest in, but on this occasion, I have to agree with him.

Explain to me then, as I obviously don't know, what i should put

Hitler at least he wasnt a dirty commie

Explain to me then, as I obviously don't know, what i should put

Nothing. They were all evil. You can't really say "But this one's better than that one" when they are/were all terrible.

I know Sean has a tendency to slag off threads he has no interest in

Interesting accusation. Prove it.

Hitler at least he wasnt a dirty commie

Idiot.

Hitler at least he wasnt a dirty commie
why does everyone slag off the communists?

Hitler at least he wasnt a dirty commie

Neither were Stalin or Mao.

[Grosse, you could have just invited discussion for cruel/evil figures in history... actually if you'd done that it would very quickly degenerate into an anti-Bush diatribe, so I'll take that back]

I would have to say Hitler although Stalin comes incredibly close.

Hitler for the following reasons:

1. Blind racism and prejudice - He believed Jews were inferior beings and were to blame for Germany's loss in WWII. He also believed black men and women were hopeless at sport (that one did a 180 on him) and considered most foriegners to be evil and just vacant land for the taking.

2. Attempted genocide - He killed a lot of Jews in concentration camps and he used barbaric instances of torture. Also not to mention the massive campaign against killing all disabled babies.

3. Lying and propoganda spreading - The Ein Volk, Ein Riech, Ein Furher. Just one instance of propoganda spread by old hairy legs. He also used the 'ethnic education' to brainwash his civillians. Not to mention his secret police that beat the living hell out of anyone who wised up and realised that what he was doing was madness.

4. Restriction of poltical freedoms - He stopped democracy in Germany dead in it's tracks but you also couldn't be a communist or socialist. If it was revealed you were either shot or imprisoned. Facism was the only system and if you didn't like it, too bad.

5. Slave labour - This problem is still coming up all over the place with General Motors and BMW. They are claiming that they were "forced" to use slave labour and that they were victims too despite the massive evidence to the contrary. Slave labour isn't a too much of a problem these days but paying people slave wages doesn't seem to be beneath most American companies. But moving on.

Stalin was indeed a pyschopath who bent every single rule of communism to benefit him and only him. Not too mention the mass murder and basic slavery.

Saddam was indeed an evil bastard who slaughtered many Irani's and many Shiites and Kurds. He let his people starve but he wasn't on the same scale as Hitler or Stalin.

Mao caused many of his people to starve as well and inspired an almost complete suppresion of political freedoms but not on the same scale as the last three.

Interesting accusation. Prove it.
Oh come on, you know how often you post "This is a ridiculous thread" on badly-worded topics.

Oh come on, you know how often you post "This is a ridiculous thread" on badly-worded topics.

No, I don't. Enlighten me.

No, I don't. Enlighten me.

;)

Ridiculous thread.

Agreed. What is this, American Bandstand for tyrants? "Well Dick, I kinda liked Hitler, because he really knew how to organize a genocide, but for raw killing entertainment I have to go with Stalin."

well, given the circumstances they faced, when they inhereited the country from their predecessors, you could say they did evil to do good. in other words, another point of view. they united a country.

Another point of view. World war 2 would not have started if Britain and France had not declared war. But why Poland? because Poland was formed from former Prussia, which contains the German port city of Dansk. I think the aim was to reunify all German peoples into one, but that became an all out war.

Another point of view. Due in part by propaganda and in part by the great eastern war on the russian front, my guess is the russian people are more afraid of the germans than stalin, and apparently, stalin only harmed elites as well as dissidents, which is what most countries are doing now anyway, be it democratic or communist.

Can't exactly blame Mao for the disaster also. He unleased the Cultural revolution to regain power and influence, but i think the experiment went too far, and it became the gang of four that control policies, not Mao. The gang of four had interests in Mao regaining his power from other comrades.

yada yada .. lots of stories, just keep an open mind. after all, when you think something threatens you, you will view it as evil. regardless of its intentions.

well, given the circumstances they faced, when they inhereited the country from their predecessors, you could say they did evil to do good. in other words, another point of view. they united a country.

Another point of view. World war 2 would not have started if Britain and France had not declared war. But why Poland? because Poland was formed from former Prussia, which contains the German port city of Dansk. I think the aim was to reunify all German peoples into one, but that became an all out war.

Another point of view. Due in part by propaganda and in part by the great eastern war on the russian front, my guess is the russian people are more afraid of the germans than stalin, and apparently, stalin only harmed elites as well as dissidents, which is what most countries are doing now anyway, be it democratic or communist.

Can't exactly blame Mao for the disaster also. He unleased the Cultural revolution to regain power and influence, but i think the experiment went too far, and it became the gang of four that control policies, not Mao. The gang of four had interests in Mao regaining his power from other comrades.

yada yada .. lots of stories, just keep an open mind. after all, when you think something threatens you, you will view it as evil. regardless of its intentions.

Just when I thought the thread couldn't get any more ridiculous or ignorant we get the Oprah Club for misunderstood mass murderers.

Incredible.

Personally, I have been rather scared of Mao since Monty Python's "And Now For Something Completely Different". All 4 of these guys were sadistic wackos, but I would have to say Stalin, because he killed the most (estimated 20,000,000). He threw a guy in the gulags (who later died there) for writing a poem about his mustache, for god's sake.

Just when I thought the thread couldn't get any more ridiculous or ignorant we get the Oprah Club for misunderstood mass murderers.

Incredible.

Nah, I like it. Defending the indefensible is far more interesting that taking the moral high ground.

I'll take none of the above. I pick Ariel Sharon as the cruelest and most unusual despot to walk the planet these days.

I'll take none of the above. I pick Ariel Sharon as the cruelest and most unusual despot to walk the planet these days.
riiiiight. I have to remind you that he doesn't kill people because they're arabs, he doesn't have an SS to silence anyone who dares speak out and he got voted in democratically, and then kept power democratically.

riiiiight. I have to remind you that he doesn't kill people because they're arabs, he doesn't have an SS to silence anyone who dares speak out and he got voted in democratically, and then kept power democratically.

Plus he doesn't speak very clearly at all, and he can't grasp basic paragraph structure - he's a rubbish dictator.

Agreed. What is this, American Bandstand for tyrants? "Well Dick, I kinda liked Hitler, because he really knew how to organize a genocide, but for raw killing entertainment I have to go with Stalin."

Hehe. My point exactly. You just put it in a slightly more entertaining and yet also slightly less provocative manner.

;)

:mad:

riiiiight. I have to remind you that he doesn't kill people because they're arabs, he doesn't have an SS to silence anyone who dares speak out and he got voted in democratically, and then kept power democratically.

I think after indirectly causing the intifada, Ariel Sharon has successfully scared the Israelis into voting for Likud and the fundamentalist Jewish parties.

On dictators, I think most dictators were voted in democratically. it also depends on the angle of media coverage too. after all, propaganda is prevalent in all media, so the amount of cover up done differs from state to state.

But then again, people have opinions on elections all the time. like election fraud, or voters not mature enough to decide, or candidates on offer are not acceptable .. blah blah.

Walt Disney or no-one.

Hitler : Rotting in Hell.
Stalin: ibid.
Mao: Ditto.
Hussein: The clock is ticking.

they have been/will be joined by Bokassa, Ceausescu, the Duvaliers, Kim Il Sung and his son, Kim Jong Il, Mussoloni, Saloth Sar (Pol Pot) and numerous others like them.

May their eternal torture be long and miserable.

Come to think of it, I'm the best leader [dictator] around. All my people love me [constant threat of revolt]. They eat daily feasts [mass starvation] and are always involved in the democratic process [forced one-party voting]. There are some who plot against me sometimes . . . what's that? . . . you're holding a knife! . . . Liar! You're no chef! Guards! Guards!! *Some Chef Boyarde looking guy is placed in a truck after being interogated [beaten into a near coma], send to a re-education super-duper-happy fun area [prison camp] and re-educated [shot in the back of the head]*

Seriously though how can you compare evil?!

You can't since 'evil' is an airy fairy concept constantly dredged up in order to simplify the worlds problems.

Well... this thread could have been kind of interesting. The idea here is to spread and exchange knowledge, so attacking the thread rather sucked.

Oh well, if I had to choose one who was more cruel and unusual I would have to say Stalin. Saddam and Mao just kind of strike me as being as being minors in being twisted and sadistic when compaired to Hitler and Stalin. I also tend to have a lot of respect for Hitler in terms of his genius.

Yeah, I'm probably going to get a lot of people jumping down my throat about this, but think about it for a second. Just set aside the atrocities he commited for a second (yes, I do condemn him for the same atrocities most do) and look at the way he ascended to power. Hitler didn't take control of Germany by force. He won through the ballot box, and managed to bring the Nazi party into power even though they did not win the majority of the population. In fact, the Nazi's only won 30%, but being the largest single minority he won the government.

Then he also managed to bring Germany out of the Great Depression before any other country by converting the entire economy to a military production economy. He also gained a lot of popularity by causing Germans to think that he could help the return to an idealistic Germany that had never actually existed outside of people's dreams.

Anyway, back to the point. This softens my opinion of Hitler a bit, and leaves me with Stalin as being the most twisted and sick of the four. Now, I don't know the same amount about Stalin as I do Hitler, but the raw killing factor is incredible.

Well... this thread could have been kind of interesting. The idea here is to spread and exchange knowlege, so attacking the thread rather sucked.

Shutup.

Shutup.

Excuse me? I was simply staing my opinion on the way things were handled here. If you have a problem with the thread, leave it alone and it won't be a problem for you anymore. If you have a problem with me, too bad, I'm allowed to have an opinion and express it here.

Excuse me? I was simply staing my opinion on the way things were handled here. If you have a problem with the thread, leave it alone and it won't be a problem for you anymore. If you have a problem with me, too bad, I'm allowed to have an opinion and express it here.

You are not the problem. Your opinion is not the problem. The problem is the idea that one bad guy is better than another. Hitler was no better or no worse than these other guys. This whole thread stinks so badly of shit that my dog's licking the screen. You can't measure evil on the scale of these guys!

You are not the problem. Your opinion is not the problem. The problem is the idea that one bad guy is better than another. Hitler was no better or no worse than these other guys. This whole thread stinks so badly of shit that my dog's licking the screen. You can't measure evil on the scale of these guys!

And that would simply be your opinion. I believe that the original question may have been ambiguous, and that no, you can't actually compare who was badder than the other, because it was all relative to the people effected. For those of us who were not directly effected, they may all seem the same.

Hey, I know. Let's stop spamming this poor guy's thread and let anyone who might actually understand what the question was implying answer.

This thread has some very important thought, although maybe not asking the question quite directly.
My thoughts on this-
These are all fine examples of the worst humanity can be and what we would hope not to allow again.
Hitler, Stalin and Mao are far worse by the sheer reach of power they had. Hussain would have done so as well, if he could have.
I find it curious that both Hitler and Hussain (I don't know enough about Stalin and Mao to say for sure), would only tolerate 'Yes' men on their advising council. Hussain thought he had more weapons, more advances in his weapons, because his advisors lied to him to save their own necks.
I think in all cases, the saying fits: "Power corrupts.."
Most worrysome to me is watching Bush put together a cabinet of "yes" people.

Hitler was more evil cuz he gobbled cocks.

Hussein and Mao r not nearly as bad as Hitler or Stalin.

Agreed. What is this, American Bandstand for tyrants? "Well Dick, I kinda liked Hitler, because he really knew how to organize a genocide, but for raw killing entertainment I have to go with Stalin."
Well, that's ethnic cleansing for you.. NOW ARE YOU READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL?!