NationStates Jolt Archive

If you could choose which of these people had never been born which would you choose and why?

You may choose other, and provide the name with your post.

Stalin. He did the most stupid level of counterproductive killing on that list. Sure, he was in power while Russia became industrialised, but Lenin started that, and it was bound to happen anyway, without slaughtering millions.

Myself. That'd take care of all the problems, from my perspective. Those guys are just too many to choose from...

I say 'Charlemagne' cos he sounds french.

If you said 'Hitler' than you should read Stephen Fry's 'Making History' and it'll put you off the idea. Great book too.

uhh, lol I don't see how any book could make me not dislike Hitler.

I say 'Charlemagne' cos he sounds french.

If you said 'Hitler' than you should read Stephen Fry's 'Making History' and it'll put you off the idea. Great book too.

Indeed, it would put one off the idea of killing people from history entirely.

And yes, Charlemagne was French.

Which is why I choose none of the above. The world is as the world is, and though some of those might make the world better, they might equally make it worse. On a personal level, I try not to be vindictive, it's counterproductive.

Only ONE person on the poll is still alive.

Not really a fair comparison, eh?

I must say, you must really think highly of Bush to put him in such um... "esteemed" company.

Only ONE person on the poll is still alive.

Not really a fair comparison, eh?

I must say, you must really think highly of Bush to put him in such um... "esteemed" company.

He's as evil as any of the bad 'uns. ;)

Yeah, I did think of that when voting. People like Hitler had an impact on history - albeit a negative one - which shaped the world as it was today. I picked Stalin, because he didn't really do such a thing as far as I can see. He wasn't a pioneer of any new ideas, he was just following Lenin's revolutionary zeal. Although he set a world record for number of people executed by a regime, it didn't really shape the modern world as much as Hitler's specific anti-semitism.

As for Russian participation in World War II, I considered that it would have happened anyway, even if Russia had been ruled by a more benevolent leader. In fact, had it not been Stalin in power, we might have beaten the axis even sooner - don't forget that initially Stalin sided with Hitler and chums.

Lenin because he got the Commies into Power!
Stalin wouldnt have been able to get into power without him!
Charlemagne id prefer to keep him good old Ancestor!

I say Other.
Man, I hate him. Other is always messing things up for everybody.

:D

I find it appauling that so far Bush and Stalin are neck and neck. Can somebody who voted Bush honestly tell me how removing Bush from world history would do any better than removing Stalin?

I find it interesting that you would list American presidents George Bush and George Washington, but not Harry Truman. What criteria are you using?

I find it interesting that you would list American presidents George Bush and George Washington, but not Harry Truman. What criteria are you using?

That I believe they have done very bad things. That's why I've put OTHER there as well.

I find it appauling that so far Bush and Stalin are neck and neck. Can somebody who voted Bush honestly tell me how removing Bush from world history would do any better than removing Stalin?

It would probably reverse the trends of religious conservatism in America? In the Long term, probably for the good.

That I believe they have done very bad things. That's why I've put OTHER there as well.

George Washington? What "bad thing" did he do?

I find it interesting that you would list American presidents George Bush and George Washington, but not Harry Truman. What criteria are you using?

Actually, I'm more amazed that LBJ didn't make it instead.

Actually, I'm more amazed that LBJ didn't make it instead.

We still have our suspicions about him don't we?

Saint Paul. He is responsible for more death and suffering than any other single human being. Closely followed by Saint Augustine.

The others had too much of an impact on history too predict the consequences. Dubya, unfortunately, is fresh in our minds.
I would've picked no one, but I like polls...

George Washington? What "bad thing" did he do?

Helped break the thirteen colonies away from England. Big is an Anglo whom is also an Ameriphobe.

i find it amazing all the people you list are long dead, and then you have Bush. so biased, and immature, if you ask me.

Helped break the thirteen colonies away from England. Big is an Anglo whom is also an Ameriphobe.

Oh...he's one of "those". Bet he sneaks glasses of iced tea.

George Washington? What "bad thing" did he do?

Create the most dangerous country in History?

It was hard for me to choose any of the figures, in all honesty, because they were all influential and despicable in their own ways. I picked "other" because I live in China ATM, and I think from what I have seen I would pick Mao Zedong. Here's why:

He killed as many people, if not more, than Stalin did with his policies. I believe he did much of it on purpose to kill off idelogues and the peasantry, to whom he couldn't deliever his promises of prosperity for them during the civil war against the Nationalists.

Some of his government's actions in Tibet amount to genocide. He started off by liberating the Tibetans fromits oppressive theocracy, then he killed thousands who realized he was just there to strip-mine the place, not honor the people's wishes. Tibet continues to suffer from that today.

He put China back at LEAST thirty years with the "Great Leap Forward" (which turned out backwards) and the Cultural Revolution. China could have had steady economic development instead of the fast-pace speculation of today if Mao Zedong had come up with reasonable policies.

He destroyed the intelligensia in China, either killing them, forcing them onto farms, or forcing them to emigrate. Much of China's best and brightest ended up in the US and other developed countries. Mao hated the scholarly classes, and his revolution was aimed at destroying them. Killing the oppressive education and exam system would have been a good idea, but you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

He willfully destroyed or altered most of China's cultural heritage. Even the change over from traditional characters to simplified ones caused most of mainland China's population to have no access to its own historical texts. He did this under the premise that more people would become literate...but he made no provisions to have at least some mainland Chinese capable of researching their own history. How convenient. Chinese people are still suffering from a lack of understanding of their own history. Much of what they know is propaganda, what's worse.

Had Mao Zedong never been born, I don't know if things would be better or not. I doubt "China" as we understand it today would exist -- the country would likely be a series of independent territories. That is what it was becoming when the CCP took over, so if you are a fan of a unified China, then that's a good thing. If you think unification came at too high a cost, then perhaps you may think that Mao is one of the most evil people who ever existed.

I think he was crazy. I think power went to his head, and like so many other emperors of one kind or another in China, he lets his ideas ruin his country.

Ge-Ren

Create the most dangerous country in History?

He didn't create the USA...the citizens did that. He was the first elected president of the newly created country. You obviously weren't around before the fall of the Berlin Wall if you think the US is the greatest threat ever to the world. Can you imagine if Hitler and Japan had won WWII?

Create the most dangerous country in History?
thats your problem right there. you are a weak, scared little other worlder. sad but true.

Oh...he's one of "those". Bet he sneaks glasses of iced tea.

Yeah. That's okay though. Wait until he dies and discovers that America bought the afterlife in the 80s. ;)

I can see it now: Big in eternity, having to deal forever on a plane of existance with McDonalds, Van Halen, gun ownership, and dentists. :D

Create the most dangerous country in History?
Are you really arguing that America would still be a British colony if George Washington hadn't been around?

Curious, here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8589688&postcount=72) you appear to be arguing it was the French wot won it for the Americans.

George Washington? What "bad thing" did he do?


all that "rotating of the crops" upset a lot of our friends accross the pond.

thats your problem right there. you are a weak, scared little other worlder. sad but true.

Note he followed his statement with a question mark thereby admitting that he doesn't know which country is or was the most dangerous.

Create the most dangerous country in History?

They all were born, and people all bitch about them way too much. "Stalin was worse than Hitler!" does it always have to be a fucking contest? they were both bad.

I wish Geroge Dubya hadnt been born because there hasnt been a worse president since nixon(why aint nixon on the list??) as far as im concerned(yes even Geroge Senior was a little better and at least had a valid reason for attacking Iraq in the first gulf war). I didnt choose hitler because even if hitler hadnt been born, someone else would have done the same evil things he did later on when there would probably have been more dangerous weapons. I hate nazis

I wish Geroge Dubya hadnt been born because there hasnt been a worse president since nixon(why aint nixon on the list??) as far as im concerned(yes even Geroge Senior was a little better and at least had a valid reason for attacking Iraq in the first gulf war). I didnt choose hitler because even if hitler hadnt been born, someone else would have done the same evil things he did later on when there would probably have been more dangerous weapons. I hate nazis

Wow. You put Dubya behind Ford and Carter??? :eek:

I voted Hitler...although I am not too thrilled with Bush, either.

I voted Hitler...although I am not too thrilled with Bush, either.
yeah. they are just so close :rolleyes:

I voted Hitler...although I am not too thrilled with Bush, either.

How was it living through the reigns of all the others?

Scipio Africanus

Scipio Africanus

You're a Carthaginian??

I voted Bush because all the others have influenced history so thoroughly that I have trouble imagining what the world would be like if they hadn't existed. It's quite possible that the world's a better place now thanks to the example Hitler gave us. Maybe that isn't the case, but I wouldn't want to gamble on it.

Bush, on the other hand, is sufficiently mediocre that I doubt history would miss him, and I know that I wouldn't.

I wish Geroge Dubya hadnt been born because there hasnt been a worse president since nixon(why aint nixon on the list??) as far as im concerned(yes even Geroge Senior was a little better and at least had a valid reason for attacking Iraq in the first gulf war). I didnt choose hitler because even if hitler hadnt been born, someone else would have done the same evil things he did later on when there would probably have been more dangerous weapons. I hate nazis


imagine this was your first post ever in here?

I'd eradicate Bill and Margaret Johanson of Helsberg, ND.

I just hate them so much!

Doug Llewelyn, the creator of 'The People's Court'. He has done more to destroy America in the last 20 years than anybody else! :mad:

You're a Carthaginian??

I <3 Hannibal!

And if you mean "You're a Carthaginian supporter?" I respond "Very much so, biaaaaaaaaaatch."

Doug Llewelyn, the creator of 'The People's Court'. He has done more to destroy America in the last 20 years than anybody else! :mad:

Rosie O'Donnell...

I <3 Hannibal!

And if you mean "You're a Carthaginian supporter?" I respond "Very much so, biaaaaaaaaaatch."

Um... they ended the Third Punic War in 146BC. I'd give up on that one. I mean, it's even more of a long shot than a Habsburg restoration. ;)

Washington. I doubt whether him living or not would have affected the outcome of the Revolutionary War, but perhaps if someone else had started the tradition of American president they'd have less power or not even exist anymore. There's a greater chance really that they'd have more power today rather than less but it would be worth the shot.

Washington. I doubt whether him living or not would have affected the outcome of the Revolutionary War, but perhaps if someone else had started the tradition of American president they'd have less power or not even exist anymore. There's a greater chance really that they'd have more power today rather than less but it would be worth the shot.

I'm sorry, but at the beginning of the war Washington was our only good commander(some were capable of leading smaller units, but he was the only one who could effectively lead a large army). Until about '78, we were so screwed it wasn't funny. If Washington wasn't there, we would have lost the war and still be British.

Also, Washington didn't declare himself president. He was elected president, and he didn't even want to be president. He didn't really do much, and he wasn't really that powerful.

If there were no Presidents, we'd collapse in a few years.

Rosie O'Donnell...

I can't believe Darth Vader hasn't been mentioned.

PS...Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.00
...it can't get much more centrist than this.

I'd say Rasheed Willard. Screw him.

Bush has more votes than Stalin, and almost as many as Hitler. :rolleyes:

I'm sorry, but at the beginning of the war Washington was our only good commander(some were capable of leading smaller units, but he was the only one who could effectively lead a large army). Until about '78, we were so screwed it wasn't funny. If Washington wasn't there, we would have lost the war and still be British.

Also, Washington didn't declare himself president. He was elected president, and he didn't even want to be president. He didn't really do much, and he wasn't really that powerful.

If there were no Presidents, we'd collapse in a few years.

1. Losing the war wouldn't be that bad in the first place, but really in head on major battles Washington wasn't al that great if I remember right. He lost in New York, he lost Philly I think. The only reason he won the major later battles was because the French blocked off the British Navy. It's the French who saved Washington's ass, Washington didn't save America.

2. Exactly. It's likely if somebody else had been president the presidential powers would have been expanded, but it can always be hoped that someone really imbecilic would have been elected and made the whole thing a sham. You never know.

3. The union would have collapsed. Individual states would probably continue and if there must be government I personally would prefer state government being the highest power rather than an even higher federal.

Stalin.

I say Stalin. He ruined many more lives than Hitler did. Many more...

I can't believe Darth Vader hasn't been mentioned.

PS...Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.00
...it can't get much more centrist than this.

Why? Vader is the only good thing in the SW series!

PS- You scored zero by zero? Answering honestly?

Bush has more votes than Stalin, and almost as many as Hitler. :rolleyes:

Makes me happy to know that the UN isn't the Government of Earth, and that here in the US we have the Electoral College. ;)

Neville Chamberlain- without him fucking up Hitler wouldn't of been able to proceed with his murdering rampage.

You

Bush has more votes than Stalin, and almost as many as Hitler. :rolleyes:

People need to read more history. :p


Anyway, I voted Other. I think Chairman Mao was the worst.

But however like so many influential (Doesn't have to be great) leaders during their time, the things they made has had a unimaginary impact on the world today, that without them, I'm curious what world would be like.

Like if Hitler didn't exist, the Cold War would most likely have been worse. And most likely I'll be speaking Japanese now.

Stalin realistically.

However, I'd also nominate Bush Jr just so we can talk about someone or something else in this blasted forum.

Bush has more votes than Stalin, and almost as many as Hitler. :rolleyes:


Kind of represents the overwhelming mentality of this site.

If you could choose which of these people had never been born which would you choose and why?

You may choose other, and provide the name with your post.
I wouldn't pick any of them. We are who we are today because all of those people lived and did what they did, at least in part. I don't know about you, but I kinda like being who I am. :)

I say 'Charlemagne' cos he sounds french.

If you said 'Hitler' than you should read Stephen Fry's 'Making History' and it'll put you off the idea. Great book too.


to bad mike was gay...and then glodder turns up...nasty

may i ask why churchil is down?..if he is down why not eisenhower or wodehose or gladstone?

Kind of represents the overwhelming mentality of this site.

I just voted for bush, but not because i find him 'the most despicable'.
It's just that the rest mentioned in the topic weren't required to do the 'evil' they did.

Charlemagne and Napoleon just achieved a lot of power in a time that war between nations was inevitable with lot's of fractions trying to grab as much power as possible.

Lenin and Stalin: revolution was inevitable, if they didn't take power, someone else would have done it. And for Stalin, to get into the seat he was in, you had to be ruthless at that time i believe.

George Washington: ?? 'Just an actor' in times of revolution. Someone had to be it.

Ghenghis Khan: I don't know much about him that would be pro or contra, but i suppose that 'the horde' would have been unleashed sooner or later. A bonus is that peace usually follows in the conquered regions if they are well in the empire.

Churchill: i'm not even adressing him.

Hitler: the extreme right was growing powerfull on the growing nationalism and antisemitism (Not only in germany!). WWII was inevitable, because of the harsh conditions set after WWI. It would have happened anyway.

Bush is another case: I don't know if a neoconservative president would have gotten elected, managed to go to an unpopular war and get reelected ...

note: you may have different views on some points above, but this is why i vote bush allthough he isn't the worst on the list (yet, if he's ambitious)

Why Churchill?

Really can't choose anyone... each person did something remarkable for history. by removing them, you remove the accomplishments that went along with them.

Why in the hell is Churchill on there, that man was a hero, no matter what way you look at it.

im going with stalin, he was just a dick.

Why in the hell is Churchill on there, that man was a hero, no matter what way you look at it.

The jolly old British chaps at Gallipoli (and the not-so British but no less jolly Kurds) might beg to differ.

Eliminating anyone from history would have consequences that would not only be eminently unforeseeable, but also make my brain hurt. More, in a lot of cases it might not make the requisite differences people would hope for: there would still be neocon hawks ruling Washington without Bush and there would still be a free, independent America devoted to the causes of liberty and equality without Washington.

Why in the hell is Churchill on there, that man was a hero, no matter what way you look at it.

im going with stalin, he was just a dick.

Unless you believe the British should have fallen to Germany of course.

I find it interesting that you would list American presidents George Bush and George Washington, but not Harry Truman. What criteria are you using?
Why on earth should Harry Truman be on that list?

Lennin

He ruined my contry! Made my family evacuate to the US.

Death to Communism!

uhh, lol I don't see how any book could make me not dislike Hitler.

try mein kampf...written by hitler...the man may have been crazy and killed billions of people and we should all always despise him for that...but that doesn't mean you can't marvel at his genious...because he was a literary god...

Yeah, I did think of that when voting. People like Hitler had an impact on history - albeit a negative one - which shaped the world as it was today. I picked Stalin, because he didn't really do such a thing as far as I can see. He wasn't a pioneer of any new ideas, he was just following Lenin's revolutionary zeal. Although he set a world record for number of people executed by a regime, it didn't really shape the modern world as much as Hitler's specific anti-semitism.

As for Russian participation in World War II, I considered that it would have happened anyway, even if Russia had been ruled by a more benevolent leader. In fact, had it not been Stalin in power, we might have beaten the axis even sooner - don't forget that initially Stalin sided with Hitler and chums.

lol...if you think Stalin didn't do anything you my friend need to go back and read your history books...but i think that...none of them shouldn't have been born they were all important figures in our history to make things the way they are now...without hitler...i mean who knows how the world would be...it's all really just a perspective of how much you know about history..because if you have the ability to pick any of those people and say they weren't important you should go read a book about them...

Kind of represents the overwhelming mentality of this site.

more like kinda represents how educated the people who're on this site are...you also hafta realize that bush is a current event so more people know about him and what he's doing so all the people who don't like him are like hey i'm gunna vote for him...simply because it's more fresh in their minds...while as stalin was def worse then him but the percent of people who know about stalin is probably alot smaller...so the people who don't like him would obviously be smaller...let alone he's not the worst one one on that list

and whoever voted for napoleon george washington or churchill is a dumbshit :D

William the conqueror
Certainly he wasn't the most despisable person in history but him not appearing would have had a lot of desirable consequences in history.