NationStates Jolt Archive

Following up my last thread comes this one. Who was the worst: Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, or Josef Stalin?

*waits for Bush to pop up*

Following up my last thread comes this one. Who was the worst: Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, or Josef Stalin?

Stalin. Not only was he culpable in some of the worst crap to hit this century he did it under a stolen banner. At least Hitler and Mussolini had the decency to create Fascism as an idealogy in it's own right.

Does it really matter? They're all dead--it's not like there's going to be a prize for the winner or anything.

Chairman Mao murdered more people than any of those psychos combined.

Hitler. Mussolini wasn't as evil. He was even trying to maintain peace in Europe, priding himself for the Munich Conference before getting bitch-slapped by Hitler who wanted that war.
Stalin may have gotten more people killed, but he also didn't write a book about it and didn't come up with the cruelest methods possible to eliminate people. He also had more time to do it. Hitler, on the other hand, had films made of the Men of the 20th of July being executed with piano wire for his personal enjoyment...

Stalin. But you need to put Mao up there. Killed millions and liked to pop young virgin girls, too. His wife wasn't much better, she had a secret torture chamber built off her bedroom.

Myrth

So difficult. I know Hitler's more infamous, but Stalin certainly deserves to be in the running. I wouldn't rate Mussolini as bad as Hitler and Stalin, although I'd probably place him the top ten in the 20th century.

Myrth

You DARE soil the name of the Great One! She shalt Smite you!

Hitler is the worst

Myrth
Had to know that was coming.

Benito Mussolini wasn't an evil person.

He had good intentions, and it all messed up.

In fact, of ANY major power in WWII, Benito Mussolini killed the LEAST Civilians.

Think about that.

there all fine by me i like them all

Hitler. Stalins purges were specifically the product of a paranoid mind trying to keep himself in power. Power was the goal for Stalin. For Hitler, genocide WAS the goal. This doesn't make Stalin inherently better than Hitler, in fact, i could argue the opposite, morally. But it makes Stalin's regime easier to survive than Hitlers. You just had to play a certain game and keep your head down completely. Despite him being anti-semitic and grudging of power, for instance, there are instances of Jewish "communist" leaders surviving at the top of the ladder right up to his death, by sucking up to him.

Mussolini doesn't even deserve to be mentioned on the list, he's a strange mix of comic opera (his overblown pretentions and delusions of grandeur), tragic mistakes (he started out merely wanting to treat everyone in his country well), slow descent into madness (originally, in Italy Fascist gangs forced their enemies to drink Castor Oil; in Germany they kicked their enemies to death) and culpability in crimes. I doubt Benito had that many deaths on his score card, i'm sure Franco and Salazar and Tojo totted up more in their reigns. I know Hitler and Mao and Pol Pot did. And i'm pretty sure Amin, Bokassar, whoever was in charge of Rwanda in the early 90s, Duvalier, whoever was in charge of Turkey in the early years of the century, the architects of Apartheid and various others may be culpable for close to the same level of death (especially if we take war combatants out of the equation).

Benito Mussolini wasn't an evil person.

He had good intentions, and it all messed up.

In fact, of ANY major power in WWII, Benito Mussolini killed the LEAST Civilians.

Think about that.

Thats because Italy got their asses kicked so fast and they never really advanced on any major cities therefore taking out the need to bomb/shell them cutting down deaths...though italys air force was pathetic to begin with so i doubt they woulda been able to bomb cities even when they wanted to.

but anyways, my vote is for Mao, then Ho Che Mimn, Stalin, Hitler, Tito, Hirohito?, Castro, Kanami? (religious leader of Iran) ect ect ect..

Look- they were all megalomaniacs and quite possibly insane. It's pretty close between Hitler and Stalin, but Adolf wins, barely.

Honestly, I think the question itself is horrible.....Musso. was obviously more "low key" when it came to his followers fate and such. But I also think that Stalin, even though not the best ruler, does not compare to Hitler's rule over Germany in the third Reich. To me there is absolutley no way around the fact that hitler was by far the most cruel, and tyrant leader. It is hard to find anything to compare to the deaths of over 7 million people

It's tough for me to decide.

I'm a Fascist, so I of course do not hate Mussolini. He tried his best to be a good leader, but his Fascist bullyboys combined with his weak will led him down a dark road that he couldn't take himself off of without either destroying his Fascist party or losing the leadership to one of the other high ranking Fascist...plus, at least he made Italy a safe spot for Jews until Hitler took them over when the allies invaded.

I hate Hitler not only because he killed so many people, but also for tarnishing Fascism with his hateful ideology.

But then again Stalin killed more people. Plus he was a Communist and I don't care for communism [goes with Fascism].

However, while Stalin killed more people he also had more time to kill people.

So my vote goes to Hitler. If he had a longer reign he could have been far worse than Stalin.

But compared to these two, Mussolini was a Saint.

Mousillini? Come on, if you wanted a 3rd why not put Tojo (or Hirohito) up there, does the phrase "Rape of Nanking" ring any bells?

I voted for hitler, because of the multitude of atrocities he commited in the short time he had. Stalin was a horrible person as well, escpecially when it comes to a tactical stand point (the purges, ignoring germany was at their borders, demoting Zhukov to deskwork after he sacked berlin, even though he was one of the greatest generals of the war; time magazine named him best allied general) but there was just something that dosent repulse me as much as hitler does, even though hed be a close 2nd (1. Mao 2 hitler 3 stalin)
The mishaps of mussolini are a subject that interests me greatly, maybe its because of my obsession with the eastern mediterannean, but i luv reading his role and mistakes in the war. he was a megalomaniac like the rest of um, but there are a few id put on my list before him.

Food for thought...

Hitler and Mussolini's policies utterly destroyed their nations (taking millions with them) and put them under occupation. Stalin's policies and leadership, while greatly harming his country, did not destroy it and consequently the USSR became a global superpower for 43 years, and tormented the world for it's entire existence...

As far as I'm concerned they were all ideologies and fanatics, self-created enemies of humanity. It is meaningless to argue which one was worse or which one was better. Doing so only diminishes the horror of what they did...

Food for thought...

Hitler and Mussolini's policies utterly destroyed their nations (taking millions with them) and put them under occupation. Stalin's policies and leadership, while greatly harming his country, did not destroy it and consequently the USSR became a global superpower for 43 years, and tormented the world for it's entire existence...

As far as I'm concerned they were all ideologies and fanatics, self-created enemies of humanity. It is meaningless to argue which one was worse or which one was better. Doing so only diminishes the horror of what they did...

Actually, Mussolini let Italy REALLY well off.

Mussolini only was responsible for the death of 250 Italians Domestically.

In war, 330,000 Italians died.

80,000 Civilians died, from Allied Bombing raids and what not.

They lost 410,000 people.

That's less then Hungrary!

Stalin killed and enslaved more people than Hitler ever could've imagined.

Mao would be #1 on my list if he was there for top score.

Otherwise I say Hitler, because had he won the second World War, many races and cultures would purposely be wiped off the face of the earth. Look at how many years it took to accumulate the death counts of both Mao and Stalin. Look how many civilian deaths Hitler pulled of during his reign.

Yeh...seems apparent that good old Benito doesn't really belong with the other two. I voted for Stalin because leftie weirdos piss me off. At least you could reason with Hitler, as long as you weren't Jewish, gay or disabled. :cool:

*waits for Bush to pop up*
Oh, absolutely. I hear she's a lousy tipper.
...
You mean Jenna, right? I mean, those other folks may have had their quirks and peccadillos, but you never hear about them shorting the waitstaff.

< / tongue-in-cheek>

Thats because Italy got their asses kicked so fast and they never really advanced on any major cities therefore taking out the need to bomb/shell them cutting down deaths...though italys air force was pathetic to begin with so i doubt they woulda been able to bomb cities even when they wanted to.

That's because the only good thing about Italy's WWII era military was their cool uniforms. They weren't all hard asses like the Storm Troopers and SS.

"At least Hitler and Mussolini had the decency to create Fascism as an idealogy in it's own right."

Ya, creating ideas where a dictator has complete control is very nice (sarcasm). Hitler was a maniac. He killed his country, and he was much more evil than the other two, because he killed people by race on a large scale.

Chairman Mao murdered more people than any of those psychos combined.

The worst part is that, of the millions that he killed (I forget exactly how many), many of them died out of the stupidity of Mao's designs e.g. all sorts of s**t that came out of his "little red book", including that he hated sparrows and so he had them all killed. Them all dying meant that the locusts - which were the natural food of sparrows normally - could thrive, and absolutely blight the crops, thus causing a MASSIVE famine.

I forget exactly how many of the millions of people that he killed in total died in that famine, but it was a MASSIVE number.

Stalin.

His hobbies included Mimery.

What else do you need to know?

Following up my last thread comes this one. Who was the worst: Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, or Josef Stalin?
definantly hitler!
mussolini and stalin both did nothing wronge.(ok, i can see how killing a large portion of the population could be concieved as wronge, but he did it for the right reasones, if he had succeded there wouldn't of been any more deaths since everyone in the country would have believe the same things.)

Hmm… I'd have to say Djugashvili (Stalin). At least Hitler was fighting for a cause - sick, twisted and hateful, but at least he wasn't the forsworn enemy of all humanity. Stalin killed those even loyal to him, on a far greater scale than the Night of the Long Knives.

It's tough for me to decide.

I'm a Fascist, so I of course do not hate Mussolini. He tried his best to be a good leader, but his Fascist bullyboys combined with his weak will led him down a dark road that he couldn't take himself off of without either destroying his Fascist party or losing the leadership to one of the other high ranking Fascist...plus, at least he made Italy a safe spot for Jews until Hitler took them over when the allies invaded.

I hate Hitler not only because he killed so many people, but also for tarnishing Fascism with his hateful ideology.

But then again Stalin killed more people. Plus he was a Communist and I don't care for communism [goes with Fascism].

However, while Stalin killed more people he also had more time to kill people.

So my vote goes to Hitler. If he had a longer reign he could have been far worse than Stalin.

But compared to these two, Mussolini was a Saint.

You're a fascist? *shocked laugh* That's quite a confession. And quite candid, too. I don't know whether or not to be proud that you're so candid and honest, or disgusted that you'd choose such an ideology.
I could never choose such an authoritarian form of government.
And I don't see Hitler as TARNISHING it, rather, as REPRESENTING IT IN FULL.

Explain, please. Maybe my view of fascism and yours aren't the same, and so you might see something that I don't.
Why fascist?

Still, you do make a good point: If Hitler had had longer to kill, then he could've matched Stalin for the numbers.
And he had a bigger scheme in mind, I think.

And, as many have said, Mussolini doesn't even come close to the machinations of the other two, even though he viewed Hitler as a small-fry dictator himself.

Somehow, Hitler's become something of a benchmark when it comes to evil, even though he didn't necessarily kill as many as the others, it was more the methods that he used.

All three were tyrannical dictators, so it's very hard to say that one's the best or the worst based on "who's the most evil dictator".

However, in terms of leadership and prosperity, Hitler and Stalin outrun Mussolini. While Hitler and Stalin were both able to build their countries into superpowers, Mussolini took many months to invade Ethiopia (defended with spears).

So in terms of 'evilness' Stalin, i'd say, is the worst. But Mussolini was a crap leader.

I hate Hitler not only because he killed so many people, but also for tarnishing Fascism with his hateful ideology.

I apologise for being ignorant, but what is Fascism if not 'Hitlerism'?

Congratulations on being declared the author of the most idiotic thread! You have triumphed over hundreds of others to prove your ignorance, abusiveness and/or immaturity and thus are the winner. To claim your prize, staple a sign to your penis saying "Help, being attacked by a German sausage." and...

The question is pointless. It's so fantastically subjective that any consensus one could hope to gain would still offer nothing like a useful perspective.

But compared to these two, Mussolini was a Saint.I don't know, tarnish fascism? Fascism was bad to begin with. Mussolini wasn't a saint, he was a failure compared to those two. Remember who started the war with the Ethiopians and slaughtered them?

Hitler is the worst

That's only because he invaded you :p

I apologise for being ignorant, but what is Fascism if not 'Hitlerism'?

Absolutely, irrefutably laudable and worthy of your eternal, utter and unyielding devotion.

Ein Volk
Ein Reich
Ein Fuhrer

Ein Volk
Ein Reich
Ein Fuhrer
You spelled it wrong.
And what exactly were you trying to say with your post, anyway?

You spelled it wrong.
And what exactly were you trying to say with your post, anyway?

I just enjoy laughing at Nazism, it really is risable

I just enjoy laughing at Nazism, it really is risableCareful. Laughing at it is what let it rise to power in the first place...

And I don't see Hitler as TARNISHING it, rather, as REPRESENTING IT IN FULL.

Explain, please. Maybe my view of fascism and yours aren't the same, and so you might see something that I don't.
Why fascist?

Nazism is a perverted form of Fascism. Where Fascism intends to bring everybody together in a Nation and to create a sense of Nationalism, Nazism only cares about race and is thus a perversion of Fascism. Since Mussolini's weak will led him into an alliance with Hitler, Nazism and Fascism have always been considered the same which is why I say tarnishing it.

~~~

I chose Fascism because I largely consider Democracy to both be too slow, weak and chaotic and I like the idea of National Syndicalism.
There's more to it, but I don't feel like typing it all up.


Mussolini took many months to invade Ethiopia (defended with spears
Haile Selassie actually outfitted about 100,000 of his troops with modern weapons in addition to the 400,000 troops with spears and bows. The Italians had 330,000 troops. Cinsidering that they had to push their way into eithiopia I can understand why it took so long.

Though I will admit that his military needed bettwe training and leadership.

Hitler. Mussolini wasn't as evil. He was even trying to maintain peace in Europe, priding himself for the Munich Conference before getting bitch-slapped by Hitler who wanted that war.
Stalin may have gotten more people killed, but he also didn't write a book about it and didn't come up with the cruelest methods possible to eliminate people. He also had more time to do it. Hitler, on the other hand, had films made of the Men of the 20th of July being executed with piano wire for his personal enjoyment...

Whereas Stalin, in his paranoid and illustrious intellectual potency, contrived to purge Russia of upwards of 20 million citizens over a tenure of 30 years,and engendered the starvation and ethnic cleansing of countless peasants in his inspired agricultural reforms.

Nazism is a perverted form of Fascism. Where Fascism intends to bring everybody together in a Nation and to create a sense of Nationalism, Nazism only cares about race and is thus a perversion of Fascism. Since Mussolini's weak will led him into an alliance with Hitler, Nazism and Fascism have always been considered the same which is why I say tarnishing it.

~~~

I chose Fascism because I largely consider Democracy to both be too slow, weak and chaotic and I like the idea of National Syndicalism.
There's more to it, but I don't feel like typing it all up.And Fascism is a perverted form of Nationalism and Nationalism is a perverted form of patriotism. It's still a dictatorship. Fascism only cares about one opinion and provides no defence to those who have a different opinion. Mussolini may not have had any concentration camps, but he did away with the opposition quite cruelly anyway.
There's nothing good about Fascism that can be tarnished.

[QUOTE=Voxio]Haile Selassie actually outfitted about 100,000 of his troops with modern weapons in addition to the 400,000 troops with spears and bows. The Italians had 330,000 troops. Cinsidering that they had to push their way into eithiopia I can understand why it took so long.

Though I will admit that his military needed bettwe training and leadership.The Italians had planes. The Ethiopians did not.
And the Italians didn't need better training and leadership. They needed to respect another nation's sovereignity.

I agree that there is a difference between Fascism and Nazism. Although similar, there are differences. For instance: To my knowledge Mussolini never had a grudge against any other race, unlike Hitler, which led him to killing them. Mussolini did harbor Jews, until the Germans took over. Their rise of power was similar though, in that their thugs gave rise to their power. Hitler killed his helpers, and Mussolini did not.

If there is a flaw in my thinking, please don't flame me for it.

Thanks.

I chose Fascism because I largely consider Democracy to both be too slow, weak and chaotic and I like the idea of National Syndicalism.
There's more to it, but I don't feel like typing it all up.

But it protects freedom better. How much freedom would you have in a dictatorship? According to history, none.

There's nothing good about Fascism that can be tarnished.
It is odd then, that it got the praise of so many people that we today consider great or noble.

The Italians had planes. The Ethiopians did not.
And the Italians didn't need better training and leadership.
Yes, they had planes which would be one of the major reasons they won. I'm not saying it was an even fight, I was pointing out that it wasn't just guns vs. Spears.

They needed to respect another nation's sovereignity.
By today's standards it is wrong to create a colonial Empire, but at the time it was the norm and while I don't support the imperialism, you cannot blame Mussolini for doing what the other great nations were doing. Mussolini wanted to become as strong as the British and the only way he could see to do it was to gain colonies.

But it protects freedom better. How much freedom would you have in a dictatorship? According to history, none.
When I look at today's standards I see people having too much freedom. They abuse it for selfish reasons. This happens to be another reason I support Fascism.

When I look at today's standards I see people having too much freedom. They abuse it for selfish reasons. This happens to be another reason I support Fascism.

What do you mean? How do they abuse it? How much freedom do you want taken away?

But Fascism leads to dictatorships, which lead to one person getting way too much power, which led to the whole Nazi, North Korea, terrorism, torture chambers, opponents being executed, etc. With democracy, it's easier for someone to lose power if he pisses the population off enough. Plus, I like saying that the government did something incorrectly without being picked up by the secret police and having my nails ripped off while my dick gets electrocuted and burned with branding irons.

Hitler. Mussolini wasn't as evil. He was even trying to maintain peace in Europe, priding himself for the Munich Conference before getting bitch-slapped by Hitler who wanted that war.
Stalin may have gotten more people killed, but he also didn't write a book about it and didn't come up with the cruelest methods possible to eliminate people. He also had more time to do it. Hitler, on the other hand, had films made of the Men of the 20th of July being executed with piano wire for his personal enjoyment...

Hmm...

Hitler wrote his book beforehand... and really, writing a book isn't very evil in and of itself. I could write worse.

As for cruelty, well I dunno, is being nerve gassed really all that worse than being shot to death? Neither sounds particularly pleasant. Gunshots are more common and so less terrifying, but I think once you're gassed/shot you have the same amount of cruelty as your body stops working and you experience lots of pain.

Killing more people really ought to be the deciding factor, so I vote Stalin. I mean, if I murder you and Bob, that's more evil than if I just murdered Bob, right?

Ronald Reagan

where's bush?

Hitler was obviously by far the most evil person throughout history and his depraved ideology attempted to wipe out entire races or nationalities. Stalin was also a brutal dictator who killed several million (certainly not the often quoted exaggerations of between 20 and 100) but at least it wasn't because of anyone's race.

Hitler was obviously by far the most evil person throughout history and his depraved ideology attempted to wipe out entire races or nationalities. Stalin was also a brutal dictator who killed several million (certainly not the often quoted exaggerations of between 20 and 100) but at least it wasn't because of anyone's race.

You know, some might say Hitler's bodycount is exaggerated too. Not to mention everyone forgets it wasn't just Jews. I still say Stalin killed more; there were more for him to kill, and no one to stop him (nor indeed, seemingly no one to care).

And who really cares if it was for 'race?' Like being killed by the paranoid fears of a mad dictator is any less evil than killed by the racist fears of a mad dictator? Murder is murder.

*waits for Bush to pop up*

Ah, F*ck you. Bush isn't a tyrant or a murderer. You should be ashamed for even mentioning his name.

You know, some might say Hitler's bodycount is exaggerated too. Not to mention everyone forgets it wasn't just Jews. I still say Stalin killed more; there were more for him to kill, and no one to stop him (nor indeed, seemingly no one to care).

And who really cares if it was for 'race?' Like being killed by the paranoid fears of a mad dictator is any less evil than killed by the racist fears of a mad dictator? Murder is murder.

There is little reason to believe that Hitler killed less people than most figures suggest and I haven't heard of any respected people who would dispute that. When however it comes to Stalin many of the figures are simply impossible considering the fact that the USSR's population increased at a faster rate than other European country's during his leadership despite the war which killed 23 million Russians. A detailed study was also carries by Khrushchev (who hated Stalin) and it found that he had killed around 2 million people although the real figures are probably slightly higher.

While all murder is certainly wrong I do believe that attempting to wipe out an entire ethnic group in a calculated and systematic way is worse than killing political opponents through extreme paranoia

To be cynical, the only reason why Hitler's bodycount is lower than Stalins is that he simply had fewer people to begin with and less time.

Bush doesn't belong on this list. Yeah, he's a nutcase and if there wouldn't be a public outcry if he only tried to be like Stalin or Hitler, he would be worse than both of them (simply 'cause he has the means at hands). The recent announcement of "preemptive nuclear strikes" might bring him close to them. But so far, he still has a few innocents to kill to rank up with them.

But he certainly reached Mussolini, even before his reelection. At least when it comes to body count.

Ah, F*ck you. Bush isn't a tyrant or a murderer. You should be ashamed for even mentioning his name.

Mussolini shouldn't be on there, he was just inept, easily led and the most hated leader in the history of his country. Sounds familiar actually.

There is little reason to believe that Hitler killed less people than most figures suggest and I haven't heard of any respected people who would dispute that. When however it comes to Stalin many of the figures are simply impossible considering the fact that the USSR's population increased at a faster rate than other European country's during his leadership despite the war which killed 23 million Russians. A detailed study was also carries by Khrushchev (who hated Stalin) and it found that he had killed around 2 million people although the real figures are probably slightly higher.

While all murder is certainly wrong I do believe that attempting to wipe out an entire ethnic group in a calculated and systematic way is worse than killing political opponents through extreme paranoia

The figures generally include the deaths in the great collectivisation famine (incompetence combined with refusal to back down) and the war (which he can hardly be blamed for, except for his incompetence at the start, and his later tactic of "drown them in bodies"). Now, thats not to say he's not culpable for the deaths in the famine (he is, and the figures are huge, read "Koba The Dread" by Martin Amis, or any of the Robert Conquest studies), or that his incompetence/callousness didn't lead to more deaths in the war than was needed (it did). But i don't think it's the same sort of culpability as Hitlers organised mass genocide.

hitler wins. but stalin is up there too. mussolini is just a joke. i mean, even his name is funny... moose-o-leenee. how lame

as everyone said. mao needs to be on there.... and like, all the japanese peoples too.

and like, all the japanese peoples too.

*Spits out his beer in shock*

What the fuck?

*Spits out his beer in shock*

What the fuck?

Yeah, ALL THE JAPANESE PEOPLES.

i blame them. for something. i dunno. i'll come back to you on it.

Yeah, ALL THE JAPANESE PEOPLES.

i blame them. for something. i dunno. i'll come back to you on it.

Shit that's racist but carry on!

Yeh...seems apparent that good old Benito doesn't really belong with the other two. I voted for Stalin because leftie weirdos piss me off. At least you could reason with Hitler, as long as you weren't Jewish, gay or disabled. :cool:
Or British. Or French. Or Czechoslovakian, or Austrian, or Polish, or ...

Shit that's racist but carry on!

Well, it would be if i wasn't flippantly taking the piss out of the poster you quoted :p

I don't hate any race*

*except the Swiss.

Well, it would be if i wasn't flippantly taking the piss out of the poster you quoted :p

I don't hate any race*

*except the Swiss.

Oh good.

Well, it would be if i wasn't flippantly taking the piss out of the poster you quoted :p
I don't hate any race
{snip}
Well *I* do. That 100 meter dash has got to go!

Me Love Bush, me love anythin from the punani area....

Hitler was a legend in his own right, he bought economic stability to germany, introduced the VW Beetle cars, and almost suceeded in killing of the dirtiest race/religion/people ever....yes thats right the dirty jews.

imagine the world today if 6.5million of the years that were killed, were still alive?

wat use is there for banks....lol...think about it

Well *I* do. That 100 meter dash has got to go!

Not to mention the hurdles!

Me Love Bush, me love anythin from the punani area....

Hitler was a legend in his own right, he bought economic stability to germany, introduced the VW Beetle cars, and almost suceeded in killing of the dirtiest race/religion/people ever....yes thats right the dirty jews.

imagine the world today if 6.5million of the years that were killed, were still alive?

wat use is there for banks....lol...think about it

Intellectual genius that you are, you do realise that the standard of living of the German people in 1939 had actually decreased compared to that they lived in 1933? Everyone bangs on about Nazi economics as though that is a point in his favour, but do me a favour, read some history - maybe Burleighs "The Third Reich: A New History" to get the facts straight.

As for the rest of your comments, they are risible and idiotic.

Intellectual genius that you are, you do realise that the standard of living of the German people in 1939 had actually decreased compared to that they lived in 1933? Everyone bangs on about Nazi economics as though that is a point in his favour, but do me a favour, read some history - maybe Burleighs "The Third Reich: A New History" to get the facts straight.

As for the rest of your comments, they are risible and idiotic.


So i sumhow blagged a A* in History :sniper: :cool: :cool:

So i sumhow blagged a A* in History :sniper: :cool: :cool:

Which just goes to show the continuing decline in educational standards the world over :)

I'm going to have to go with Stalin.

Stalin murdered far more people than Hitler. Stalin also was trying to spread communism to the rest of the world. In my opinion Communism was far worse than Fascism (Nazism) even though Nazism was terrible. Also, in my opinion, it doesnt matter why you kill someone, Hitler did it to neutralize the threat of "Jewish Bolshevik parasites" and Stalin did it as a "Political tool". Does it really matter? No. In both situations they ended up dead at the end. The only way to judge it is by how many were murdered. Not if they were Jews, Russians, Slavs.....It doesnt matter they are ALL HUMANS. Also, another reason I find Stalin worse, he was in controll of the Soviet Union, an empire, which if had not existed, would never have caused the National Socialist German Workers Party to come together in the first place. After all, as anyone well read knows, Nazism was birthed as a defense against Communism. I find that Communism was dicatated from the Devil himself, and that the U.S.S.R. was a little piece of Hell on Earth.

I'm going to have to go with Stalin.

Stalin murdered far more people than Hitler. Stalin also was trying to spread communism to the rest of the world. In my opinion Communism was far worse than Fascism (Nazism) even though Nazism was terrible. Also, in my opinion, it doesnt matter why you kill someone, Hitler did it to neutralize the threat of "Jewish Bolshevik parasites" and Stalin did it as a "Political tool". Does it really matter? No. In both situations they ended up dead at the end. The only way to judge it is by how many were murdered. Not if they were Jews, Russians, Slavs.....It doesnt matter they are ALL HUMANS. Also, another reason I find Stalin worse, he was in controll of the Soviet Union, an empire, which if had not existed, would never have caused the National Socialist German Workers Party to come together in the first place. After all, as anyone well read knows, Nazism was birthed as a defense against Communism. I find that Communism was dicatated from the Devil himself, and that the U.S.S.R. was a little piece of Hell on Earth.

It's bad history to suggest the Russian Revolution caused the Nazi party (and Stalin wasn't in charge of Russia till after Hitler was in charge of the Nazis). Yes, it had a contributing factor to their SUPPORT, but the Nazi party ideology was formed from a mess of things going back to the pre-WWI period, combined with a sense of humiliation about German defeat in World War I. Hitler was banging on about Lebensraum in the 20s. And not Lebensraum "because Russia was ruled by the Bolsheviks", but "Lebensraum because it is the Germans racial rights to dominate and exploit the Russian".

Which just goes to show the continuing decline in educational standards the world over :)

yeh ok mate, if im livin in the only county in England that has Grammar Schools.

so i hate jews who doesn't?

Which just goes to show the continuing decline in educational standards the world over :)
Hey, my contrys edumaction standards is a goodly as dey haf ever bean.

It's bad history to suggest the Russian Revolution caused the Nazi party (and Stalin wasn't in charge of Russia till after Hitler was in charge of the Nazis). Yes, it had a contributing factor to their SUPPORT, but the Nazi party ideology was formed from a mess of things going back to the pre-WWI period, combined with a sense of humiliation about German defeat in World War I. Hitler was banging on about Lebensraum in the 20s. And not Lebensraum "because Russia was ruled by the Bolsheviks", but "Lebensraum because it is the Germans racial rights to dominate and exploit the Russian".

While it is true that the Germans were upset about being humliliated in the great war, (I know, my family fought for Germany and Austria during THE FIRST WORLD WAR NOT THE SECOND ONE...WE WERE NOT NAZIS!!!) I disagree about Nazism being the direct result of Communism....That is the most direct threat that faced Germany, and the Nazis planned to fight it. Obviously Stalin was not the ruler of Russia until after Hitler, but the point is that he WAS in charge of the Soviet Union....an EVIL empire, atleast in my book.

yeh ok mate, if im livin in the only county in England that has Grammar Schools.

so i hate jews who doesn't?

Which just shows why comprehensive schools were a good idea.

Warning, History graduate, back from before they devalued exams, versus...current GCSE candidate?

Only going to be one winner kid :)

And i don't hate Jews. Ta. So don't include me in your little worldview.

Hitler<Mussolini<Stalin

Hitler was too egoistic and rarely followed any of his generals' advice.

Mussolini was just a dumbass that slowed down Hitler's advance.

Stalin is teh 1337 haxxorz because he listened to his generals and didn't really interfere in their battle plans.

yeh ok mate, if im livin in the only county in England that has Grammar Schools.

so i hate jews who doesn't?
I don't hate the Jewish people. Anyway what does Grammer School have to do with German History?

While it is true that the Germans were upset about being humliliated in the great war, (I know, my family fought for Germany and Austria during THE FIRST WORLD WAR NOT THE SECOND ONE...WE WERE NOT NAZIS!!!) I disagree about Nazism being the direct result of Communism....That is the most direct threat that faced Germany, and the Nazis planned to fight it. Obviously Stalin was not the ruler of Russia until after Hitler, but the point is that he WAS in charge of the Soviet Union....an EVIL empire, atleast in my book.

The Nazis planned to invade Russia. They would have invaded Russia if it was a fascist regime, a democracy or a communist state. It's part and parcel of the Nazi creed, far more than opposition to communism was. Lebensraum and the "heroic" german mission to "civilize" the Slav was far more vital to the Nazi ideology than hatred of communism.

Well, Benny's not even in league with Addie and Joey, so he's automatically out. After you remove him from the list, you've got two bad guys of such massive evil, that it's tough to tell the difference on the eVilmeter (r).

Stalin is teh 1337 haxxorz because he listened to his generals and didn't really interfere in their battle plans.

Whoo boy, have you been reading some shite. Stalin was constantly interfering. Until he realised (unlike Hitler) that his interference did more harm then good. THEN he stopped.

yeh ok mate, if im livin in the only county in England that has Grammar Schools.

so i hate jews who doesn't?

By the way...If you hate Jews because of the reasons Hitler stated (I read Mein Kampf....I know what he said about them) I just wanna let you know how full of shit Hitler was. I have light blonde hair, green eyes, I am 6'2, 6'3 and athletic. My family comes from Germany, Austria, Prussia, and Russia....I am Nordic and Germanic.....According to your budy Hitler, I'm as Aryan as they come. However, I am also Jewish....Which according to Hitler, is impossible. I am also NOT a communist, I am a right wing conservative...I am basicely the opposite of the "Race" he described in his book. So now tell me, why do you hate Jews?

Stalin is teh 1337 haxxorz because he listened to his generals and didn't really interfere in their battle plans.
After he decimated his officer corp and nearly lost the war, of course.

The Nazis planned to invade Russia. They would have invaded Russia if it was a fascist regime, a democracy or a communist state. It's part and parcel of the Nazi creed, far more than opposition to communism was. Lebensraum and the "heroic" german mission to "civilize" the Slav was far more vital to the Nazi ideology than hatred of communism.

They planned to invade Russia because the only way the thought they could expand, was East. However, you start of the party, was to defend Germany against Communism....That is an accepted fact.

yeh ok mate, if im livin in the only county in England that has Grammar Schools.

so i hate jews who doesn't?
Well, I'd hope grammar schools would teach you the basics of apostrophes and the like...

And I rather like Jews...

{snip}
I have light blonde hair, green eyes, I am 6'2, 6'3 and athletic. My family comes from Germany, Austria, Prussia, and Russia....I am Nordic and Germanic.....According to your budy Hitler, I'm as Aryan as they come. However, I am also Jewish....Which according to Hitler, is impossible. I am also NOT a communist, I am a right wing conservative...{snip}
Oh wow. Are also Female & Single? If not, do you have a sister?
:fluffle:

Whoo boy, have you been reading some shite. Stalin was constantly interfering. Until he realised (unlike Hitler) that his interference did more harm then good. THEN he stopped.

zomg stfu n00b. j/k

But still Stalin was badass. :D

By the way...If you hate Jews because of the reasons Hitler stated (I read Mein Kampf....I know what he said about them) I just wanna let you know how full of shit Hitler was. I have light blonde hair, green eyes, I am 6'2, 6'3 and athletic. My family comes from Germany, Austria, Prussia, and Russia....I am Nordic and Germanic.....According to your budy Hitler, I'm as Aryan as they come. However, I am also Jewish....Which according to Hitler, is impossible. I am also NOT a communist, I am a right wing conservative...I am basicely the opposite of the "Race" he described in his book. So now tell me, why do you hate Jews?

He hates Jews because he's an idiot. Idiots need to feel better about themselves. So they need someone to look down on. A race will do just as well as a class or a profession. You can assign the race identifying qualities (like "owning banks" - hah, as if the banks of the world are owned by anyone other than a couple of dozen very rich white men). Then, when you've assigned them qualities (which are, of course, painted as inherently evil), you can then seperate them from the "good". And then you can proceed to exterminate them.

Racism, insecurity about your own self writ large. All the evidence that you provide against racial theories will be pissing in the wind against someone like that.

Oh wow. Are also Female & Single? If not, do you have a sister?
:fluffle:

Lol....I'm a guy, bro, sorry. (And obviously not gay. I did just state that I was a Righty Tighty Conservative) And I do have a sister but she is young. lol. To give you a view of what I regard as young, well I'm 16...So anything younger than that is young.

I ended up voting for Hitler, probably because growing up,
nothing was worse than a nazi. I hate to demonize or cartoonize,
but nothing is worse than a nazi.

the idea of any sort of "special" "race" is so God-fuck-sick.
there is almost nothing that can bottom that.
I know that such dementia has not left us yet,
heck, sort of thinking is too often transferred over into
plain old blind ugly nationalism, or jingoism.
"we are the supreme".
That sick-o thinking still exists today and may be even worse
because those that think that way might think they have over come it.


and besides Communism is the world's one true religion.

ha. just kidding.
just wanted to see how many people would huff and puff about it.
and then throw some thing back and say something like,
"no, no. my heirarchy, with me on the top is the one true religion."
give me a break folks. heirarchy is man(yes Man) made and
we don't need such high school-esque oppressions.


AND,
to think, I almost fell for the Stalin killed as many or more than Hitler line.
Both are equally scum for this.

if we were debating ideologies,
the delusion of white supremacy is infinately worse
than the equality of the human race - although it cannot be forced from above.

He hates Jews because he's an idiot. Idiots need to feel better about themselves. So they need someone to look down on. A race will do just as well as a class or a profession. You can assign the race identifying qualities (like "owning banks" - hah, as if the banks of the world are owned by anyone other than a couple of dozen very rich white men). Then, when you've assigned them qualities (which are, of course, painted as inherently evil), you can then seperate them from the "good". And then you can proceed to exterminate them.

Racism, insecurity about your own self writ large. All the evidence that you provide against racial theories will be pissing in the wind against someone like that.

But, and I always have to say this, there are some things that were right about Jews. Jews were not innocent. I know this, and I can say this because I myself am Jewish and well read on this subject. Jews did some very bad things that I am not proud of. If anyone is interested I will go on, however I do not wont to offend any Politically Correct liberals on here....So as long as its ok...I will explain myself. Can I continue?????

Facism was founded to stop the spread of socialism & communism

Facism was founded to stop the spread of socialism & communism

No, Nazism was founded to stop the spread of Socialism and Communism

Lol....I'm a guy, bro, sorry. (And obviously not gay. I did just state that I was a Righty Tighty Conservative) And I do have a sister but she is young. lol. To give you a view of what I regard as young, well I'm 16...So anything younger than that is young.
*LOL* Yes that is way - way - ( etc ) too young even fer this hear dirty ole' man. :eek:
Ahhh *Shtuff!*
With a description like that I just had to ask tho'
Carry on!

*LOL* Yes that is way - way - ( etc ) to young fer this hear dirty ole' man. :eek:
Ahhh *Shtuff!*
With a description like that I just had to ask tho'
Carry on!

LOL Thanks though man...Glad people like how I look (IN A NONHOMOSEXUAL MANNER OF COURSE).

Benito was without a doubt the biggest failure.

But, and I always have to say this, there are some things that were right about Jews. Jews were not innocent. I know this, and I can say this because I myself am Jewish and well read on this subject. Jews did some very bad things that I am not proud of. If anyone is interested I will go on, however I do not wont to offend any Politically Correct liberals on here....So as long as its ok...I will explain myself. Can I continue?????

Innocent of what? Explain.

I mean according to some folks, no human being is innocent, and all cuz of that Eve woman and her apple fixation.

Still, I don't think anything can justify Hitler, or Stalin for that matter.

Benito was without a doubt the biggest failure.
It's probably good he was a failure.

Innocent of what? Explain.

I mean according to some folks, no human being is innocent, and all cuz of that Eve woman and her apple fixation.

Still, I don't think anything can justify Hitler, or Stalin for that matter.

Ok. Well before I begin let me say this....In no way did any of this justify Hitlers mass murder. Jews in Europe hated Non Jews....They were self segregated (I know that one could respond with Jews were not allowed to live integrated...sometimes they werent...but even when they were they wouldnt), they thought the non Jews to be inferior to them, and they did not want to live by a non Jewish law. They saw themselves as above the non Jews....literally as the chosen people...and everyone else not really as people. They also ridiculed the normal way of life...working class....labor...farmers....etc....And since they held high positions and made losts of money, did not worry about others views of them. It makes me really ashamed of Judaisms past to think about this. However....NEVER, did any Jew physically harm a non Jew....Whereas Hitler murdered millions of Jews....And even though I am very displeased by the past actions of Jews I see no way that any of their actions justifies their murders.

Hopefully I didnt offend any other Jews...I know I'm not offended its the truth and it deserves to be known. If you are Jewish and you are offended...Well then you need to stop living in our Utopian world and realize that even though the Nazis were evil sons of bitches....there were things Jews did that should make EVERYONE very upset. I hate when people only speak from one side.

Ok. Well before I begin let me say this....In no way did any of this justify Hitlers mass murder. Jews in Europe hated Non Jews....They were self segregated (I know that one could respond with Jews were not allowed to live integrated...sometimes they werent...but even when they were they wouldnt), they thought the non Jews to be inferior to them, and they did not want to live by a non Jewish law. They saw themselves as above the non Jews....literally as the chosen people...and everyone else not really as people. They also ridiculed the normal way of life...working class....labor...farmers....etc....And since they held high positions and made losts of money, did not worry about others views of them. It makes me really ashamed of Judaisms past to think about this. However....NEVER, did any Jew physically harm a non Jew....Whereas Hitler murdered millions of Jews....And even though I am very displeased by the past actions of Jews I see no way that any of their actions justifies their murders.

can some1 please enlighten me on thier version, y most of europe hated jews, or in many cases still hate them?

can some1 please enlighten me on thier version, y most of europe hated jews, or in many cases still hate them?

This is correct, and I am in no way a Anti-Semite...I am Jewish. I'm just not gonna lie and tell you straight why there was hate for Jews.....Also....Jews did have many positions in Banks and other important occupations. Well, when the great depression hit, it wasnt just America it hurt, it was world wide...specificly post WWI Germany....It was very easy for Hitler and the Nazis to put the whole blame on whoever was in charge of most of the money and money related jobs in Germany....SUPRISE THE JEWS!!! Of course they had nothing to do with the Great Depression.....but Propaganda can turn falsities into facts.

I think that people needed somebody to blame and the Jews were a handy scapegoat. It makes people feel better if they can blame somebody

No, Nazism was founded to stop the spread of Socialism and Communism

No, facism was!

can some1 please enlighten me on thier version, y most of europe hated jews, or in many cases still hate them?
I think what The Atlantian islands said may be why why they were hated at the time. What he describes does not seem very likable. Though it still does not justify what happened to them.

I think what The Atlantian islands said may be why why they were hated at the time. What he describes does not seem very likable. Though it still does not justify what happened to them.

Exactly...What I said is correct and does show why they were hated...However, it NEVER justifies murder EVER.

No, Nazism was founded to stop the spread of Socialism and Communism



Facism was founded to stop the spread of socialism & communism


Actually, this person is more correct.
Look into Mussolini's fascism.
He started out as some sort of socialist or maybe leftist when he was
young, but then, with others, developed a system
of corporates in which the trade unions and the company managers
ruled over the people in that trade.

Something like that. Wikipedia does a better job at explaining
it.

Facism was founded to stop the spread of socialism & communism


Actually, this person is more correct.
Look into Mussolini's fascism.
He started out as some sort of socialist or maybe leftist when he was
young, but then, with others, developed a system
of corporates in which the trade unions and the company managers
ruled over the people in that trade.

Something like that. Wikipedia does a better job at explaining
it.
But Nazism was a direct result of Communism threatining Germany.

But Nazism was a direct result of Communism threatining Germany.Wrong. National Socialism was born from the economic crisis of the time as well as plenty of frustration due to the Treaty of Versailles. The extremist movement on the other political side was communism, but in between you had the centrists, monarchists, and socialists. Nazism has a lot to do with communism, but it wasn't a direct result of communism "threatening" Germany.

Wrong. National Socialism was born from the economic crisis of the time as well as plenty of frustration due to the Treaty of Versailles. The extremist movement on the other political side was communism, but in between you had the centrists, monarchists, and socialists. Nazism has a lot to do with communism, but it wasn't a direct result of communism "threatening" Germany.

Yes it had alot to do with Post WWI Germany, but, my studies have led me to beleive that its main purpose was fighting Communism.

Yes it had alot to do with Post WWI Germany, but, my studies have led me to beleive that its main purpose was fighting Communism.The "bolshevik-jewish" conspiracy idea was the main motivation behind it, yes, but neither of these really "threatened" Germany. In fact, the misguided hypothesis was that it was these elements that had brought the mighty German war machine to fall, and not the fact that people were starving in the streets of major cities or that the allies simply had more material and started using the tank on time.
This doesn't mean that communism was threatening Germany, it only means that the Nazis were convinced that this was the case.
In what context have you made your studies, if I may ask out of curiosity?

Ok. Well before I begin let me say this....In no way did any of this justify Hitlers mass murder. Jews in Europe hated Non Jews....They were self segregated (I know that one could respond with Jews were not allowed to live integrated...sometimes they werent...but even when they were they wouldnt), they thought the non Jews to be inferior to them, and they did not want to live by a non Jewish law. They saw themselves as above the non Jews....literally as the chosen people...and everyone else not really as people. They also ridiculed the normal way of life...working class....labor...farmers....etc....And since they held high positions and made losts of money, did not worry about others views of them. It makes me really ashamed of Judaisms past to think about this. However....NEVER, did any Jew physically harm a non Jew....Whereas Hitler murdered millions of Jews....And even though I am very displeased by the past actions of Jews I see no way that any of their actions justifies their murders.
First of all, I'm not Jewish, I'm an ardent Conservative, and I'm a historical scholar, second of all...you're wrong in every way.

The True History of Anti-Semitism.

In the years of the rise of the early Church, Jews were treated extremely well by all of Europe. This was done for multiple reasons. First of all, the Church thought that if they treated the Jews well, they might convert of their own accord, and many did. Second of all, the Jews were renowned in the ancient world (as well as today) for their business ability, and as such many rulers invited Jews in to try and build up commerce. This lasted for many centuries, until a sudden shift occured in what we now call "The Middle Ages". The Church at this time shifted away from it's former policy and instead began the now well known "the Jews killed Jesus" policy. At the same time, with most of Europe's nations now solidified, and nationalities united, the Jews remained an uncertain proposition. Due to their unifying religion, they had always stayed as dual citizens, both of their resident lands and their religion. However, they also controlled a large amount of trade (due to their original roles when they were invited in), and because Europe had emerged into a somewhat stable area, the Jews now became a problem to national leaders. They wanted to control trade, but the Jews had it. Solution? Revoke the Jews rights, and in some cases citizenship, and in more extreme cases, eject them from the country.

Now, this explains the most ancient source of anti-semitism, and I don't think it is necessary to go into depth about the period from about 1200-1800, as it really shifted from sporadic leaders going after the Jews, to others bringing them back in.

In the Modern Era, the rebirth of anti-semitism came from a single great cause: Nationalism. The birth of Germany, Italy, the French Revolution, etc, all caused such sweeping movements of Nationalism as had never been seen in history. However, in many cases the Jews were left with a dubious dilemna: integrate as fully into the national identity as possible but thereby lose their identity, or fail to integrate and risk the wrath of the growing Nationalist tides of Europe. However, before the close of the 19th century, a very sudden and new force for the Jews appeared (can you guess it?) : Nationalism. The birth of nationalism with the Jews sparked a whole new line of thought in the Jewish community, namely, Zionism. In this time (directly prior to WW1), anti-semitism had receded to some degree, however, many peoples still hated the Jews (especially the Eastern Europeans, whom were in many cases themselves alike to the Jews, that is, ruled by a people not their own, normally Russia) At the close of WW1, the tide of Zionism rose increasingly, leading to the well known British decision to move Jews to Palestine. However, with the economic collapse that soon occured, a very troubling situation developed. Faced with a loss they had never seen coming, Germany looked for a scapegoat. In dire straits despite just gaining their independence, many Eastern Europeans looked for the same. The people most easily blameable? The Jews. Not only did they retain much visibility in business (as during the course of the 13th-19th centuries, many nations had banned the Jews from any trade beside commerce), they also retained a visibility as The Other. A nation within other nations. Hitler (and Stalin to a lesser degree) used this. The Jews proved to be the perfect scapegoat, and the results are now well known.

Now down to the knitty gritty: A) The Jews did not hate non-Jews (excluding in Poland, however the situation there was one of constant attacks upon them, from forced segregation, to economic pograms, to exclusion from basic society. The fact that Yiddish was known as "the language of suffering" should tell you all you need to know). B) The only cases were Jews were segregated was where they were forced to be (namely, Eastern Europe). In all other cases, the Jews were never segregated. That is why it proved so difficult to find and eradicate them throughout Western Europe. C) They thought of non-Jews as being non-Jews. Remember, this is the age of Nationalism, everyone thought they were best. D) The Jews never classed the rest of humanity as anything but humanity. They may have been heathens (I can't recall the Jewish word), but they were still people. Only the Nazis ever went so far as to call other races inhuman. E) In many cases, the Jews were actually quite poor (Eastern Europe again). In Western Europe however, the Jews were almost universally middle class. Small business owners, small traders, occasionally farmers, the Jews had were rarely "rich", but merely middle class. However, because they were in business, they were more visible than other middle class groups. F) The Jews always worried about the "views of others". That is why the integration debate was always so large. To be displeased with the actions of past Jews is one thing...but really only if you're displeased with how they acted in the Middle East. To be ashamed of their actions in Europe is to say the least...patently absurd. It's like being ashamed of the first Irish in America. It doesn't make sense.

Oh, and a point for clarification: Facism was formed as a right wing movement to try and make people forget their current struggles, and instead think back to glorious days of old (which is why Mussolini always harped on about the Roman Empire). It was not a response to Communism, not even Nazism was a response to Communism. Facism is best classed as the right wing version of Communism, that is, the totalitarian extreme of government. If you avoid economics, it's stunning to see how alike Facism and Communism actually are. Although many Fascist leaders used anti-communism to rally support, that wasn't an essential part of Fascism (see: Early Mussolini policies, Spain's refusal to join the war)


Frankly put, the Atlantian Islands does not appear to have any real historical education about anti-semitism, and most of what he has said is either completely incorrect, or a wild misinterpretation of reality. The only truly horrible things the Jews have done are there acts directly prior to, and following, the creation of Israel. Otherwise, they have basically been a convenient scapegoat.

Mussolini wasn't a saint, he was a failure compared to those two.
I said he seemed like a saint compared to the other two, not that he was a saint.

Mussolini shouldn't be on there, he was just inept, easily led and the most hated leader in the history of his country. Sounds familiar actually.
Or maybe this led to the Italian people considering him one of the 100 greatest Italians of all time.

Stalin is teh 1337 haxxorz because he listened to his generals and didn't really interfere in their battle plans.
Stalin put one of his best gernerals behind a desk just so he couldn't gain the populations support. Durring WWII he constantly interfeared with them.

No, Nazism was founded to stop the spread of Socialism and Communism
No, Fascism was. Nazism came from Fascism and thusly inherited the anti-socialism/communism ideology.

Facism was founded to stop the spread of socialism & communism


Actually, this person is more correct.
Look into Mussolini's fascism.
He started out as some sort of socialist or maybe leftist when he was
young, but then, with others, developed a system
of corporates in which the trade unions and the company managers
ruled over the people in that trade.

Something like that. Wikipedia does a better job at explaining
it.
Mussolini wasn't really a socialist when he was young, was more of a leftist rabble-rouser who used whatever he could to get his name known.

Yes, look up Corporatism on Wiki, it explains what it is.

Or maybe this led to the Italian people considering him one of the 100 greatest Italians of all time.Italy isn't exactly a good example for showing how a population copes with it's past. It says more about the sad condition of Italian historical tradition than Mussolini's character.

Italy isn't exactly a good example for showing how a population copes with it's past. It says more about the sad condition of Italian historical tradition than Mussolini's character.

hey im half itallian

and mussolini is that all cracked up frm my mums side of the family

-snip-
Wow a novel. Just what I've always wanted.:rolleyes:
Anyways, it's sad how they were forced to be in commerce only to be hated and killed for it. It really makes Europe look bad.

Well, when you look at it: Hitler, yes, was a fucking prick, what with the mass slaughter of random minorities for the hell of it, and delighting in the pain and suffering of them all. BUT he DID do a lot for the German, and WORLD economy, if it weren't for WWII, than we would be in a much higher state of economic decay than we are now. Not to mention the fact that he gave Germany a reason to live again, and said, basically "fuck you, i'm doing what i wanna do" to the allies, and the TOV (treaty of versailles), restoring a once-proud nation to it's former glory. you can't say that's not GOOD in some way.

Stalin, however, corrupted all the ideals of communism to fit his own plan, and brutally maimed a large population. he killed thousands of mothers's sons, not MEN, but BOYS! in his pointless defences. he killed civilians for not wanting to fight, and sparked the catalyst for the cold war. So, yes, i would have to say that out of all of them i would think that Stalin is the worst

It's tough for me to decide.

I'm a Fascist, so I of course do not hate Mussolini. He tried his best to be a good leader, but his Fascist bullyboys combined with his weak will led him down a dark road that he couldn't take himself off of without either destroying his Fascist party or losing the leadership to one of the other high ranking Fascist...plus, at least he made Italy a safe spot for Jews until Hitler took them over when the allies invaded.

I hate Hitler not only because he killed so many people, but also for tarnishing Fascism with his hateful ideology.

But then again Stalin killed more people. Plus he was a Communist and I don't care for communism [goes with Fascism].

However, while Stalin killed more people he also had more time to kill people.

So my vote goes to Hitler. If he had a longer reign he could have been far worse than Stalin.

But compared to these two, Mussolini was a Saint.
Well i,m a NEO-NAZI, and you don,t see how the Jews betrayed germany in ww1(the stab in the back theory) and how can you call yourself a fascist, and be all loving to Jews, they destroy all races they come in contact with, there greedy, evil vile creatures, they are the main reason you and more importenly me and my brothers may die, in a terrorist attack by our illegal support of them, we don,t need people like you even calling themselfs fascits, as far as the personal attack on the one man who tried to free people, f**k you.

Stalin is the worst he killed his own people.
He killed more People than the other two combined
He made Bullshit up about the Chechens.
He was always Insane.

[looks up at the headline] The worst what?

Worst Dressed: Hitler. His coloring was Spring, but he always went with Winter. This, of course, lead to the ill-timing of his invasion of Russia.

Worst Handwriting: Stalin. The man held a pen like a kindergartener.

Worst Mustache: Mussolini. The pansy couldn't even grow one. Honorable Mention: Hitler. Thing looked like it came in a box of crackerjacks.

Worst Taste in Food: Stalin. Ate so much cabbage and beets that you couldn't travel in a car with him in winter, it being too cold to roll the window down.

Worst in Bed: Hitler. Reports say his efforts resembled a goldfish flopping around on the floor. One lady was reported as saying that Stephen Hawking would probably be more nimble in the sack.

Worst Last Words: Mussolini. "See, I told ya I was well hung!"

Worst Dirty Habit: Mussolini. He ate his own boogers.

okay, okay, I better stop. I've already got a ticket for Hell.

[looks up at the headline] The worst what?

Worst Dressed: Hitler. His coloring was Spring, but he always went with Winter. This, of course, lead to the ill-timing of his invasion of Russia.

Worst Handwriting: Stalin. The man held a pen like a kindergartener.

Worst Mustache: Mussolini. The pansy couldn't even grow one. Honorable Mention: Hitler. Thing looked like it came in a box of crackerjacks.

Worst Taste in Food: Stalin. Ate so much cabbage and beets that you couldn't travel in a car with him in winter, it being too cold to roll the window down.

Worst in Bed: Hitler. Reports say his efforts resembled a goldfish flopping around on the floor. One lady was reported as saying that Stephen Hawking would probably be more nimble in the sack.

Worst Last Words: Mussolini. "See, I told ya I was well hung!"

Worst Dirty Habit: Mussolini. He ate his own boogers.

okay, okay, I better stop. I've already got a ticket for Hell.
Dude my ribs hurt quit it! :p

sorry, i meant all the japanese war criminals. like.. yamashita.. and idontknowtheothersnames

sorry guys. didnt mean any offense.

stalin. well just because.... and i don't want to write an essay on a forum. but i wouldn't say he was the worst because I think the Japanese Army General was way more evil because when he invaded china he killed a lot of people through slow torture. I think he was trying to model himself as adolf hitler tho, with his mustashe (don't know how to spell lol) and torturing. i think he may have been worst

Mussolini shouldn't be on there, he was just inept, easily led and the most hated leader in the history of his country. Sounds familiar actually.

I thought that place was taken by Berlusconi...

I apologise for being ignorant, but what is Fascism if not 'Hitlerism'?
fascism is an economic/social system where the hardest working citizens are given most governmental power. 'hitlerism' is national socialism, which is completely different.