FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Who was worse ? Hitler ? Mao ? Or Stalin ?
Who was worse ? Hitler ? Mao ? Or Stalin ?
Jump to: Newest in thread
In terms of numbers, Mao has the title - although the effects were mostly felt by his own people.
Hitler and his allies, Japan and Italy, unleashed the dogs of war against virtually the whole world, so in terms of impact Hitler was the worst.
However, anyone living under soviet repression would probably place Stalin as world's most evil dictator.
Poland suffered greatly under the repression of Hitler and Stalin during the war and after the war by Stalin again. I believe that most Poles would say that Stalin was the bigger evil.
There's not much point in trying to create a table of worst tyrants, but in terms of morality, I would support the proposition that assassination of any of them should be classified as a virtuous kill. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'd add Bin Laden to the formbook as well.
I would credit him (and the koran of course) as the inspiration behind nearly 30,000 world-wide murderous islamo-nazi attacks since 9/11.
This year alone SO FAR there have been 2416 recorded islamo-nazi attacks in 59 countries, in which 20948 people have been killed and 26292 injured.
That of course doesn't include conspiracies/attempts e.g. the plan by Melbourne's islamo-nazis to blow up Melbourne Cathedral and the railway station on Christmas Day.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly think he runs Hitler very close !"
.
The reason I picked Stalin was nothing to do with numbers of dead, it's the fact he took a genuine revolution for something better than the tsar offered (which was terrible in itself) and turned it into something equally as bad or worse.
Everybody else at least set out on the path of dictatorships from the outset |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"I certainly think he runs Hitler very close !.
The reason I picked Stalin was nothing to do with numbers of dead, it's the fact he took a genuine revolution for something better than the tsar offered (which was terrible in itself) and turned it into something equally as bad or worse.
Everybody else at least set out on the path of dictatorships from the outset"
Good point |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The reason I picked Stalin was nothing to do with numbers of dead, it's the fact he took a genuine revolution for something better than the tsar offered (which was terrible in itself) and turned it into something equally as bad or worse.
Everybody else at least set out on the path of dictatorships from the outset"
I like your thinking. However on the plus side for Stalin took a country with 98% illiteracy and no industrial base and built a world nuclear industrial superpower that was first into space and had universal literacy. I for one don't think that would have been possible to achieve in the 40 years it took by any other method.
Therefore I still favour Hitler for the 40 or so million he is responsible for killing in 5 years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
I don't think one can be considered better or worse than another, they were all evil bastard, and there are others too, Pol Pot has also been mentioned. I wonder what some Indian nations would say about some American presidents, or what some of our former colonies would say about us. The concentration camp is after all a British invention. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think one can be considered better or worse than another, they were all evil bastard, and there are others too, Pol Pot has also been mentioned. I wonder what some Indian nations would say about some American presidents, or what some of our former colonies would say about us. The concentration camp is after all a British invention."
Again I agree, an evil bastard is an evil bastard, and the world is full of evil bastards. The question has to be how much good came from the damage they cause?
I would suggest the likes of Pol Pot, Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Foday Kallay of the West Side Boys (Sierra Leone) and the Ill dynasty in N Korea stand out as having no saving graces to their tyranny.
Again just my personal opinion, and the distinctions I am making are very small. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There seems to be one constant with them all though. Socialism
So you think Hitler was a socialist...
That explains much...
 "
Yes he was. Didn't he employ socialist policies? Create jobs through government etc? Follow a lot of what Marx said? Didn't he blame the rich for the countries problems? National socialism is just socialism with a different name |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There seems to be one constant with them all though. Socialism"
Two of them were communist and one was a national socialist (nazi). Just because socialist is in the title it does not meant he was one. It's like when you corrected me about neo-facist in the past. An extract below mention they reject the Marxist concept of class struggle.
"The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class struggle, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism, and sought to convince all parts of a new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the "common good" and to accept the priority of political interests in economic organisation." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There seems to be one constant with them all though. Socialism
Two of them were communist and one was a national socialist (nazi). Just because socialist is in the title it does not meant he was one. It's like when you corrected me about neo-facist in the past. An extract below mention they reject the Marxist concept of class struggle.
"The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class struggle, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism, and sought to convince all parts of a new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the "common good" and to accept the priority of political interests in economic organisation.""
class struggle? Who knows but everything about national socialism in Germany was based on Marx.
Pol pot was also a socialist |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There seems to be one constant with them all though. Socialism
Two of them were communist and one was a national socialist (nazi). Just because socialist is in the title it does not meant he was one. It's like when you corrected me about neo-facist in the past. An extract below mention they reject the Marxist concept of class struggle.
"The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class struggle, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism, and sought to convince all parts of a new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the "common good" and to accept the priority of political interests in economic organisation."
class struggle? Who knows but everything about national socialism in Germany was based on Marx.
Pol pot was also a socialist"
But Marxism is all about class struggle. It's against capitalism because the theory is that it creates a split in class. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Does it matter the politics of the person
I think what matters is,too a man they wanted to rule the world they didn't like you because you where different to them
Black,jew,pole,gypsy,christian,
Catholic.
Whatever !!!!
It isn't politics its ideology I dont like yours so you will bow down to mine as i am bigger and stronger than you.
Just an aside, take a look at the man in the high castle on amazon possibly could jave been
Andy  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Does it matter the politics of the person
I think what matters is,too a man they wanted to rule the world they didn't like you because you where different to them
Black,jew,pole,gypsy,christian,
Catholic.
Whatever !!!!
It isn't politics its ideology I dont like yours so you will bow down to mine as i am bigger and stronger than you.
Just an aside, take a look at the man in the high castle on amazon possibly could jave been
Andy "
I agree. It's just an ideology, a theory or a believe. It does not define what actions or intentions they have.
We can probably name a killer from any ideology. For example, buddhism. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
'We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with the unfair salaries, with the unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are determined to destroy the system under all conditions'
Adolf Hitler, May 1, 1927
Straight from the horses mouth you might say, so who are we to argue |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
@candm4u: political ideology is horse shoe shaped, whether they consider themselves right wing or left wing, if it entails mass murder (I don't include soldiers killing each other in battle) its the same thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"dont forget Corbyn and the unions
You might not like Corbyn, I certainly don't, but he hasn't killed anyone, and I doubt he ever will. "
Not sure you could say the same about Mc Donald ? Got to be the most scary politician on the Planet !!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"dont forget Corbyn and the unions
You might not like Corbyn, I certainly don't, but he hasn't killed anyone, and I doubt he ever will.
Not sure you could say the same about Mc Donald ? Got to be the most scary politician on the Planet !!!"
Again, not killed anyone, never will. Hardly comparable to the people mentioned in the OP |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A question to those who mistakenly believe Hitler was on the left, and was a socialist, do you think there has ever been a right wing dictator, and if so, who? "
Henry Kissinger is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths through his malign influence on US presidents. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A question to those who mistakenly believe Hitler was on the left, and was a socialist, do you think there has ever been a right wing dictator, and if so, who?
Augusto Pinochet."
Waiting for someone to say he is a socialist... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"A question to those who mistakenly believe Hitler was on the left, and was a socialist, do you think there has ever been a right wing dictator, and if so, who?
Augusto Pinochet."
And why do you believe that Pinochet was on the right and Hitler was on the left. What do you see as their main ideological differences? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andACouple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"A question to those who mistakenly believe Hitler was on the left, and was a socialist, do you think there has ever been a right wing dictator, and if so, who?
Augusto Pinochet.
And why do you believe that Pinochet was on the right and Hitler was on the left. What do you see as their main ideological differences?"
I never mentioned anything about Hitler. I was just trying to help out by answering your question. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andACouple
over a year ago
glasgow |
Having done a quick google search this wiki link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany#Hitler.27s_views_on_economics) gives a decent description of Germany's pre war (1939) economy that makes it pretty clear it was what we would call socialist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"'We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with the unfair salaries, with the unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are determined to destroy the system under all conditions'
Adolf Hitler, May 1, 1927
Straight from the horses mouth you might say, so who are we to argue"
He's just a bloke who didn't like anyone that was different
Hence the master race
He was a racist above all else, it was the politics of a single twisted mind that due to circumstances swayed a whole nation to his narrow minded beliefs.
Socialism,facsism,isms !!! All bull isms just some bully who wants what you have and as he thinks he is bigger and stronger he can take it.
Doesn't matter how you dress it up fundamentally its the big guy against the little guy coz the big guy wants what you have and doesnt like the way you think and he is taking what you have
Fuck you fuck your beliefs mine are better mine are stronger |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think stalin was honest compared to our leaders today when he said.One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.
We wont be shedding a tear over 500,0000 body bags in iraq down to us.Thats before isis even existed. Its just numbers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Newbury |
"'We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with the unfair salaries, with the unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are determined to destroy the system under all conditions'
Adolf Hitler, May 1, 1927
Straight from the horses mouth you might say, so who are we to argue
He's just a bloke who didn't like anyone that was different
Hence the master race
He was a racist above all else, it was the politics of a single twisted mind that due to circumstances swayed a whole nation to his narrow minded beliefs.
Socialism,facsism,isms !!! All bull isms just some bully who wants what you have and as he thinks he is bigger and stronger he can take it.
Doesn't matter how you dress it up fundamentally its the big guy against the little guy coz the big guy wants what you have and doesnt like the way you think and he is taking what you have
Fuck you fuck your beliefs mine are better mine are stronger "
I think the (not particularly difficult) concept that some people are failing to grasp is that Hitler was a) a nutter and b)Borrowed bits from lots of different ideologies, which he dictated in a series of rants to form the basis of Mein Kampf. He waged war on socialists (of the non nationalist variety).... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Newbury |
"It's an interesting question but on a serious note I don't think we can engage in moral relativism when it comes to mass-murdering tyrants. There is no Gold, Silver and Bronze in evil."
But, in relation to the OP, these are my thoughts too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think when discussing their politics that it is worth keeping in mind that politics is a circle, and so Hitler being so far right and stalin being far to the left essentially made them cut from the same cloth in terms of their beliefs.
Stalin was definetly a nut job, I remember reading about a mass grave that was discovered. The Russians blamed the Germans, how ever the hands of the people who were killed were tied in a way that the Russians did. Plus it got to a point with stalin where the top guys in his military were all early 20's as he kept killing them when they brought him bad news. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly think he runs Hitler very close !.
The reason I picked Stalin was nothing to do with numbers of dead, it's the fact he took a genuine revolution for something better than the tsar offered (which was terrible in itself) and turned it into something equally as bad or worse.
Everybody else at least set out on the path of dictatorships from the outset"
Bad comparison; the Russian Revolution created its own mythos and Stalin's part in that was attacked (of course very reasonably) by Trotskites and then within Russia following Khrushchev's 'Secret Speech'.
Stalin was a paranoiac. He used terror as a yardstick of obedience - quotas for arrests and executions - the Great Purges, 'collectivisation', the GULAGs and the rest.
The belief of the old left is that Stalin perverted the Revolution.
But Trotsky had martial law declared in factories, Lenin created the CHEKA, instigated the Red Terror...
The seed of authoritarianism was strong in Russia under the Tsars and was a dictatorship under Lenin. Stalin made it into an Orwellian nightmare. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
