Battle of the Psycho Dictators: Hitler vs Stalin

[Syndicapolis]

I figured I would start this thread, since the plot to sabotage my flag thread on the banning of hammer and sickles became an argument over whether Stalin's US"S"R or Hitler's Germany was worse and was subsequently closed, and everyone seems to have strong opinions on the subject.

Personally, I would consider Stalin worse. This may be a surprising statement to hear from a communist, but the communist movement is highly divided and ultra-leftists like myself and Stalinists share a mutual dislike of each other's methodology. Stalin's regime was a state capitalist police state that completed the creation of a new bourgeois that had been begun by Lenin and caused famine, great oppression, and more deaths than the Nazis caused. It was more destructive to the proletariat's freedom and ability to survive than Nazi rule in practice, and, with all its nationalism, almost as bigoted. All this was about as socialist as Airstrip One.

Well, there's my view. Let the debate, flaming and swarming by angry, ice axe-wielding MLs begin.

[Mefpan]

Well, unlike Hitler Stalin didn't have millions of people executed in a nightmarishly industrialized death machine in a span of, what, four fucking years?

And hey, perhaps Stalin's headcount is higher - that doesn't really matter. I think when that's waved about people kind of happen to forget that between Hitler and Stalin, only one of the two lunatics had actual plans to erase all sapient human life in eastern Europe. As fucked up as it sounds, Stalin at least knew moderation. I mean, Berlin is still a city and Poland, the Baltic States and Finland are still nations. The same couldn't be said of eastern Europe if Nazi Germany got to play with it for as long as the Soviets did.

[CTALNH]

Well, unlike Hitler Stalin didn't have millions of people executed in a nightmarishly industrialized death machine in a span of, what, four fucking years?

And hey, perhaps Stalin's headcount is higher - that doesn't really matter. I think when that's waved about people kind of happen to forget that between Hitler and Stalin, only one of the two lunatics had actual plans to erase all sapient human life in eastern Europe. As fucked up as it sounds, Stalin at least knew moderation. I mean, Berlin is still a city and Poland, the Baltic States and Finland are still nations. The same couldn't be said of eastern Europe if Nazi Germany got to play with it for as long as the Soviets did.

This pretty much is it my realistic response.

[Jordsindia]

Well, unlike Hitler Stalin didn't have millions of people executed in a nightmarishly industrialized death machine in a span of, what, four fucking years?

And hey, perhaps Stalin's headcount is higher - that doesn't really matter. I think when that's waved about people kind of happen to forget that between Hitler and Stalin, only one of the two lunatics had actual plans to erase all sapient human life in eastern Europe. As fucked up as it sounds, Stalin at least knew moderation. I mean, Berlin is still a city and Poland, the Baltic States and Finland are still nations. The same couldn't be said of eastern Europe if Nazi Germany got to play with it for as long as the Soviets did.

Hitler started opening camps in the mid-1930's. He didn't really start exterminating people until late in the war.

He forced labor, and severely neglected prisoners. But he didn't order mass murder until the 'Final Solution'.

[The Modern Roman Republic]

I would support Hitler over Stalin, although both of them were bad. Hitler killed 29 million while Stalin killed 35 million. Hitler knew modernization, not Stalin. That explains why the Nazis had assault rifles (STG-44) and jets (ME-262). The soviets did not have any of that.

[Mefpan]

Well, unlike Hitler Stalin didn't have millions of people executed in a nightmarishly industrialized death machine in a span of, what, four fucking years?

And hey, perhaps Stalin's headcount is higher - that doesn't really matter. I think when that's waved about people kind of happen to forget that between Hitler and Stalin, only one of the two lunatics had actual plans to erase all sapient human life in eastern Europe. As fucked up as it sounds, Stalin at least knew moderation. I mean, Berlin is still a city and Poland, the Baltic States and Finland are still nations. The same couldn't be said of eastern Europe if Nazi Germany got to play with it for as long as the Soviets did.

Hitler started opening camps in the mid-1930's. He didn't really start exterminating people until late in the war.

He forced labor, and severely neglected prisoners. But he didn't order mass murder until the 'Final Solution'.

Yeah, I know. I didn't go for the "regular boring" camps because every last jackass then points out that Stalin had the equivalent in his gulags.

Gas chambers, death trucks and trains and death squads slaughtering entire villages however were a little less common with the Soviets.

[Conserative Morality]

Stalin was an asshole and a murderer.

Hitler defies classification. There's something about industrializing death that... just... I don't know. Shakes something deep within a person's core; evokes horror, revulsion, outrage. Moreso than any number of gulags that worked their poor zeks to death, or starved them for daring to speak out against the regime. Gulags feel human, still. People starve and work to death under normal circumstances, and yeah, causing this is still atrocious; but people... people don't die like products from a factory. People shouldn't die like that. No one.

[Laerod]

I would support Hitler over Stalin, although both of them were bad. Hitler killed 29 million while Stalin killed 35 million. Hitler knew modernization, not Stalin. That explains why the Nazis had assault rifles (STG-44) and jets (ME-262). The soviets did not have any of that.

Germany did not look the least bit modern by the time Hitler was done with it. Hell, if we assume Speer wasn't lying about it, then Hitler gave him orders to completely dismantle German infrastructure beyond what the bombing and fighting had already destroyed, sending Germans back into the stone age in terms of technology.

[The Modern Roman Republic]

Stalin was an asshole and a murderer.

Hitler defies classification. There's something about industrializing death that... just... I don't know. Shakes something deep within a person's core; evokes horror, revulsion, outrage. Moreso than any number of gulags that worked their poor zeks to death, or starved them for daring to speak out against the regime. Gulags feel human, still. People starve and work to death under normal circumstances, and yeah, causing this is still atrocious; but people... people don't die like products from a factory. People shouldn't die like that. No one.

I agree!

[Las Palmeras]

If one counts bodies, Stalin is worse. If one counts percentages of affected target populaces, Hitler is worse. But yeah, like Mefpan said...the sheer prospects of Generalplan Ost make Hitler more monstrous.

[CTALNH]

I would support Hitler over Stalin, although both of them were bad. Hitler killed 29 million while Stalin killed 35 million. Hitler knew modernization, not Stalin. That explains why the Nazis had assault rifles (STG-44) and jets (ME-262). The soviets did not have any of that.

Stalin knew how reverse engineer though AK47,nuclear weapons,rocket science.

[Laerod]

Well, unlike Hitler Stalin didn't have millions of people executed in a nightmarishly industrialized death machine in a span of, what, four fucking years?

And hey, perhaps Stalin's headcount is higher - that doesn't really matter. I think when that's waved about people kind of happen to forget that between Hitler and Stalin, only one of the two lunatics had actual plans to erase all sapient human life in eastern Europe. As fucked up as it sounds, Stalin at least knew moderation. I mean, Berlin is still a city and Poland, the Baltic States and Finland are still nations. The same couldn't be said of eastern Europe if Nazi Germany got to play with it for as long as the Soviets did.

Hitler started opening camps in the mid-1930's. He didn't really start exterminating people until late in the war.

He forced labor, and severely neglected prisoners. But he didn't order mass murder until the 'Final Solution'.

Those camps were sites of mass murder even before extermination was planned. The intention to work inmates to death predates the Wannsee Conference.

[Distruzio]

Stalin. He was worse.

[Alyakia]

Stalin was an asshole and a murderer.

Hitler defies classification. There's something about industrializing death that... just... I don't know. Shakes something deep within a person's core; evokes horror, revulsion, outrage. Moreso than any number of gulags that worked their poor zeks to death, or starved them for daring to speak out against the regime. Gulags feel human, still. People starve and work to death under normal circumstances, and yeah, causing this is still atrocious; but people... people don't die like products from a factory. People shouldn't die like that. No one.

for me it's quite simple. there are many cases where people served out their time in gulags or were later released. how many people served out their time as jews in auschwitz and got released?

[Mefpan]

I would support Hitler over Stalin, although both of them were bad. Hitler killed 29 million while Stalin killed 35 million. Hitler knew modernization, not Stalin. That explains why the Nazis had assault rifles (STG-44) and jets (ME-262). The soviets did not have any of that.

Germany did not look the least bit modern by the time Hitler was done with it. Hell, if we assume Speer wasn't lying about it, then Hitler gave him orders to completely dismantle German infrastructure beyond what the bombing and fighting had already destroyed, sending Germans back into the stone age in terms of technology.

Yeah, our great and mighty Aryan "herrenvolk" lost in the "heroic struggle" against the slavic "untermensch" and thus proved ourselves unworthy of continuing to exist on this world because by losing that war we apparently lost our right to exist.

I like to think that my mere existence is a middle finger to Schicklgruber's fucked up worldview.

(I shouldn't have to point this out, but the usage of controversial words in this post is done to drive home the sheer irony of how the whole thing turned out and not meant to offend anyone except for the guys who actually believe the shit the Bohemian Corporal spouted.)

[Great Liberal Land of True Serbia]

Equality through subjugation is the only way. Stalin was right.

[Oceans Haven]

Theyre both equally psychotic assholes but hittler wins by a narrow margin. Both wanted world domination, both silenced their opposition, and both essentially commited warcrimes on their own citizens. But hittler was the one who said "FUCK EVERYONE WHO ISNT OF A CERTAIN RACE AND CREED!" and launched genocide. Even if initially he just forced jews, gypsies, non aryans, and other people he deemed unworthy to labor camps, at the end of the day, he still pulled the trigger on them for basically being different.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Both were shit on an almost unfathomable level.

[Calimera II]

They were both utter shit.

[Bulgar Rouge]

I would support Hitler over Stalin, although both of them were bad. Hitler killed 29 million while Stalin killed 35 million. Hitler knew modernization, not Stalin. That explains why the Nazis had assault rifles (STG-44) and jets (ME-262). The soviets did not have any of that.

1) Stalin probably sent to camps much more people than Hitler, but a much smaller proportion of those died. The worst events under Stalin were the Great Terror, forced resettlements and the Holodomor. The first two were campaigns on entirely political grounds. The last one was the result of gross mismanagement.

Hitler's campaigns aimed extermination of people entirely because of what they were. Under Stalin, you could've joined the Party, follow the line and be safe, under most circumstances. Under Hitler, you could be the most devoted Nazi yet coming out as a homosexual, being a Jew or somehow disabled guaranteed your ticket to the gas chambers. The former is methodical authoritarianism, the latter is pure evil.

2) Stalin took one of the poorest countries in Europe only to make it the second-largest economy in the world. Hitler took a depressed, yet developed economy and completely ruined it, dividing and diminishing Germany on top of that. Oh, and the Soviet Union was more technologically advanced than Germany long before the war.

[Jordsindia]

Hitler started opening camps in the mid-1930's. He didn't really start exterminating people until late in the war.

He forced labor, and severely neglected prisoners. But he didn't order mass murder until the 'Final Solution'.

Those camps were sites of mass murder even before extermination was planned. The intention to work inmates to death predates the Wannsee Conference.

But Hitler did not speed up the process until the Final Solution.

Sure they worked them to death, but it wasn't done to wipe them out as fast as possible.

[Laerod]

Those camps were sites of mass murder even before extermination was planned. The intention to work inmates to death predates the Wannsee Conference.

But Hitler did not speed up the process until the Final Solution.

Sure they worked them to death, but it wasn't done to wipe them out as fast as possible.

Later mass murder being "more efficient" does not make previous mass murder something else.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Stalin was responsible for killing more people, actively cooperating with the Nazis, and the formation and maintenance of the state security apparatus and cult of "communism", personality and paranoia that would go on to spend almost a half-century oppressing the entirety of Eastern Europe.

Hitler was a monster with a sickening and mad ideology. But at least it was a sickening ideology that was practically destroyed by the active work of the world. Stalin's delusional psychopathy was accepted and allowed to continue only minorly hindered in those countries he couldn't grab.

[KASSRD Drone]

Hitler was worse. He killed more people in a shorter time, and planned on killing far more.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Stalin was responsible for killing more people, actively cooperating with the Nazis, and the formation and maintenance of the state security apparatus and cult of "communism", personality and paranoia that would go on to spend almost a half-century oppressing the entirety of Eastern Europe.

Hitler was a monster with a sickening and mad ideology. But at least it was a sickening ideology that was practically destroyed by the active work of the world. Stalin's delusional psychopathy was accepted and allowed to continue only minorly hindered in those countries he couldn't grab.

Honest question here, what exactly SHOULD Stalin have done? The British government of the 30s was more likely to have joined the Germans in attacking the USSR if the choice came up, and their alliance with France was doubtful at best for a variety of reasons. Stalin had been the main political opponent of fascism up to the non-aggression pact was signed, and even then both sides clearly knew that the pact was just a delaying measure for them to try to gain strategic advantage.

So. Put yourself in Stalin's boots for a moment. You're clearly not going to get any help from outside, but you've got a chance to grab a nice buffer zone between yourself and the guys who plainly intend to invade your country and murder everybody in it. If that means the sacrifice of Polish liberty and the 'sovereignty' of a bunch of traitorous Batic-Germans, all of whom are, from your perspective, legitimately part of your country anyway, what do you do?