NationStates

Both Stalin and Mao killed more people than Hitler. Hitler at least cared about some people and had principles, even if his beliefs and actions were utterly abhorrent and a perversion of humanities worst impulses. Stalin and Mao? They were nothing more than murderous sociopaths that both killed millions more people than Hitler.

All 3 men were evil, but Stalin and Mao had a different quality as well as quantity of evil. Something which in my view makes them even worse than Hitler.

Hitler had a wider impact than Stalin and Mao, because of the war he started, and given that you can lay all the bad consequences of that war to his account, you can argue that there was more blood on his hands. Stalin's and Mao's worst crimes were against the people of their own countries, although they were on a truly massive scale because they were huge countries.

What do you think? Was anyone as bad as Hitler was? Was Stalin? Mao?

Hitler was by far the best dressed of the three. His uniforms much cleaner and crisper, he had better designers working for him as well.

Ethel mermania wrote:Hitler was by far the best dressed of the three. His uniforms much cleaner and crisper, he had better designers working for him as well.

Stalin had a cool mustache and hairstyle.

Well, "small" detail here, but Hitler was in power for 12 years whereas Stalin was in power for 24-29 years, aka twice as many.

EDIT: In the end, they were all brutal, totalitarian dictators. Looking past their admittedly enormous body counts, there are other things to consider. Taking the state in which they left the country during their rule Mao gets the worst score, as he left China miserably poor and isolated.

All three sucked.

However Hitler was at least good to ethnic Germans. Stalin on the other hand did not even treat Georgians (Ordzhonikidze) that well and may have killed his second wife. Mao was simply another Zhang Xianzhong, that is, a complete sociopath. Stalin at least stayed in Moscow before the battle. Mao on the other hand was good at fleeing..

I vote Hitler, because god forbid we trigger the tankies.

Yes, this post is sarcasm.

Hitler.

Hell of a lot more would have died if he won.

Hitler.

Stalin and Mao are awful, but their ideologies are not based on ethnic genocide, and god knows how many Hitler would've slaughtered had he won, considering he saw Slavs as Untermenschen, you can add 60 million more to the 12 million holocaust death count, at least.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Hitler.

Hell of a lot more would have died if he won.

But a lot of people still stand by Stalin and Mao, more so than Hitler.

I would say that Hitler and Stalin can both share the infamous title of "most evil man in history."

Bread Herbert wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Hitler.

Hell of a lot more would have died if he won.

But a lot of people still stand by Stalin and Mao, more so than Hitler.

The former is correct. The latter is irrelevant.

You only count the victims of the holocaust for Hitler, while you arguably should add all the victims of the Second World War.

Regardless, you can’t compare numbers like that. Russia and China are both bigger, and people there died through sheer mismanagement and famine. The death toll is horrendous and the people in charge didn’t mich care.

However, Hitler committed genocide. He purposfully forced people into gas chambers by the millions and killed them. His goal was the extermination of an ethnicity. That makes him one of the most despicable people to ever roam the earth. The industrialised, purposeful killing of a group of people.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:I would say that Hitler and Stalin can both share the infamous title of "most evil man in history."

Indeed.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:I would say that Hitler and Stalin can both share the infamous title of "most evil man in history."

I would not spare Mao, who might as well be as brutal as Stalin and fairly incompetent when it comes to ruling (most of his body count are starvation deaths from disastrous policies that Mao doubled down after knowing the terrible consequences).

Worst overall I would still pick Hitler I guess.

Hard to say. I think all are equally evil. I do think it might be important to point out that death counts aren’t really an evilness measurement system. What if you killed 2 million Nazis?

Mao's high kill count, the fact that a lot more people still follow him/defend him than Hitler, and the fact that he repeatedly raped a 14 year old girl makes Mao the worst. At least under Hitler you were safe if you were in a certain category while hardly anyone was safe under Stalin or Mao.

Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:You only count the victims of the holocaust for Hitler, while you arguably should add all the victims of the Second World War.

Regardless, you can’t compare numbers like that. Russia and China are both bigger, and people there died through sheer mismanagement and famine. The death toll is horrendous and the people in charge didn’t mich care.

However, Hitler committed genocide. He purposfully forced people into gas chambers by the millions and killed them. His goal was the extermination of an ethnicity. That makes him one of the most despicable people to ever roam the earth. The industrialised, purposeful killing of a group of people.

Body count is also distorted by the lengths of their rule, Hitler was in power for "only" 12 years.
Hitler started WWII but all combatants contributed to the bloodshed. You could, however, add all killings by the Germans in WWII.
Stalin also committed genocide in both Ukraine and Kazakhstan during the 1930s.

Hitler in 13 years killed about the same number if people as Stalin did in 30. Hitler's holocaust was much better organised, planned, executed And recorded than any other genocide in history, a sickening disturbing window into how completely dehumanized the victims were by then to him. Not to mention the part where he aggressively tried to conquer an entire continent, bringing death to 10s of millions beyond his country's borders.

So yeah, I say Hitler was the worst out of all these psychotic monsters.

I vote pol pot as worse than any of them.

Bread Herbert wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Hitler.

Hell of a lot more would have died if he won.

But a lot of people still stand by Stalin and Mao, more so than Hitler.

That doesnt really matter considering Hitlers entire ideology was aimed the utter annihilation and enslavement of multiple races and ethnic groups in Europe and the annexation of land. The Slavic deaths alone would have been well over 100 million after enough time.

Springfeal wrote:Mao's high kill count, the fact that a lot more people still follow him/defend him than Hitler, and the fact that he repeatedly raped a 14 year old girl makes Mao the worst. At least under Hitler you were safe if you were in a certain category while hardly anyone was safe under Stalin or Mao.

Many people follow Mao partially because he is still idolized in the world's most populous country for political reasons.

Chan Island wrote:Hitler in 13 years killed about the same number if people as Stalin did in 30. Hitler's holocaust was much better organised, planned, executed And recorded than any other genocide in history, a sickening disturbing window into how completely dehumanized the victims were by then to him. Not to mention the part where he aggressively tried to conquer an entire continent, bringing death to 10s of millions beyond his country's borders.

So yeah, I say Hitler was the worst out of all these psychotic monsters.

This, though Stalin also deliberately annexed large areas in Eastern Europe before the Germans invaded the USSR.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Bread Herbert wrote:
But a lot of people still stand by Stalin and Mao, more so than Hitler.

That doesnt really matter considering Hitlers entire ideology was aimed the utter annihilation and enslavement of multiple races and ethnic groups in Europe and the annexation of land. The Slavic deaths alone would have been well over 100 million after enough time.

Arguable. Given the ever changing definition of Aryan and the tendency of many officials to believe a lot of Slavs could be Aryanized, the actual scale of the killings probably wouldn't have been nearly that high.

Diopolis wrote:I vote pol pot as worse than any of them.

Yeah, how was he missed? He killed 25% of his country's population in 4 years.

Hitler, he intentionally tried to wipe out an entire people, in a way that is truly beyond cruel.

After that Stalin, who killed numerous people to stay alive.

And the numbers for Mao are just absurd, and the famine was not planned, but a result of circumstances and bad decisions.

Vivolkha wrote:

Diopolis wrote:I vote pol pot as worse than any of them.

Yeah, how was he missed? He killed 25% of his country's population in 4 years.

Indeed.