Most infamous man of the 20th century

Most Infamous man of the 20th Century

  • Mao Tse-Tung

    Votes: 5 10.9%
  • Adolf Hitler

    Votes: 30 65.2%
  • Joseph Stalin

    Votes: 6 13.0%
  • Benito Mussolini

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Francisco Franco

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Emperor Hirohito

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Pol Pot

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Idi Amin

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Papa Doc

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 4.3%

  • Total voters
    46
Silverbackman said:
How come Saddam isn't in that list? How about Kim Jong II and maybe even Fidel Castro?
Not very evil if you ask me. To be really evil you must be reponsible for the deaths of millions (like Hitler, Stalin, Mao...), not a few thousands.
 
Maciamo said:
Not very evil if you ask me. To be really evil you must be reponsible for the deaths of millions (like Hitler, Stalin, Mao...), not a few thousands.

We really don't know how many Kim Jong II has killed. The country is so isolated. It may well be in the millions. We didn't figure out all the horrors of Saddam either until we occupied his country.

Saddam's greatest idol was Stalin and his administration was modeled after the Third Reich. Saddam would have killed as much people as Stalin or someone else if he stayed in power but we took him out before had the chance to do so. His intentions were all the same so it is almost as bad. If I tried to kill you and fail it wouldn't change the fact that I meant to kill you whether you are dead or not. Where as if I accidently killed you but it was accident it is a lot different. I didn't initially mean to kill you so it really isn't as bad as if I tried to kill you and fail.

Saddam maybe as evil as even the top 3 excluding numbers. Unlike other dictators he witnessed a lot of his killings. While say Hitler may have ordered the deaths of many many people, it was almost as if Saddam killed many of his victims with his bare hands.

As for Castro........well........he maybe more mild than the other 3 but to be honest we really don't know much since information is so tightly kept. Fidel would have you believe the approval rating is at 100% and everyone knows that isn't true.
 
Silverbackman said:
As for Castro........well........he maybe more mild than the other 3 but to be honest we really don't know much since information is so tightly kept. Fidel would have you believe the approval rating is at 100% and everyone knows that isn't true.
I think Americans have a very skewed view of Cuba (ironically as it is their neighbour). Maybe that is a remnant of the Cold War. In fact, US citizens are still not allowed by their own government to go to Cuba (the Cuban government welcomes them though). Cuba has been a touristic destination for Europeans for decades, and I have never heard of any "atrocity" or "fear-instilled people" or other signs of evil dictatorship. Actually Cubans tend to be very joyful people, and contrarily to North Korea Castro has managed to make communism work quite effectively for the good of the nation in Cuba. I am sure that Cubans are happier than their non-communist Haitian neighbours (maybe even than several other central American countries).

Cuba is the Dinseyland of Communism. Cuba is the party land of salsa, mambo, rumba and chachacha. In fact it gets over 1 million tourists per year (despite being offlimits to US citizens !), more than Portugal or Peru.
 
I'm picking Hitler, simply as most 'infamous' (not saying that he was necessarily the 'worst'). But they all come pretty close...

Props for a good list!
Also I think it's good for me to think more about those other people and what they have done... continue a bit with my education. :cool:
I have to say though, that at least in Europe, Hitler tends to be the one that gets mentioned whenever someone wants to illustrate an epitome of 20th-century evil.
 
Silverbackman said:
How come Saddam isn't in that list? How about Kim Jong II and maybe even Fidel Castro?
Several reasons. If I had picked every person who is regarded as infamous the list would have been longer than the polls allow. Saddam is more a 21st century tyrant. Fidel Castro is hardly a tyrant or evil to most people in the world except to Americans, who seem to think that Fidel is poised to invade Florida at any second. The fact is George W. Bush is is probably more infamous than he is. Fidel is just sticking two fingers up at the US since he gained power and the US government don't like it and portray him as an evil dictator.
 
Maciamo said:
I think Americans have a very skewed view of Cuba (ironically as it is their neighbour). Maybe that is a remnant of the Cold War. In fact, US citizens are still not allowed by their own government to go to Cuba (the Cuban government welcomes them though). Cuba has been a touristic destination for Europeans for decades, and I have never heard of any "atrocity" or "fear-instilled people" or other signs of evil dictatorship. Actually Cubans tend to be very joyful people, and contrarily to North Korea Castro has managed to make communism work quite effectively for the good of the nation in Cuba. I am sure that Cubans are happier than their non-communist Haitian neighbours (maybe even than several other central American countries).
Cuba is the Dinseyland of Communism. Cuba is the party land of salsa, mambo, rumba and chachacha. In fact it gets over 1 million tourists per year (despite being offlimits to US citizens !), more than Portugal or Peru.

Well illness is forcing the Cuban leader to cede power temporarily to his brother...

What would this mean? Star Bucks, Mc Donald’s, Coca Cola on their way to Cuba or the next dictator would be like the last and the cold war continues...
 
After that I think Stalin, becuase aside from his purgres, his actions and those of his successors resulted in half of Europe sitting around in a grey communist smog while the rest of Europe developed and moved on.


Actually, I am not surprised that the Pole voted against Stalin. Many Poles love to whimper and say that it is the USSR that messed up their lives. I wonder, why do not they say anything like that about the Russian Empire? :rolleyes:


Nice thread... To tell the truth, I do not hate Stalin, nor Hitler. Sometimes I say that I do, but, in reality, I do not. Yes, Stalin killed 40 million Russians and almost destroyed the Russian culture and Russian national identity; Hitler considered the Slavs an inferior race, was going to annihilate most of the Russians and to make slaves to so-called superior Aryan race of the rest of the Russians. And, in fact, he succeeded, in some sense, in that, having killed 20 million Russians.

Fear and respect are the reverse of the medal called hatred. I do not why, but I do not even despise them at all.


So my choice is hypocritical b@stard Winston Churchill. I also do not know why, but I am disgusted by him.

He said, ?eWhat is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone??f and then agreed with Stalin upon dividing post-war Europe into two halves (Stalin owned and controlled the Eastern part of Europe; Churchill & Co. owned and controlled the Western part). In addition, he made the world much more muddled by unleashing the Cold War. Very nice...

I also despise Maggie Thatcher. Malicious b!tch...
:D
 
Nice thread... To tell the truth, I do not hate Stalin, nor Hitler. Sometimes I say that I do, but, in reality, I do not.
...
So my choice is hypocritical b@stard Winston Churchill. I also do not know why, but I am disgusted by him.
He said, ?eWhat is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone??f and then agreed with Stalin upon dividing post-war Europe into two halves (Stalin owned and controlled the Eastern part of Europe; Churchill & Co. owned and controlled the Western part). In addition, he made the world much more muddled by unleashing the Cold War. Very nice...

Churchill didn't have much choice in the agreement of diving Europe in two halves. At the end of WWII, the influence of Churchill had faded to the profit of president Roosevelt then Truman, on the Allied side. Anyway, the USSR already occupied Eastern Europe and Stalin was never going to surrender these territories from the Soviet sphere of influence. What would you have done in the position of the Allied ? Continue the war against the USSR ? That would have been suicidal (for both sides). Churchill reluctantly agreed to divide Europe, but he was the first to forsee the Cold War coming.

However it wasn't him, nor Britain, that were the main cause of the Cold War, but the two main protagonists : the USA and the USSR. Western Europeans hardly cared about the Communist block at all during most of the Cold War. On the capitalist side, it is only Americans that were paranoiac about the Communists. The best proof is that countries like France and Italy have had Communist parties in their parliaments from the end of WWII to this day, while it used to be a crime to even call yourself communist in the US.
 
I believe that Hitler was the worst.

Wasn't he known to be bi-polar? I think he was Half Jewish too. In any case, he was insane.
 
I believe that Hitler was the worst.
Wasn't he known to be bi-polar? I think he was Half Jewish too. In any case, he was insane.

Are all bi-polar and half (or full) Jewish people insane ? How much have you read about Stalin and Mao ? What do you about Hitler's private life and character ?
 
AFAIK the half-jewish story is urban myth bought about by some very suspect family history.
Hitler wasn't bi-polar, just a very single minded man with total conviction in what he believed. Various people like the madness to explain what he did, but he was a product of the times and an very intelligent man. Because of what he did he cannot be viewed very objectively by a great many people.
As for insanity you could call a great many people from history insane depending on your standpoint. Was Joan of Arc insane? She swore blind she saw angels from God, yet the French admired her. Nowadays we call it hallucinations and lock her up.
 
As for insanity you could call a great many people from history insane depending on your standpoint. Was Joan of Arc insane? She swore blind she saw angels from God, yet the French admired her. Nowadays we call it hallucinations and lock her up.

For many people insanity is not being "like everyone else". In our Western individualist societies, insanity is often associate with mindset or behaviours we cannot understand. I could refer to all practising Muslims as "insane" because they pray 5x a day toward Mecca. Likewise, they could refer to all non-Muslims as insane because they don't. It's all relative, and certainly very subjective.
 
Are all bi-polar and half (or full) Jewish people insane ?

Was that a rhetorical question?


How much have you read about Stalin and Mao?

I have read enough about Stalin. Yes, Stalin was a ruthless man, killing Millions to get the power he wanted in the Communist Party. Stalin killed more people than Hitler. But Hitler is the man I think about when this "Most Infamous" question is asked. About Mao, I have only tentative learning about the guy. Besides the holocaust is something that gets to me everytime I hear about it.


What do you about Hitler's private life and character ?

I know he was an extraordinary painter. But I don't need to know anything about his private life and character. All I need to know is what his intentions were and what he has done to become the most infamous man in my mind.
 
Insanity is one of the labels a man with tunnel vision pins on inexplicable behaviours, deeds, etc. As to you, Mitsuo Oda, I hope that by calling Hitler insane, you just expressed your negative feelings about him. ;)


Originally posted by Mitsuo Oda:

I know he was an extraordinary painter.


What do you mean by an extraordinary painter? In my opinion, extraordinary painters are Salvador Dali, Hieronymus Bosch, Rembrandt, et cetera. Hitler was not an extraordinary painter. I have seen his paintings. They are absolutely untalented. My cat paints better! And, please, do not judge Hitler from Hollywood films.

By the way, Salvador Dali said that Hitler's back had a fascination for him. In 1937, he even painted The Enigma of Hitler. Afterwards, Dali said that Hitler had been a complete masochist who had unleashed the war for the sole purpose of losing it. :D


Originally posted by Mitsuo Oda:

But I don't need to know anything about his private life and character. All I need to know is what his intentions were and what he has done to become the most infamous man in my mind.


If a man invents the race theory, kills 6 million Jews, it does not mean that he is mistaken about everything in the world and cannot be, for example, a good father, friend, husband, etc.

Many Russians want a monument to Stalin to be erected in every city. Yes, they are aware of his purges, etc. But they consider him a man who won one of the greatest victories in Russian history (perhaps, in the world history as well). What do you think about it?

As to me, I think it was the people and the talented generals who won the victory. (Any war is won most of all by people.) When Stalin made a military decision, the army failed.

What will one say, if the Germans erect a monument to Hitler and argue for his having cared for the Aryan race? Erecting a monument to Stalin (as well as to Hitler) is totally ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
Insanity is one of the labels a man with tunnel vision pins on inexplicable behaviours, deeds, etc. As to you, Mitsuo Oda, I hope that by calling Hitler insane, you just expressed your negative feelings about him. ;)


Or you'll what? Say that I'm a man with tunnel visions?
When I say that he's "insane", I don't mean it in the literal sense. When I say that, it means he did things that would make you question his insanity. YOU need to be able to distinguish among literal phrases and non. Perhaps a remedial English class will help. Just a suggestion.


What do you mean by an extraordinary painter? In my opinion, extraordinary painters are Salvador Dali, Hieronymus Bosch, Rembrandt, et cetera. Hitler was not an extraordinary painter. I have seen his paintings. They are absolutely untalented. My cat paints better! And, please, do not judge Hitler from Hollywood films.

UH, yeah, you heard correctly. He was a good painter. This is my opinion. Deal with it. Although many of his paintings were copies of post cards, they are quite impressive. Not very many people can replicate pictures so well. Trust Me.
Why are you even questioning me about this? You make no sense bud.

Who said anything about Hollywood Films?


By the way, Salvador Dali said that Hitler's back had a fascination for him. In 1937, he even painted The Enigma of Hitler. Afterwards, Dali said that Hitler had been a complete masochist who had unleashed the war for the sole purpose of losing it. :D

Your point?

If a man invents the race theory, kills 6 million Jews, it does not mean that he is mistaken about everything in the world and cannot be, for example, a good father, friend, husband, etc.

Really? So you mean he COULD have been a great father, friend, or husband? Wow, I didn't know that. Do you think he liked flowers too?
You misunderstand what I'm saying Crazy Russian. The question for this thread is "Who do you think is the most infamous man...". I do not need to consider if he liked to stop and smell the roses, liked long walks on the beach, romantic candle light dinners, or if he was a good father or not. None of those matter to me. They don't negate his intentions, and his actions. His actions made him the most infamous man in MY MIND. Do you like him or something?


Many Russians want a monument to Stalin to be erected in every city. Yes, they are aware of his purges, etc. But they consider him a man who won one of the greatest victories in Russian history (perhaps, in the world history as well). What do you think about it?

It doesn't matter what I think about it. I'm not here to talk about Stalin.

As to me, I think it was the people and the talented generals who won the victory. (Any war is won most of all by people.) When Stalin made a military decision, the army failed.
What will one say, if the Germans erect a monument to Hitler and argue for his having cared for the Aryan race? Erecting a monument to Stalin (as well as to Hitler) is totally ludicrous.

You are getting way off topic here. No one is talking about a monument to Hitler, except you. You are analyzing things way too much.
I have made my choice. So deal with it.
 
Whoa, only two people voted for Stalin? WTF?:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
Stalin is the most "evil" man in world history! Hitler was evil, but he was only evil to those who he thought were "demonic" and "beastly" or weren't of his own. Hitler would never kill people he knows and respects, even if they messed up (he would at worse fire them). Hitler at least cared for a few people (close officials, Eva Braun, mother, other relatives, allies) as well as non-Jewish Germans (please note I am not apologizing for anything Hitler dead, I'm just trying to show that there is no comparison to Stalin).
Stalin has killed more people in pure genocide and indiscriminately killed. It didn't matter who you were, even if you glorified Stalin you can be labeled as a threat and put to death. Stalin killed all his close friends and evidence shows he even killed his wife too. He let his son rot in a Nazi prison. He literally didn't care about ANYONE! Stalin even killed his police chief! He hated his parents. Although I don't blame him for hating his dad, his hate for his mom had no need.
Mao did many similar things, but he learned it from Stalin. During WWII his Maoist philosophy was still in its infancy and copied many of the purge ideas of Stalin.
I cannot stress how much no one (except maybe Mao) comes close to how cold-hearted and brutal Stalin was to ANYONE!
It goes like this;
1. Stalin
big gap here
2. Mao
big gap here
3. Hitler
big gap here
4,5,6, everyone else.

I agree Stalin, hands down.
 
The quotes from the Mitsuo Oda's post:

'When I say that he's "insane", I don't mean it in the literal sense. When I say that, it means he did things that would make you question his insanity.'

Please, don't occupy yourself with demagogy. :D


'YOU need to be able to distinguish among literal phrases and non. Perhaps a remedial English class will help.'

Wow, thanks for the advice! :cool: I will try to do. ;)


'He was a good painter.'

You say he was an extraordinary painter, then you say that he was a good painter. Was it my casting doubt on his having been an extraordinary painter that forced you to call him a good painter, not an extraordinary painter again? :D Is it so easy to make you change your mind?

Have you seen his paintings? Has anyone here seen his paintings? Do you agree with Mitsuo Oda that Hitler was an extraordinary – or, at least, a good – painter?


'Trust Me.'

Oh, I trust You. Amen. :bow:


'Who said anything about Hollywood Films?'

I did. ;)


'Your point?'

That was just a lyrical digression concerning Salvador Dali's views on Adolf Hitler. ;)


'I do not need to consider if he liked to stop and smell the roses, liked long walks on the beach, romantic candle light dinners, or if he was a good father or not. None of those matter to me.'

However, whether Hitler was an extraordinary painter or not seems to matter to you.

I always try to be beyond moral judgements. Nevertheless, let us suppose that Hitler was not born. Do you 100 per cent sure, that the world would have been 'better?' Are you able to objectively assess his deeds and their consequences?


'Do you like him or something?'

The only thing I can say is that I am grateful to him for his having invaded the USSR.


'It doesn't matter what I think about it. I'm not here to talk about Stalin.'

Actually, I posed the question to everyone, not only to you. ;)


Concerning what belongs to greatness (just food for thought):

Who can attain to anything great if he does not feel in himself the force and will to inflict great pain? The ability to suffer is a small matter: in that line, weak women and even slaves often attain masterliness. But not to perish from internal distress and doubt when one inflicts great suffering and hears the cry of it – that is great, that belongs to greatness.

:evil: :evil: :evil:​

I am sorry for my sarcastic tone.


P.S. If Hitler did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him?
 
If a man invents the race theory, kills 6 million Jews, it does not mean that he is mistaken about everything in the world and cannot be, for example, a good father, friend, husband, etc.
I seriously doubt that Hitler invented the race theory (that is to say "Racism"). Genocides have happened throughout history, even before the rise of civilisations (tribal genocide). Hitler did not even invent anti-semitism. Anti-semitism has a long history going back to the early days of Christianity. But Hitler was mostly inspired by many 19th-century writers and the prevalent mood in Germany in the early 20th century.

As for his personal life, he seemed to have been loved by at least three women. In a documentary I saw about his life recounted by people who have known him, some witnesses explained that he looked so normal in real life that no one could have guessed he was chancelor by seeing him in the street.
It is also said that Hitler had a profound and deep love of animals, and he was a notorious vegetarian. There are reports of him disgusting his guests by giving them graphic accounts of the slaughter of animals in an effort to make them shun meat (surprising for someone associated with death camps !). He also had a habit to stroll everyday in the nature around his house in Bavaria. He was a rather reclusive and reserved man, who only opened up in the presence of people close to him. He was also a fervent anti-smoking campaigner before his days, and refrained from drinking alcohol.

So in many ways, he was some sort of role model for society in his private life. Even as chancelor he managed to make the German economy recover from the post-WWI crisis as well as from the world-wide economic depression starting from 1929. He reduced unemployment drastically and modernise the country's infrastructure. Had it not been for his social repression, warmongering and racist ideologies leading to the holocaust, history might have remembered him as a great leader and capable politician. It is undeniable that he lost most of his sanity in the late years of his life, but this alone does not represent his whole life.

In comparison Mao Zedong destroyed most of the country's cultural and historical heritage and caused the death of at least 5x more of its own people (30 to 40 million) than the number of Jews who died during the holocaust. Mao also caused the Chinese economy to plumet to its lowest historic level in comparison to the rest of the world, and to brainwash his people so well that it took several more decades after his death from old age for the country to start recovering.

Stalin cannot be said to have made of the USSR a modern and developed nation either, and his brutality far exceeded that of the Nazis. At least the Nazis treated occupied countries in Western Europe (France, Benelux, Denmark, Norway...) with respect. German troops were happy to enter into Paris, not just because of the victory, but because of the admiration and romantic feelings they had for it. German officers were often seen at the opera or other cultural events in France. In contrast, Stalin and Mao repressed both foreign and national cultures to levels never seen in a civilised nation.
 
Maciamo, much of what you say I agree with. I have read about his private life as well. And I also can say that Hitler was a nice person in his daily lives that were not related to politics. That is though he invented the race theory and killed 6 million Jews, he was a nice person in his private life. You illustrated my words well. :)

However, I disagree with you on several points.

Hitler's race theory was not only about anti-Semitism. Here are several statements from the theory:


The Aryans are the superior race (or the master race).

The Jews, Gypsies, Slavs are the inferior races. (Though Wikipedia does not indicate the fact that Hitler considered the Slavs an inferior race.)

The white race is superior to the black race.

The Aryans are more intelligent (genetically) than the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, and the black men.


And so on...


Hitler brought something new to the word 'racism.' Besides, Mein Kampf popularised the statements.


'Hitler was mostly inspired by many 19th-century writers and the prevalent mood in Germany in the early 20th century.'

I am sure that he was inspired not only by 19th- and 20th-century writers and not only by writers.

For example, Tacitus wrote, 'The Jews are the people who were created to be slaves.'

One more example. Hitler adored Wagner's music. Perhaps, because Wagner was a staunch anti-Semite. So, in a certain sense, his music inspired Hitler.


'His [Stalin's] brutality far exceeded that of the Nazis.'

Only in terms of the number of people killed. The Nazis treated with Jews much more terrible (cruel tortures, gas chambers, ovens, etc.). Stalin, basically, just killed people or sent them to work in Gulags. The Nazis made candles and soap out of fat of Jews (even Kurt Vonnegut Jr. wrote about it). Stalin did not do anything like that.


'At least the Nazis treated occupied countries in Western Europe (France, Benelux, Denmark, Norway...) with respect.'

Nevertheless, they treated with Jews in those countries with disrespect.



'German troops were happy to enter into Paris, not just because of the victory, but because of the admiration and romantic feelings they had for it. German officers were often seen at the opera or other cultural events in France.'

Hitler wrote that he was disgusted by the French and the French culture. Moreover, France was a good place for the Nazis to steal the French material values (virtus, e.g.). (They did it all round Europe.)

Hitler wanted Germany, Britain and Italy to unite their forces to defeat France, Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.


...I do not know whether Hitler was half-Jewish or not. But I know that to be both Jewish and anti-Semite is possible. Good example – Otto Weininger. He was both Jewish and anti-Semite. Paradox?


Maciamo, was invading the USSR the most serious mistake of Hitler?
 
One more example. Hitler adored Wagner's music. Perhaps, because Wagner was a staunch anti-Semite. So, in a certain sense, his music inspired Hitler.
I happen to like Wagner's music. Does that make me an anti-semite?

The reason the "inferior" races were treated so badly is because Hitler saw them as just that ie: sub-human. A true racist looks upon those below as animals and not worthy of giving his time. They are only vermin and should be treated as such. That is why those killed in the death camps had the remains used for other things. To them it was a useful by-product from something that was otherwise useless.
Hitler might have been a racist, but he did show affection for other people and admiration for foreign powers achievements (If they were white). In fact he admired the British Empire.
Stalin and Mao were both selfish and couldn't see beyond themselves. Hated everybody, Stalin and Mao didn't particularly like their own familes, so what chance had anyone else got. Mao didn't overly admire Stalin, but was scared of him and saw him as a way of supporting his own dictatorship. Maos stance towards the USSR changed after Stalin died. Stalin didn't overly admire Lenin and only saw him as a step up in the power structure. Neither showed much appreciation to anything cultural, be it foreign or from their own countries..
If we compare Hilter, Stalin and Mao to school children. Hitler was the nerdy, picked on boy, who would eventually pay the bullies back. Stalin and Mao were the bullies.
 

This thread has been viewed 63661 times.

Back
Top