[jla7]

i think they were pretty much equally evil :/

[Stalin]

(Original post by tehFrance)
Stalin, he did more killing than Hitler but what makes Hitler more bearable is the medical advancements that were founded even if they did come through horrific means whereas Stalin just had people killed.

In order to make this argument you must consider the population of the Soviet Union. More Soviets died at the hand of Stalin than Germans died at the hands of Hitler, granted, but the population of the Soviet Union was 200 odd million, whilst Germany's was 70 odd million.

Hitler was more 'bearable' than Stalin? He systematically attempted to exterminate the Jews, and had he succeeded, would've exterminated 90% of the Soviet Union, whilst enslaving the remaining 10% - and that would have been the same for India, Africa and eventually the Americas, with Japan owning the Far East.

Also, you have to bear in mind that the numerous deaths in the Soviet Union were largely due to the country's enormous industrialisation, without which there would have been no Stalingrad and defeat of Nazism.

[Davij038]

Stalin obviously- He did what he did for pure selfish gain- Hitler thought he was saving the Aryan race and was acting for he good of mankind.

[Harolinho]

(Original post by Muscovite)
how long is a piece of string?

Twice as long as half a piece of string.

How evil was Hitler? Twice as evil as half a Hitler.

Can I vote for either Mao or Melkor pl0x?

[Harolinho]

(Original post by Stalin)
In order to make this argument you must consider the population of the Soviet Union. More Soviets died at the hand of Stalin than Germans died at the hands of Hitler, granted, but the population of the Soviet Union was 200 odd million, whilst Germany's was 70 odd million.

Hitler was more 'bearable' than Stalin? He systematically attempted to exterminate the Jews, and had he succeeded, would've exterminated 90% of the Soviet Union, whilst enslaving the remaining 10% - and that would have been the same for India, Africa and eventually the Americas, with Japan owning the Far East.

Also, you have to bear in mind that the numerous deaths in the Soviet Union were largely due to the country's enormous industrialisation, without which there would have been no Stalingrad and defeat of Nazism.

Do I detect a slight sense of bias coming from you Stalin And the old proportional argument is a silly one. It's like if the pope killed 100 people in the vatican - proportionally that would be more than Stalin's 20 million, but still not anything like as bad (although the pope... well I won't go there).

Despite this:

5.5mil (Military deaths) + 2mil (Civilian deaths due to military activity) = 7mil

So that's like 10 percent of the populous right?

With the USSR

10.7mil + 15.9 = 26.6mil

That's about 14 percent of the populous.

So yes, Stalin killed more of his own people proportionally.

[floridadad55]

(Original post by Mr.Zen)
Ok, so its this debate again - who was more evil? Hitler or Stalin? Many people say Stalin was, because he killed more people than Hitler did. However, he did so out of being a complete *******, and generally didn't care about anyone.

However, Hitler wanted to wipe out whole races of people because he thought they were not worthy of life, which, along with his ideologies, make him a far more evil and corrupt human being than Stalin.

At least Stalin did not set up death camps with gas chambers. Or, by and large, murder millions of children and women. I think most of his murdering was intended to wipe out his political opposition, or at least, what he perceived to be his political opposition. Hitler, on the other hand, consigned whole peoples to extermination (the jews), or slavery (the Poles and the Czechs). If you were a jew who was a decorated WW I war veteran for Germany, you would still be exterminated.

[xander93]

(Original post by thetobbit)
While I have yet to make my mind up on this matter, it's interesting to go back to basics on this issue.

what is "evil"? Is evil an absence of good?

I'm reading a book on Stalin as youngster and I'm beginning to feel that maybe Stalin was influenced more so by his childhood and circumstance than by an inherent "evilness" within him. Eg. Abusive/drunk/absent father, overly doting/often abusive mother, strict educational rigidity, etc.

What makes Hitler/Stalin evil while the deeds of America in Vietnam or Japan for example, justifiable and for the "greater good"?

Actually, Hitler's upbringing was rather similar (absent father), often rejected, mother died.

Not that I'm excusing any of his actions, I'm just providing a pointer as to where his diabolical deeds and ideology stemmed from.

I have wont to say that Hitler was the more evil one, yet Stalin was the more ruthless of the two.

[Pitt1988]

My vote goes to Stalin. The argument that Hitler was worse because it was a discriminatory thing, whereas Stalin was just an ********, I don't think holds weight. Take, for example, someone that goes and destroys a colony of ants just because he wants to watch them all burn for kicks, or the person that destroys the colony of ants for some beneficial purpose to himself or another group. I'd say the one that does it just to watch them burn is worse.....No matter how mislaid Hitler's reasoning was, he genuinely thought it was for the betterment of all.

[mddub39]

(Original post by Pitt1988)
My vote goes to Stalin. The argument that Hitler was worse because it was a discriminatory thing, whereas Stalin was just an ********, I don't think holds weight. Take, for example, someone that goes and destroys a colony of ants just because he wants to watch them all burn for kicks, or the person that destroys the colony of ants for some beneficial purpose to himself or another group. I'd say the one that does it just to watch them burn is worse.....No matter how mislaid Hitler's reasoning was, he genuinely thought it was for the betterment of all.

Spot on, Hitler committed his actions because he thought he was helping the people of Germany. Stalin literally killed anyone and everyone whom he thought was a threat, he had lost his mind absolutely no-one was safe under his rule.

[Swanbow]

Hitler was a heavily flawed idealist. Half the time he believed all the crap that was coming out of his mouth and didn't let more capable people take charge. His intentions for the restoration of Germany as an imperial power weren't necessarily evil considering injustice of the Treaty of Versailles. However on the final solution, and the systematic annihilation of Jews, Gypsies, Gays, Slavs and all other undesirables was a horrible act which was carried out with the most 'evil' intentions of chasing this ideal of making way for a pure aryan race which makes no actual sense except in the mind of lunatics. Stalin on the other hand was a power mad despot, who took a more pragmatic approach to ruling the USSR, and by that I mean sending anyone who disagreed with him to the gulags. I don't really know enough on Stalin to make a proper assessment on who is the most 'evil' but be assured both men are directly accountable for horrible deeds.

[05EWalker]

Well considering hitler did lazed around, went for walks and stayed at home during much of his reign.... id have to say stalin. The things that Stalin did were under his authority. Many things that happened under Hitler reign were the result of the devolved powers and Social Darwinism (in relation to leadership/destiny), For instance Hitler was not at the 1942 Wansee Conference, the crucial meeting that decided to exterminate jews. So, overall, although worse things happened during Hitlers reign, I think that Stalin was worse.

[Clessus]

(Original post by 05EWalker)
Well considering hitler did lazed around, went for walks and stayed at home during much of his reign.... id have to say stalin. The things that Stalin did were under his authority. Many things that happened under Hitler reign were the result of the devolved powers and Social Darwinism (in relation to leadership/destiny), For instance Hitler was not at the 1942 Wansee Conference, the crucial meeting that decided to exterminate jews. So, overall, although worse things happened during Hitlers reign, I think that Stalin was worse.

Oh come on, do you really think that Hitler didn't know about such a huge undertaking in the middle of a war? I mean seriously, he was willing to jepordise his own war aims to fulfil his mad quest to murder all of European Jewry. That's not even getting into his action against non-Jews, these include but are by no means resticted to;
The Commissar Order
The Commando Order
The Night and Fog Decree
Generalplan Ost
Hunger Plan

(Original post by Swanbow)
His intentions for the restoration of Germany as an imperial power weren't necessarily evil considering injustice of the Treaty of Versailles.

I by and large agree with the rest of your comment, but I have always objected to the notion that the treaty of Versailles was "unfair". It was undoubtedly a failure, but this is not the same as saying it was "unfair". It should be remembered that;

1. Clemenceau, the French representative, was forced to give way over most of his country's more extreme demands, such as the creation of an independent Rhineland and the annexation of the Saar (Which would have totally destroyed Germany's economy).

2. The application of self-determination was bit not nearly as unfair as many Germans believed;
- Alsace Lorraine would have voted to return to France anyway, as it had been French before 1871, and its population was mainly French.
- Plebiscites were held in Schleswig, Silesia and parts of Prussia to decide their future. Many of these areas voted to remain in Germany and did so accordingly.
- The eastern frontier province of Poznań (Posen) was overwhelmingly Polish and West Prussia was rather more mixed in ethnic mix-up than Germans were prepared to admit. In these provinces Germans predominated in the towns, whereas Poles did so in the countryside - which made it very difficult to draw a clear frontier line. Also, these territories had been Polish before Germany annexed them in 1795. German rule over these territories before 1918 had been very brutal, and many Poles still harbour bitter memories of it.
-Austria and the Sudetenland had never been part of Germany before 1918.
-The Polish corridor was only around 10% German in ethnic make up.

3. Germany was not physically occupied during the war and as a result the real damage was suffered on foreign soil e.g France, Belgium, Poland and Russia.

4. In comparison the Treaty of Versailles seems relatively moderate to the severity of the terms imposed by the Germans on the Russians at the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1918 which had taken away a third of Russia's population, one half of Russia's industrial undertakings and nine-tenths of Russia's coal mines, coupled with an indemnity of six billion Marks.

7. The German right was committed to an annexationist program of Germany annexing most of Europe and Africa during the war and in some cases before 1914 would have found any peace treaty that did not leave Germany as the conqueror unacceptable to them. Short of allowing Germany to keep all the conquests of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, there was nothing that could have been done to persuade the German right to accept Versailles. The parties of the "Weimar coalition", namely the SPD, the DDP and the Catholic Center were all equally opposed to Versailles, and it is false to claim as some historians have that opposition to Versailles also equalled opposition to the Weimar republic.

8. It is important not to overstate the treaty's contribution to Germany's following economic problems. The problems that caused hyperinflation went back to world war 1 (84% of war expenditure had been borrowed). High demand for and low supply of consumer goods began to drive prices up. After the war the government was unwilling to control inflation by raising taxes or controlling spending, allowing it to spiral out of control. The Rhine crisis and reparation payments only added to an already serious situation. Cuno's government made no effort to deal with the situation, indeed Cuno deliberately exacerbated the economic crisis and played on nationalist fervor brought by the popular decision to encourage 'passive resistance'. Reparations hardly contributed to the Great Depression of the 1930s (which led to the rise of the Nazis) at all.

9. The military restrictions, while undoubedly humiliating for Germans, were understandable, given what had happened in the previous 4 years. The military Germany was allowed was not much smaller that that of the United States' at the time, and was more than adequate for self defense.

10, People tend to forget just how murderous and aggressive Imperial Germany was. Germany was ruled by an aggressive military caste which had been spoiling for a fight. The idea of Lebensraum did not originate with Hitler, Germany was planning to acquire it in the East after WW1. The Kaiser picked a fight with Britain by backing the white Dutch Afrikaner rebels in South Africa and by butchering the Ovambo people of what is now Namibia. He looked for trouble with the French by abruptly sending warships to Agadir in French Morocco, which nearly started the first world war in 1905, and with Russia by backing Austria-Hungary's insane ultimatum to the Serbs after the June 1914 assassinations in Sarajevo. It helped spread the war by attacking France and by violating Belgian neutrality.

[Rational Thinker]

If you think Hitler was more evil than Stalin you are retarded. Hitler did some good things I can't think of one good thing Stalin did.

[Rational Thinker]

(Original post by Stalin)
In order to make this argument you must consider the population of the Soviet Union. More Soviets died at the hand of Stalin than Germans died at the hands of Hitler, granted, but the population of the Soviet Union was 200 odd million, whilst Germany's was 70 odd million.

Hitler was more 'bearable' than Stalin? He systematically attempted to exterminate the Jews, and had he succeeded, would've exterminated 90% of the Soviet Union, whilst enslaving the remaining 10% - and that would have been the same for India, Africa and eventually the Americas, with Japan owning the Far East.

Also, you have to bear in mind that the numerous deaths in the Soviet Union were largely due to the country's enormous industrialisation, without which there would have been no Stalingrad and defeat of Nazism.

Silly silly Stalin. Hitler let his generals retire, Stalin had them shot. The main thing that defeated the Nazis' was the winter full stop. Ever read any books upon Stalingrad. Until the Nazi's supply lines ran out, they were kicking soviet ass.

[Clessus]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
If you think Hitler was more evil than Stalin you are retarded. Hitler did some good things I can't think of one good thing Stalin did.

Please name one good thing Hitler did. The much lauded "economic recovery"
was mainly undertaken by the non-Nazi banker Hjalmar Schacht. When the Nazis took control of the economy in 1936, the recovery slowed down. Germany was nowhere near ready for a war in 1939, and their economic preparations for war were a shambles. The only reason they did so well at the start war because they were fighting foes that were either weak or were taken by surprise.

Silly silly Stalin. Hitler let his generals retire, Stalin had them shot.

Yeah, Hitler let Rohm, Rommel and von Schleicher retire...

. The main thing that defeated the Nazis' was the winter full stop. Ever read any books upon Stalingrad. Until the Nazi's supply lines ran out, they were kicking soviet ass.

Oh well, they should have taken that into account before attacking the Soviet Union, shouldn't they? The Germans have no one to blame for their lack of preparedness for the winter except themselves. Another little known fact is that the Winter actually initially helped the Germans, as the roads which were previously unusable due to the heavy read became usable again. Besides, people tend to overstate the importance of the Russian winter in the defeat of Hitlerite Germany. Winter undeniably helped stall the German's attack on Moscow, it was not winter who encircled the 6th Army in Stalingrad and it was not winter who basically destroyed all of the Army group centre in operation Bagration. It was not winter which led to the disaster of Operation Citadel. The Germans failed for a number of reasons, these were;

Underestimated Soviet potential- German war planners grossly underestimated the mobilization potential of the Red Army: its primary mobilization size (i.e. the total number of trained units ready to deploy at a moment's notice) was about twice the expected number. By early August, new armies had replaced destroyed armies. This alone implied Operation Barbarossa's failure, for the Germans were forced to limit their operations for a month to bring up new supplies. This delay left only six weeks to complete the battle before the start of the mud season(Autumn). On the other hand, the Red Army proved it could replace huge losses quickly, and was not destroyed as a coherent force. When divisions of conscripts trained before the war were destroyed, new conscripts replaced them. On average, about half a million men were drafted each month for the duration of the war. The ability to mobilize vast (if often poorly trained and equipped) forces rapidly and continually allowed the Soviet Union to survive the critical first six months of the war. In the face of early crushing defeats, the Soviets managed to dismantle entire industries threatened by the German advance. These critical factories, along with their skilled workers, were transported by rail to secure locations beyond the Germans' reach. Despite the loss of raw materials and the chaos of an invasion, the Soviets managed to build new armaments factories in sufficient numbers to allow mass production of needed war machinery. The Soviet government was never in danger of collapse and remained at all times in tight control of the Soviet war effort.

Faults of logistical planning- German infantry and tanks stormed 300 mi (480 km) ahead in the first week, but their supply lines struggled to keep up. Soviet railroads could at first not be fully used due to a difference in railway gauges and dismantled railroad facilities in border areas. Lack of supplies significantly slowed down the blitzkrieg.

The German logistical planning also seriously overestimated the condition of the Soviet transportation network. The road and railway network of former Eastern Poland was well known, but beyond that information was limited. Roads that looked impressive on maps turned out to be just mere dust roads or were only in the planning stages.

Weather - As we all know

Hitler's interference - Hitler could never decide on what he wanted to do, and kept changing his mind. This would delay German offensives and continue to affact the German army for the remainder of the war.

The failure to defeat Russia quickly ment an almost certain defeat for Germany, which was nowhere near prepared for a long, drawn out war of attrition.

[Rational Thinker]

(Original post by Clessus)
Please name one good thing Hitler did. The much lauded "economic recovery"
was mainly undertaken by the non-Nazi banker Hjalmar Schacht. When the Nazis took control of the economy in 1936, the recovery slowed down. Germany was nowhere near ready for a war in 1939, and their economic preparations for war were a shambles. The only reason they did so well at the start war because they were fighting foes that were either weak or were taken by surprise.



Yeah, Hitler let Rohm, Rommel and von Schleicher retire...



Oh well, they should have taken that into account before attacking the Soviet Union, shouldn't they? The Germans have no one to blame for their lack of preparedness for the winter except themselves. Another little known fact is that the Winter actually initially helped the Germans, as the roads which were previously unusable due to the heavy read became usable again. Besides, people tend to overstate the importance of the Russian winter in the defeat of Hitlerite Germany. Winter undeniably helped stall the German's attack on Moscow, it was not winter who encircled the 6th Army in Stalingrad and it was not winter who basically destroyed all of the Army group centre in operation Bagration. It was not winter which led to the disaster of Operation Citadel. The Germans failed for a number of reasons, these were;

Underestimated Soviet potential- German war planners grossly underestimated the mobilization potential of the Red Army: its primary mobilization size (i.e. the total number of trained units ready to deploy at a moment's notice) was about twice the expected number. By early August, new armies had replaced destroyed armies. This alone implied Operation Barbarossa's failure, for the Germans were forced to limit their operations for a month to bring up new supplies. This delay left only six weeks to complete the battle before the start of the mud season(Autumn). On the other hand, the Red Army proved it could replace huge losses quickly, and was not destroyed as a coherent force. When divisions of conscripts trained before the war were destroyed, new conscripts replaced them. On average, about half a million men were drafted each month for the duration of the war. The ability to mobilize vast (if often poorly trained and equipped) forces rapidly and continually allowed the Soviet Union to survive the critical first six months of the war. In the face of early crushing defeats, the Soviets managed to dismantle entire industries threatened by the German advance. These critical factories, along with their skilled workers, were transported by rail to secure locations beyond the Germans' reach. Despite the loss of raw materials and the chaos of an invasion, the Soviets managed to build new armaments factories in sufficient numbers to allow mass production of needed war machinery. The Soviet government was never in danger of collapse and remained at all times in tight control of the Soviet war effort.

Faults of logistical planning- German infantry and tanks stormed 300 mi (480 km) ahead in the first week, but their supply lines struggled to keep up. Soviet railroads could at first not be fully used due to a difference in railway gauges and dismantled railroad facilities in border areas. Lack of supplies significantly slowed down the blitzkrieg.

The German logistical planning also seriously overestimated the condition of the Soviet transportation network. The road and railway network of former Eastern Poland was well known, but beyond that information was limited. Roads that looked impressive on maps turned out to be just mere dust roads or were only in the planning stages.

Weather - As we all know

Hitler's interference - Hitler could never decide on what he wanted to do, and kept changing his mind. This would delay German offensives and continue to affact the German army for the remainder of the war.

The failure to defeat Russia quickly ment an almost certain defeat for Germany, which was nowhere near prepared for a long, drawn out war of attrition.

All of those generals were plotting against Hitler.

Like it or not at the start of the war. The German army was one of the best in history. What lost the war was a lack of winter preparation. Soviet defenses were a joke. One of the top Soviet generals came back from a party to find out the Nazi's had already broken through the defenses. .

[Rational Thinker]

(Original post by Clessus)
Please name one good thing Hitler did. The much lauded "economic recovery"
was mainly undertaken by the non-Nazi banker Hjalmar Schacht. When the Nazis took control of the economy in 1936, the recovery slowed down. Germany was nowhere near ready for a war in 1939, and their economic preparations for war were a shambles. The only reason they did so well at the start war because they were fighting foes that were either weak or were taken by surprise.



Yeah, Hitler let Rohm, Rommel and von Schleicher retire...



Oh well, they should have taken that into account before attacking the Soviet Union, shouldn't they? The Germans have no one to blame for their lack of preparedness for the winter except themselves. Another little known fact is that the Winter actually initially helped the Germans, as the roads which were previously unusable due to the heavy read became usable again. Besides, people tend to overstate the importance of the Russian winter in the defeat of Hitlerite Germany. Winter undeniably helped stall the German's attack on Moscow, it was not winter who encircled the 6th Army in Stalingrad and it was not winter who basically destroyed all of the Army group centre in operation Bagration. It was not winter which led to the disaster of Operation Citadel. The Germans failed for a number of reasons, these were;

Underestimated Soviet potential- German war planners grossly underestimated the mobilization potential of the Red Army: its primary mobilization size (i.e. the total number of trained units ready to deploy at a moment's notice) was about twice the expected number. By early August, new armies had replaced destroyed armies. This alone implied Operation Barbarossa's failure, for the Germans were forced to limit their operations for a month to bring up new supplies. This delay left only six weeks to complete the battle before the start of the mud season(Autumn). On the other hand, the Red Army proved it could replace huge losses quickly, and was not destroyed as a coherent force. When divisions of conscripts trained before the war were destroyed, new conscripts replaced them. On average, about half a million men were drafted each month for the duration of the war. The ability to mobilize vast (if often poorly trained and equipped) forces rapidly and continually allowed the Soviet Union to survive the critical first six months of the war. In the face of early crushing defeats, the Soviets managed to dismantle entire industries threatened by the German advance. These critical factories, along with their skilled workers, were transported by rail to secure locations beyond the Germans' reach. Despite the loss of raw materials and the chaos of an invasion, the Soviets managed to build new armaments factories in sufficient numbers to allow mass production of needed war machinery. The Soviet government was never in danger of collapse and remained at all times in tight control of the Soviet war effort.

Faults of logistical planning- German infantry and tanks stormed 300 mi (480 km) ahead in the first week, but their supply lines struggled to keep up. Soviet railroads could at first not be fully used due to a difference in railway gauges and dismantled railroad facilities in border areas. Lack of supplies significantly slowed down the blitzkrieg.

The German logistical planning also seriously overestimated the condition of the Soviet transportation network. The road and railway network of former Eastern Poland was well known, but beyond that information was limited. Roads that looked impressive on maps turned out to be just mere dust roads or were only in the planning stages.

Weather - As we all know

Hitler's interference - Hitler could never decide on what he wanted to do, and kept changing his mind. This would delay German offensives and continue to affact the German army for the remainder of the war.

The failure to defeat Russia quickly ment an almost certain defeat for Germany, which was nowhere near prepared for a long, drawn out war of attrition.

Also one thing that comes to mind that Hitler did well was the implementation of laws to protect animals. The Nazi's were actually very kind to animals. People have been indoctrinated with this idea that all the Nazi's did was evil and its simply not true. Also people have been indoctrinated with the idea that the Nazi's were not human in a way as not human could do such cruelty and once again its not true. The tobacco industry is far more evil than the Nazi's ever were. Think about it they are selling products that with kill people painfully and damage the environment.

[anthonyfl]

(Original post by Rational Thinker)
Also one thing that comes to mind that Hitler did well was the implementation of laws to protect animals. The Nazi's were actually very kind to animals. People have been indoctrinated with this idea that all the Nazi's did was evil and its simply not true. Also people have been indoctrinated with the idea that the Nazi's were not human in a way as not human could do such cruelty and once again its not true. The tobacco industry is far more evil than the Nazi's ever were. Think about it they are selling products that with kill people painfully and damage the environment.

No, tobacco is optional - users no the risks and they decide to smoke. That's different from being hounded from your home, separated from your family, worked like a piece of **** and then having your lungs burned out when you're completely useless, then finally having you and your family's bodies burned in a pile.

Tobacco is optional
Being sent to a concentration camp is not optional
Yes tobacco may kill you, but being separated from your family and have discrimination which is worse than hell is ten times worse


Are you telling me you'd rather be a jew in nazi Germany than smoke?!


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Rosalind]

hahaha

[Rational Thinker]

(Original post by anthonyfl)
No, tobacco is optional - users no the risks and they decide to smoke. That's different from being hounded from your home, separated from your family, worked like a piece of **** and then having your lungs burned out when you're completely useless, then finally having you and your family's bodies burned in a pile.

Tobacco is optional
Being sent to a concentration camp is not optional
Yes tobacco may kill you, but being separated from your family and have discrimination which is worse than hell is ten times worse


Are you telling me you'd rather be a jew in nazi Germany than smoke?!


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

What you have done is a false dichotomy. I don't have to smoke or be a Jew in Nazi Germany. It is not one or the other. I don't smoke and I have a low opinon of those who do because they have no strength of character as if they had strength of character they would not smoke. The Tobacco industry is evil what it does is try and brainwash people into smoking this is no less evil than the Nazi's brainwashing people into hating Jews. Todays hideous corporate society is no better than Nazi Germany in fact I would argue it is worse. Take away the discrimination towards the Jews and take away the racial hatred and what Hitler was in his mind doing was making Germany a better place. What the tobacoo industry does is exploit, cause damage and generally parasite of society.