Most manipulative people in history. Watch

This discussion is closed.
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Hello, as your average person is shockingly ignorant and massively foolish, I thought it would be appropriate to create a thread to those individuals who have managed to manipulate everyone and everything in history.

Personally I am going for Joseph Stalin. Not only was he exceptionally intelligent. (Only Lenin was more well read in the Bolshevik's but he played left and right off against each other ( left being Kamnev and Zinoviev and right being Bukharin) in an amazing way. Oh he was completely ruthless, but ruthlessness does not mean a lack of intelligence. Stalin edited his opponents out of photographs and even the Vatican that most secretive of organisations wanted to ally with him. We must remember that the Bolshevik's were more than often not comprised of highly intelligent people such as Trostsky, so not your average foolish person and this means that Stalin's ruthlesssness and cunning is even more enhanced.

TL;DR Stalin ruthless but brillant, who do you think was the most manipulative person in history?
0
Moosferatu
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
I immediately thought of Stalin when I saw the title thread. He wasn't sadistic per se, just one cold mother****er.
1
Padwas
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
My mum she got me to study somehow even when i didn't want to and was always twisting my words

In history it has to be hitler how can a man go from nothing to a world
Leader without knowing how to talk
0
Verana
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
Tony Blair
1
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by Verana)
Tony Blair
I wanted to say him, but he's small fry on a global historical scale. He's just a ****.

I'd say hitler
0
cleveradam
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
Hitler
1
MouldingMercury
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
Ronald McDonald, he's taking over the world!
4
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by Padwas)
My mum she got me to study somehow even when i didn't want to and was always twisting my words

In history it has to be hitler how can a man go from nothing to a world
Leader without knowing how to talk
The thing about Hitler is he was an exceptional orator and was able to gain respect from many because of his undeniable bravery in World War Two as a trench dispatch runner, however I personally think that while he was hypnotic in his evil, he was not as manipulative as Stalin. Let us do a comparison.

Hitler
Idle and lazy day to day, his daily routine consisted of waking up at around 12, a long lunch with newspapers, a walk and then mostly watching movies, Hitler often was not aware of problems and signed many things without reading them first.
Had many attempts on his life, survived by a mixture of coincidence and a certain sense for danger.
Relatively loose control over his subjects. It could be argued he found chaos helpful but I am not convinced.
Lost World War Two through falling through the age old mistake of invading Russia, ignored and overruled the wise ideas of generals such as Manstein

Stalin
Workaholic certainly not lazy, towards then end he slept during the day and worked at night to avoid danger.
I cannot remember one assassination attempt on Stalin getting anywhere remotely close, outsmarted any potential threats, regularly purged the secret police the NKVD in order to prevent them becoming a danger to him.
Arguably made the greatest contribution to winning World War Two essentially, through outmanoeuvring opponents and understanding exactly what his soldiers needed (eg during the Nazi Invasion of the Soviet Union, Stalin had the churches re opened in order to inspire his soldiers) takes the idea of Realpolitik to a whole unique level. His army often had less compunction than that of Roosevelt's or Churchill's and was a perfect instrument for Stalin's desires.
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
I wanted to say him, but he's small fry on a global historical scale. He's just a ****

I'd say hitler
See my post to Padwas.
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#10
I am suprised posters have not mentioned religious leaders yet.
0
RunningScotsman
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
Niccolo Machiavelli was the first name that came to mind.
1
Padwas
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by Rational Thinker)
The thing about Hitler is he was an exceptional orator and was able to gain respect from many because of his undeniable bravery in World War Two as a trench dispatch runner, however I personally think that while he was hypnotic in his evil, he was not as manipulative as Stalin. Let us do a comparison.

Hitler
Idle and lazy day to day, his daily routine consisted of waking up at around 12, a long lunch with newspapers, a walk and then mostly watching movies, Hitler often was not aware of problems and signed many things without reading them first.
Had many attempts on his life, survived by a mixture of coincidence and a certain sense for danger.
Relatively loose control over his subjects. It could be argued he found chaos helpful but I am not convinced.
Lost World War Two through falling through the age old mistake of invading Russia, ignored and overruled the wise ideas of generals such as Manstein

Stalin
Workaholic certainly not lazy, towards then end he slept during the day and worked at night to avoid danger.
I cannot remember one assassination attempt on Stalin getting anywhere remotely close, outsmarted any potential threats, regularly purged the secret police the NKVD in order to prevent them becoming a danger to him.
Arguably made the greatest contribution to winning World War Two essentially, through outmanoeuvring opponents and understanding exactly what his soldiers needed (eg during the Nazi Invasion of the Soviet Union, Stalin had the churches re opened in order to inspire his soldiers) takes the idea of Realpolitik to a whole unique level. His army often had less compunction than that of Roosevelt's or Churchill's and was a perfect instrument for Stalin's desires.
just think though it took Russia England America and many other countries to take on just Germany

Do you not remember hitler police there were almost no attempts on his life he motivates his troops and many German letters found showed he was loved by his people he was very clever he did not have loose control of his subjects letter 3-3 found in his bunker clearly showed he was in total control

AS for Russia in ww2 they had the highest casualties in the whole war yes he made mistakes like invading Russia in the winter but he took all of Poland and held the Russian and French capitals not to mention many others

Unlike Stalin who was hated by other world leaders up to the was hitler was
Loved and feared so much so that he was able to get all the way to Poland until war and held of us involvement until very late on

I can tell from your posts that we can have a reasonable argument I look forward to your reply
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by Padwas)
just think though it took Russia England America and many other countries to take on just Germany

Do you not remember hitler police there were almost no attempts on his life he motivates his troops and many German letters found showed he was loved by his people he was very clever he did not have loose control of his subjects letter 3-3 found in his bunker clearly showed he was in total control

AS for Russia in ww2 they had the highest casualties in the whole war yes he made mistakes like invading Russia in the winter but he took all of Poland and held the Russian and French capitals not to mention many others

Unlike Stalin who was hated by other world leaders up to the was hitler was
Loved and feared so much so that he was able to get all the way to Poland until war and held of us involvement until very late on

I can tell from your posts that we can have a reasonable argument I look forward to your reply
Germany did have Italy and Japan (at least after 1941) as allies as well as much of the Middle East, Vichy France and so on. So it was not a case of Germany alone vs the rest of the world. In fact I would argue that the declaration of war on a neutral America (although it was providing weapons to Britain on lend lease agreements) was particularly foolish.

There were frequent attempts on Hitler's life, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassi...n_Adolf_Hitler

Stalin was loved by his people to an extent as well and became virtually a deity in Soviet Russia as well as an iconic figure throughout the world. Germany held on in spite of Hitler not because of him, while Hitler did indeed have some determination and clever coups such as the Anchluss, he was not a master strategist. Had he been, he would have either waited until the end of Winter to launch Operation Barbarossa or sheltered over during the Winter in the invasion rather than chaotically rushing to the Volga Oil fields.

Hitler had a gradually more cold relationship with much of the world, Britain for one allowed Germany to take territory more because the horrors of World War One had exhausted its spirit for war (most of the nation supported appeasement) rather than any particular cleverness on the part of Hitler.

Russia had the highest casualty rate because it was still industrialising (the fact that it had industrialised so quickly is testament to Stalin's ingenuity)

Stalin was not hated by all other world leaders, Roosevelt was reasonably fond of him and Churchill despite rhetoric held all night drinking sessions with him http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94M0VE20130523 Stalin was also liked by the Japanese foreign minister Tatekawa and this led to a resulting pact between Russia and Japan.

Hitler survived until only 1945, whereas Stalin lasted for another eight years and in that time caused the Korean War to suit his purposes.

I do not particularly care for Stalin as an individual (Trostsky is an altogether more decent chap, though he too possessed some flaws) but credit where credit is deserved, he manipulated not only Nazi Germany but much of the rest of the world. He turned Russia from a backward nation to one which was responsible for more than 90% of German casualties. From a nation which struggled to produce effective tractors to one which by the end of World War Two was making arguably the greatest tank in the war the T34.

Thank you, for the compliment by the way, you're also enjoyable to debate with.
1
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by RunningScotsman)
Niccolo Machiavelli was the first name that came to mind.
He formulated much of the theory which many leaders have benefited from for expedience (though there is a debate as to whether it was intended as a satire) but despite his name being a synonym for "dirty tricks", was he personally a very manipulative person?
0
tillytots
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
'God' in any form. The things people will do for him/her.
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by tillytots)
'God' in any form. The things people will do for him/her.
Well you can in Pantheism and to some in extent Deism have a concept of a non interventionist God therefore doing things for said God could be said not to have been authorised by God at all.
0
Padwas
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by Rational Thinker)
Germany did have Italy and Japan (at least after 1941) as allies as well as much of the Middle East, Vichy France and so on. So it was not a case of Germany alone vs the rest of the world. In fact I would argue that the declaration of war on a neutral America (although it was providing weapons to Britain on lend lease agreements) was particularly foolish.

There were frequent attempts on Hitler's life, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassi...n_Adolf_Hitler

Stalin was loved by his people to an extent as well and became virtually a deity in Soviet Russia as well as an iconic figure throughout the world. Germany held on in spite of Hitler not because of him, while Hitler did indeed have some determination and clever coups such as the Anchluss, he was not master strategist. Had he been, he would have either waited until the end of Winter to launch Operation Barbarossa or sheltered over during the Winter in the invasion rather than chaotically rushing to the Volga Oil fields.

Russia had the highest casualty rate because it was still industrialising (the fact that it had industrialised so quickly is testament to Stalin's ingenuity)

Stalin was not hated by all other world leaders, Roosevelt was reasonably fond of him and Churchill despite rhetoric held all night drinking sessions with him http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94M0VE20130523 Stalin was also liked by the Japanese foreign minister Yo****sugu Tatekawa and this led to a resulting pact between Russia and Japan.

Hitler survived until only 1945, whereas Stalin lasted for another eight years and in that time caused the Korean War to suit his purposes.

I do not particularly care for Stalin as an individual (Trostsky is an altogether more decent chap, though he too possessed some flaws) but credit where credit is deserved, he manipulated not only Nazi Germany but much of the rest of the world. He turned Russia from a backward nation to one which was responsible for more than 90% of German casualties. From a nation which struggled to produce effective tractors to one which by the end of World War Two was making arguably the greatest tank in the war the T34.

Thank you, for the compliment by the way, you're also enjoyable to debate with.
Rep given

If we take into account total soldiers weapons and resources available the allies far outstripped hitler so why then was he able to hold off so much longer he was a tactia. Genius

German people did not follow him out of spite they followed him out of love as reported by many people who survived

the British were actually responsible for the most amount of Germans killed Russia actually had the highest casualties from German troops in fact Russian soldiers killed very few German soldiers there own stupidity to invade Russia in the middle of winter was responsible for that though another famous commander called Napoleon also made that mistake :?

Yes stalin survived longer but never made Russia as great as Germany became though it may seem unbelievable the German fleet was far superior to Russian army's Stalin also wax tactically inept as many Russians were slaughtered during there attack on Germany even far later the in the war the Russians Stalin also Stalin also murdered many of his own people and had a lot of questionable tactics witch I will go into more detail about later including the infamous NKVD he also beloved men hitler captured were traitors and needed to be cleansed ( killed )
1
581371
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
Charles Manson came to mind
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by Padwas)
Rep given

If we take into account total soldiers weapons and resources available the allies far outstripped hitler so why then was he able to hold off so much longer he was a tactia. Genius

German people did not follow him out of spite they followed him out of love as reported by many people who survived

the British were actually responsible for the most amount of Germans killed Russia actually had the highest casualties from German troops in fact Russian soldiers killed very few German soldiers there own stupidity to invade Russia in the middle of winter was responsible for that though another famous commander called Napoleon also made that mistake :?

Yes stalin survived longer but never made Russia as great as Germany became though it may seem unbelievable the German fleet was far superior to Russian army's Stalin also wax tactically inept as many Russians were slaughtered during there attack on Germany even far later the in the war the Russians Stalin also Stalin also murdered many of his own people and had a lot of questionable tactics witch I will go into more detail about later including the infamous NKVD he also beloved men hitler captured were traitors and needed to be cleansed ( killed )

Hitler was not a tactical genius, he had some talented generals but he himself was not a genius in any way. Physically brave? Yes, talented orator? Indeed, Genius? Certainly not. Many of Hitlers decisions were seriously flawed, Operation Barbarossa being among them.

Indeed many did. However, this does not make Hitler any different to many leaders, Churchill and Stalin among them.

Britain did not kill the most amount of German soldiers. That deed goes to the Soviet Union. The fighting on the Eastern front and Germany's defeat there was the main reason for their surrender.

Who do you think was responsible for the decision to invade Russia? I am glad you mention Napoleon the fact that Hitler almost certainly would have known about Napoleon's invasion and still authorised Operation Barbarossa is a testament to his hubris and lack of tactical foresight.

The German Navy being superior to the Russian Army is shocking precisely because it is untrue and not substantiated by evidence, It seems strange to compare an army with a navy anyway.Stalin's attack on Germany and the resulting Battle of Berlin was certainly not tactically inept, it was led by Zhukov arguably the greatest general in World War Two. Most battles in World War Two had many casualties.

I am aware of Stalin's purging of the NKVD and the Red Army however these decision did have their advantages more in the case of the former rather than latter, unlike for example Hitler's decision to persecute the Germany Jewish community which not only alienated much of America but led to a brain drain of Jewish scientists (among them Albert Einstein who helped inform Roosevelt of Germany's plan to develop a nuclear bomb through gathering heavy water) and other business leaders and officials. Hitler's racialism for instance was purely irrational and arguably was a main factor in his losing World War Two.

I highlight this last point, which group of "traitors" in particular are you referring to?
0
Rational Thinker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by Zuki)
Charles Manson came to mind
I thought of that as well but his influence, you could argue, was pretty much restricted to a select group within America.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Biology Paper 3 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (90)
13.8%
The paper was reasonable (360)
55.21%
Not feeling great about that exam... (152)
23.31%
It was TERRIBLE (50)
7.67%

Watched Threads

View All