Most manipulative people in history.

Define "intelligent"... Living in a material world, where we almost immediately see how we would reap the benefits of our actions we forget what the soul purpose of us being here on earth is. In the end, as the LinkinPark, it doesn't even matter... This idea I'm attempting to reiterate in weak hope, to show that a person realising we are not everlasting entities, and we do in fact have an end, would have realised how to use their gained power for, good.


Using you words, he was "intelligent" at his ability to stay in power, but isn't that comparable to a strong gorilla standing on a table, beating its chest and throwing large, non-specific objects, at others trying to undermine its physical position. This may seem like an over-exaggeration, from the perspective of the bigger picture... we can only see that he brought his country to inevitable destruction, send his most valued specialists, generals, doctors into prison. He kept the whole country in constant fear, due to the KGB, which I would say would be superflous if he genuinly believed he was worthy of the position of power he fradulantly cheated to attain. By far the most ridiculous act, besides murduring countless citizens of his own country, when a messanger from Germany, managed to cross the border to tell him, that Hitler was going to attack the following day, he just shot him in his place and refused to believe it. When childish refusal to give up power and believe that he was to fight a savage battle..... I think are enough to say he was far from intelligent in my eyes.... Looking at the bigger picture he should have tried developing the country etc.

Define "intelligent"... Living in a material world, where we almost immediately see how we would reap the benefits of our actions we forget what the soul purpose of us being here on earth is. In the end, as the LinkinPark, it doesn't even matter... This idea I'm attempting to reiterate in weak hope, to show that a person realising we are not everlasting entities, and we do in fact have an end, would have realised how to use their gained power for, good.


Using you words, he was "intelligent" at his ability to stay in power, but isn't that comparable to a strong gorilla standing on a table, beating its chest and throwing large, non-specific objects, at others trying to undermine its physical position. This may seem like an over-exaggeration, from the perspective of the bigger picture... we can only see that he brought his country to inevitable destruction, send his most valued specialists, generals, doctors into prison. He kept the whole country in constant fear, due to the KGB, which I would say would be superflous if he genuinly believed he was worthy of the position of power he fradulantly cheated to attain. By far the most ridiculous act, besides murduring countless citizens of his own country, when a messanger from Germany, managed to cross the border to tell him, that Hitler was going to attack the following day, he just shot him in his place and refused to believe it. When childish refusal to give up power and believe that he was to fight a savage battle..... I think are enough to say he was far from intelligent in my eyes.... Looking at the bigger picture he should have tried developing the country etc.

Interesting. He was a masterful seducer from what I have read but why do you choose him compared to individuals like Stalin and Hitler?

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?

Indeed he did murder many. I am not saying he was a benevolent person but that does not stop him from being intelligent. He had began to prepare for World War Two by the way drilling even civillians to fight the invading Nazi's. He opened the churches despite being a professed atheist in order to channel the religious spririt against the Nazi's. He did develop his country, industrialisation happened amazingly quickly in Russia during Stalin, industrialisation itself is often difficult and bloody, he gave money towards education etc.

I'm sorry, but would have to to think you are joking or misled when you say he opened churches....I respect your opinion but the fact is he ordered to kill anyone who even remotely seemed to have any conection with religion or faith hence opening up churches even for the intention you say, was out of the question.

And also I will have to politely disagree again . The idea of inculcation or in other words drilling an idea into someone's mind till they are brainwashed is not genious or in your words "intelligent"... All countries have used it previously to him, when trying to motivate against a particular group.... If I'm honest I have known young kids on a playground to do similar things, unknowingly getting more kids onto their side against a common enemy. I may even go so far to say this act of self-perservation his human nature and by no means requires "intelligence".

Well I am afraid to tell you that he did in fact open them up during the Nazi Invasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union#World_War_II_rapprochement

The way that Stalin indoctrinated people was exceptionally sophisticated being as it was an inspiration for 1984's big brother.

I immediately thought of Stalin when I saw the title thread. He wasn't sadistic per se, just one cold mother****er.

If Stalin's not sadistic then who is?!

Well, that the evidence you have provided only goes to fuel the already established idea that he was a hypocrite and the depth to his savage/ cruel methods.

I'm sorry but how in any way can we say this person who reopened churches and freed the clergy only to arrest them again.

Just to quote from the link you sent me...
"For example, in April 1946 there was a wave of arrests in Moscow of clergy that belonged to Bishop Afanasii's group that had returned to the official church; they were sentenced to long terms of hard labour. Many laity were arrested and imprisoned as well including the religious philosopher SI Fudel; most of them had already been in prison and few of them would see freedom until after Stalin died. "

This is the epitome of cruelty, it sets the ground for the most abhorrent, unspeakable acts....How can we commend him on this/ or in any way compliment him.

"Oh this guy he massacred a million people because he couldn't tolerate their race........ by the way he planned this out very well, to the extent I might use the word "intelligent".... "

"I am sorry, but he killed a million people, I don't care about how he planned it... the despicable crimes he committed override his supposed "intelligent" methods. "

All I want to say is the end result is what matters. No matter how cleverly I act in a theory test persay, if I end up driving over a person in the end... I won't get my driving test with other things to answer to.

The end result of Stalin's Rule...a disheartened, hopeless population, many with family dead or imprisoned by their ruler, still afraid of the KGB control that can any moment raid their homes, killing the remaining family or them. The corruption, the almost non-existing economy, starvation, is only to name a few things that were onset by his so -called "intelligent" time in power.

the bit about the traitors I located on statins wiki and the bottom he except iced his captured men referring to them as cowards and traitors for not fighting to the death

Hitler was not a smart man why would he have checked what Napoleon had done he beloved himself to be the greatest also hitler himself did NOT declare the attack in Russia his chief army seargent told him to delay Russian response so. They could sack France which they did his mistake was believing Russia was weaker than France

You claim hitler lost the war due to his racial views but the main Turing point of the war was his decision to attack the us
I disagree Zhukov may have been one of the best but by far the best general in ww2 was Patton in my opinion

You claim that Hitler in other posts was a military genius and then now say he was not smart? Seems a tad illogical. The main turning point was Operation Barbarossa the US at first had to deal with the Japanese military whereas Russia could completely concentrate upon Germany.

By that I meant he placed his trust in the wrong people sometimes and made a mistake as a leader and manipulator he was the best I ask you did the Russian people love Stalin they did not even know who hitler was and those who knew him disliked. Him as proved by the fact none of his former comdads from ww1 joined his party so how did he then become leader his mini policits ame minipultive mind was by far the best in history

You can be intelligent and cruel you know? I have met many intelligent cruel people and many unintelligent non cruel people. Stalin placed those things as for the economy the scale of industrialisation was impressive. You seem to be deliberately misinterpreting what I have said. I have not once implied that I believe Stalin was benevolent but to suggest he was not intelligent is completely ahistorical.

To me, and this is only my view, intelligence and pure malice, can not co-exist. If one is intelligent he can't be the latter, and vice-versa. This all lies in their ability to see the bigger picture, one who's acts stem from irrational power- hungry energy, is going to inevitably lead the way only to destruction, leaving ruins behind. The lack of this key trait, leaves no space for an intelligent mind, as in the end this will only leave him looking like a narcissistic, self- centred ego-maniac.

A true intelligent person, would see that their are not hierarchies, this all manifestation of our minds. He would then be able to logically resolve the issue with Hitler without leaving it till the last minute.

Did you know that both Hitler and Stalin annexed Poland, signing a pact against war between the two?It was pretty naive of Stalin and also very cruel towards Poland.

If he was so clever, Stalin wouldn't have imprisoned nearly all his specialists Army officers, doctors, scientists etc.... He would also not have closed the churches in the first place, getting the country so dispirited, demoralised that they had no chance of winning the war, because they had no hope even-though they outnumbered the German troops.

Obviously it will look great and intelligent what Stalin did, but really in fact all he did, was wreck the country under his rule, and then realising that " oh, wait a second, my country is falling apart, and is too weak to fight maybe I should reverse what I had done". This is not genius, this is only common sense, if you wrecked something, and everything is in decline well the only thing you can do , is set it back to how it was.

This misleading illusion that he had created, for me is just disgusting... maybe the impoverished, neglected, sickened from fear, people to worship him as portrayed hero. No, I can never agree that he is intelligent.

This is my opinion, of course, you may still not feel able to coincide... but I have laid down the facts and you can grow to accept them if you wish.

[...] who do you think was the most manipulative person in history?