Should Stalin and/or Hitler be a leader in Civ?

[Alexander I]

Edited by Locutus: This discussion was part of the Warlords announcement thread but taking it over. I moved it to a seperate thread. Feel free to continue to discuss the question in the topic here, but it has great potential for going off-topic, please don't let it or I'll have to close it.

Originally posted by Generaldoktor

All the more reason for not messing with Adolf. Is there anybody who would really want to play as him??

Well, apparently somebody wants to play as Stalin, who was just as bad!

[padillah]

Originally posted by Alexander01


Well, apparently somebody wants to play as Stalin, who was just as bad!

Yeah, but he's not as personified. None of the others are; Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jeung Ill, Andre Baptiste, et al.

None has the "Devil incarnate" label they all really deserve.

Tom P.

[player1]

Well, nothing beats planned genocide.
That's what makes Hitler the worst.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Alexander01


Well, apparently somebody wants to play as Stalin, who was just as bad!

He was worse. I just did a quick read from a Google search and he was responsible for the deaths of over 7 million Ukrainians alone. The total number given in the article was 30 million people murdered by his regime, to Hitler's 6 million Jews.

Here's the article:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1262

[Generaldoktor]

Yeah, I never liked that, I'm about half, third generation Ukrainian, over here in the States. On the other hand, some Ukrainians fought for the Germans and committed bad atrocities against their neighbors. I had a great uncle on the wrong side, but I certainly don't idolize him.

Don't take the avatar and the phony sobriquet too seriously; when I joined Poly, all the good Greek warrior names were taken. I would have much preferred to be Xenophon, but somebody's got that, though I never see him post.

[padillah]

Originally posted by player1
Well, nothing beats planned genocide.
That's what makes Hitler the worst.

As opposed to Pol Pot?!?

Tom P.

[Nacht]

Originally posted by Willem
He was worse. I just did a quick read from a Google search and he was responsible for the deaths of over 7 million Ukrainians alone. The total number given in the article was 30 million people murdered by his regime, to Hitler's 6 million Jews.

He also had more time...

Is somebody who is responsible for 30 million deads really five times as bad as somebody who is 'only' responsible for 6 million?

Really, these comparisations are vain.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Nacht

He also had more time...

Is somebody who is responsible for 30 million deads really five times as bad as somebody who is 'only' responsible for 6 million?

Really, these comparisations are vain.

If the article is correct, Stalin had over 7 million Ukraines slaughtered in a single year. It took Hitler several years to kill 6 million or so Jews. So I'd say that makes Stalin much more ruthless.

But you are right of course, genocide in any form or degree is still evil. But that doesn't answer the question as to why Stalin is in the game but Hitler is not.

[Alexander I]

I just don't like the double standard. There was a long discussion on this forum recently about what made Hitler more hated than the others (Stalin, Mao, etc.).

I stated that it was his treatment by the media, and that his atrocities were exposed. Stalin never had film documentaries of his gulags and pogroms. Yes, Hitler was evil, and yes, he should be portrayed as such, but then the media turned around and made Stalin "Uncle Joe."

[player1]

Originally posted by padillah
As opposed to Pol Pot?!?

Tom P.

And is he in the game?
No.

It's not "kill count" that matters. But that Hitler plan was to eradicate one ethic group (Hebrews) from the face of the earth using any means necessary.

That can't compare to failed communist reforms, that led to death of many by Stalin, even if led to more death people overall (nor starvation could compare to a "slaughter" which Nazi gas chambers really were).

[Nacht]

Originally posted by player1
failed communist reforms, that led to death of many

I nominate this for the understatement of the day

[player1]

Originally posted by Nacht
I nominate this for the understatement of the day

But it's just that, same with Mao.
People who know nothing about economics doing their experiments for whatever it takes. And for whatever it costs.


From that angle, Pol Pot is the worst.
That's madman doing ecomony.


P.S.
But nothing beats the genocide.
Which as goal has to kill, not as mean.
Organized killing machine of Nazies.

[Willem]

Originally posted by player1
(nor starvation could compare to a "slaughter" which Nazi gas chambers really were).

Read the article. The commander in charge of the Ukraine progrom actually set a quota of 10,000 executions a week, though the number was sometimes 25,000 a day. If that's not a slaughter, I don't know what is.

[player1]

Didn't most of those people in Ukraine died from starvation?

Although quotes like this fog the issue:

During the bitter winter of 1932-33, 25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or died of starvation and cold. Cannibalism became common. Ukraine, writes historian Robert Conquest, looked like a giant version of the future Bergen-Belsen death camp.

How many shot compared to died from starvation?

Yes, communist revolution was ruthless.
But word genocide is used too lighty these days.

The goal wasn't to depopulate Ukraine (although unfortunaty results were not far away), but to restructure economy and crush anti-communist elemets.

Now gulags were not death camp neithter, although many and many people died in them. They were ruthless work camps.
Death camps on the other hand were concentrated areas for killing people.

[padillah]

Well... Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin... I'm with Nacht, I'm not going to argue who killed more people better.

Tom P.