Should Stalin apologists be treated in the same way as Nazi sympathisers

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Illyrien
Nazies arent inherently evil people, they really believed that they did the right thing.

Except for clueless rebels who just love to do the "wrong" thing in order to get attention, every political doctrine is trying to do the "good" thing. Hitler really believed he'd tremendously help the humanity by curing it of the ancient Jewish disease. Colonizing countries really believed they would bring civilization and happiness to the countries they colonized.

[Boris Godunov]

That's why I have to wonder: Is someone who commits atrocities out of a twisted ideology (Killing Jews = a good thing) somehow more evil and repugnant than someone who kills out of opportunism? I have a hard time accepting that.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
That's why I have to wonder: Is someone who commits atrocities out of a twisted ideology (Killing Jews = a good thing) somehow more evil and repugnant than someone who kills out of opportunism? I have a hard time accepting that.

To me, yes.
That's why Pol Pot is the worst of the worst in my book. His delirium killed -in a mere 4 years- one quarter of his population, the very population he wanted to bring good to :vomit:

[Bereta_Eder]

Actually maybe Kissinger sympathisers should be treated as Nazi symapthizers.

Brits should just be laughed at.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Actually maybe Kissinger sympathisers should be treated as Nazi symapthizers.

Brits should just be laughed at.

thanks for the insight

[St Leo]

If there was no rapid industrialization under Stalin's rule, more probably nazi would won and completely exterminated Russia as country and Slavs as people.

I suspect that Russia would have been a lot more industrialized had they kept the provisional government and not gone for another revolution, but that's just me.

Nazism isnt more inhuman or evil then Socialism, they just have slightly different goals. The root of both Socialism and Nazism is the belief in "The Strong Man" or "The Enlightened State" eg. the belief that all power should be given to someone wise who will use this power for the cause of good.

Will you people please use "Socialism" consistently? Either Sweden is Socialist or the USSR is Socialist, but both of them are not Socialist.

[Bereta_Eder]

no problem

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Spiffor

To me, yes.
That's why Pol Pot is the worst of the worst in my book. His delirium killed -in a mere 4 years- one quarter of his population, the very population he wanted to bring good to :vomit:

I'm not talking about which has a worse effect on the victims, but which is more evil in intent. IMO, Stalin was just as evil as Hitler, if not moreso, because he didn't kill people because he was trying to create a better world and whatnot, but rather because he felt killing those people allowed him to keep his grip on power. Selfish motivations for horrific acts are pretty evil.

There is the old question, if you could go back in time and find Hitler when he was a young man, before he'd done anything, and murder him, would you do it? I don't think those who answer yes are any more evil than someone who would murder young Hitler to steal his wallet.

[Az]

Oh the Green Nazi party. never figured those guys out.

[Sava]

yes and no... if it's someone pointing out the differences between the two, then no. If it's someone praising the murderous dictator... YES...

and IMO, equating modern liberals or socialists with Stalin is an equally stupid move

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Most Stalin's sympathizers are people who were indoctrinated when Stalin was alive, or people who feel things were better under the rule of Stalin than later. I certainly don't agree with them, and I even don't understand such a sympathy can exist, but these motivations look quite harmless.

I've heard that about 50% of Russians believe that Stalin did more good than harm. I assume that many of those never knew life first hand under Stalin.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Most Stalin's sympathizers are people who were indoctrinated when Stalin was alive, or people who feel things were better under the rule of Stalin than later. I certainly don't agree with them, and I even don't understand such a sympathy can exist, but these motivations look quite harmless.

I've heard that about 50% of Russians believe that Stalin did more good than harm. I assume that many of those never knew life first hand under Stalin. Probably a lot of them see that things are very bad and look back to that time as a golden age of sorts.

[Az]

You have a DP there, kidicious.

[Sava]

One is longer

[Alvaro]

Stalin's sympathesiers are quite aware of his attrocities and think that his reasoning was still better than that of the current leadership.

That is perhaps debatable but not dangerous.

Nazi sympathesiers are usually racist and violent.

Besides, what treatment are you refering to? There are nazi parties still out there...