Stalin. Worse than Hitler?

[Theben]

While I've never watched either, I think I would still be victorious, yes.

[Kitschum]

Hitler was clearly worse.

[MOBIUS]

Why?

[Kitschum]

Stalin had more people under him and for a longer time, something like 1928-1953 so I think if you calculate the per annum you'd find Hitler is still in the lead. Not to mention much of Stalin's genocidal actions were prompted by Hitler's own second world war (deportations of Tatars and Chechens) or the lead up to it (the great terror). Add the Soviet citizens kileld in Hitler's bid for lebensraum, which should probably pertain to his count, and Hitler wins I have not done the math on this but I think I'm right.

[DaShi]

I had to revote.

[Barnabas]

Hitler was worse because he had a more dranged ideology

Stalin won ww2, and we all know what happened to the world with Stalins victory

Had Hitler won, the world would have beem much worse he decades after ww2

Anthropologists would still be measuring the heads of non whites with calipers, all gypsies would have been killed, we would live in a darwinian inspired racist world

[MOBIUS]

WTF?

Who removed the Dale option and why!?

Well I guess Dale = Stalin now, cos he was beating Stalin last I checked...

[Cort Haus]

It's ****ing idiocy to suggest that Darwin 'inspired' racism. Just a cretinous attempt by some creationist ****wit to score points.

[Elok]

That he inspired racism, plain ol' racism? Yes, that's stupid. But he did inspire eugenics, though I doubt he subscribed to any ideas of the sort and blaming him for it (in the sense of moral culpability) would be absurd.

[Dr Strangelove]

Eugenics had been around centuries before Darwin became a twinkle in his father's eye. The Teutonic Knights proposed a sort of eugenics back in the late middle ages. For that matter humanity has been selectively breeding animals for its own purposes for millennia.

The number of deaths from Stalin's policies have been grossly exaggerated by several authors. Some authors for instance assume that every Kulak sent east and every Soviet former German POW sent to special camps died, but statistics show that's not the case. Likewise estimates of the numbers who died because of collectivization in the 1920s often fail to take into account the dramatic drop in the birth rate in the 1920s and epidemics that hit most of eastern Europe as well as the Soviet Union.

[Joseph]

Since 1900 until today 31 Jan 2010, Mao is no. 1 with around 50 Mil., Then Stalin with around 30 Mil. + and then Hitler with around 20 Mil. +.

[Perfection]

I think it all boils down to which one had the worse breath.

[Ecofarm]

Percentage of population, Pol Pot wins right?

Do we give Stalin credit for unnecessary human waves?

Hitler's racism might trump numbers.

[Kidlicious]

I pick Stalin, because he was more the hypocrit

[BeBMan]

Thing with numbers is that they vary quite a lot esp. for Stalin and Mao. And what exactly do we count in, only victims of deliberate killings or also those who died as a result of a certain policy that maybe wasn't primarily aimed to genocide someone, but still caused massive death? Example, if all the Chinese from the massive famine caused (mostly) by the great leap forward are in, then why not count all 50-60 million victims of WW2 as Hitler'''s?

There are unique aspects in the rule of Hitler, Stalin and Mao though, I'm not arguing that there's no difference, just that the search for 'worse' or 'worst' given the dimensions we're facing here is IMO rather pointless.