# Forum About Russia Culture and History  Hitler vs. Stalin

## Ilkay

I wonder what you folks think about Hitler and Stalin.

----------


## Leof

I think the evil they have done can not be mesuared or counted, neither compared one with the other. Both them were just evil.  
I think it is like to aks who is better Jesus or His Father.

----------


## Ramil

You forgot to include Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot and Genghis Khan in the list.
All of them are perfect candidates for 'the most evil man' title.  
Along with Tomas de Torquemada, Vlad Tepes and Idi Amin. 
And....
look here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder 
I know it's hard to compare but I don't know who's more evil, political leaders who introduced terror as the instrument of political rule or individuals who commit mass murders just for the fun of it.

----------


## Ilkay

> You forgot to include Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot and Genghis Khan in the list.
> All of them are perfect candidates for 'the most evil man' title.  
> Along with Tomas de Torquemada, Vlad Tepes and Idi Amin

 I just wanted to make a comparison between Hitler and Stalin, both of which played an important role in the 20th century of Russia. I also suspect that Russians do not consider Stalin as evil as Hitler. That's why I posted this poll.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  You forgot to include Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot and Genghis Khan in the list.
> All of them are perfect candidates for 'the most evil man' title.  
> Along with Tomas de Torquemada, Vlad Tepes and Idi Amin   I just wanted to make a comparison between Hitler and Stalin, both of which played an important role in the 20th century of Russia. I also suspect that Russians do not consider Stalin as evil as Hitler. That's why I posted this poll.

 Oh, that. Well, of course, Hitler is more evil.  ::  Stalin was a bloody tyrant but Hitler had managed to outdo him.

----------


## gRomoZeka

I voted for Hitler.

----------


## Leof

Then I think they are equal. 
Both wished to built the nation of ideal people.
Both killed everyone who did not fit their ideals' model.

----------


## Rtyom

I don't want to compare. It's akin to delving in all kinds of evil ever existed, and it's really unpleasant to me. Like thinking every time about bad things for them to happen after that.

----------


## Ramil

A bit of humour in a gloomy subject. 
Imagine you saw the results torn out of context, what would you think if you saw just this:

----------


## Rtyom

> A bit of humour in a gloomy subject. 
> Imagine you saw the results torn out of context, what would you think if you saw just this:

  ::  People elect them presidents!  ::

----------


## Ramil

And a bit of homemade philosophy: 
Evil can't be measured or compared. Evil is just evil, like a switch yes/no. So it's really impossible to say who is more evil they both are integral parts of evil. They and the like comprise evil. They don't have ranks there in evil empire - they are just bricks. They accumulate and evil grows.

----------


## charlestonian

When Stalin died, the entire USSR cried.... It has never happened before, or after Stalin's rule.

----------


## Ramil

Yes, Stalin was truly loved by the people. Well, by some of them anyway.

----------


## chaika

by some of the ones still left alive. Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't. 
Maybe you could measure evil by the number of human beings killed by each of them?

----------


## charlestonian

> Yes, Stalin was truly loved by the people. Well, by some of them anyway.

 Stalin ruled during the very difficult time: he led people to victory over German  invasion. He had to rule with an "iron arm," there were many enemies, and he could not take any chances.

----------


## gRomoZeka

> by some of the ones still left alive. Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.

 I think you are wrong. Most of the people loved him wholeheartedly, even many of those who were repressed (they saw it not as Stalin's fault, but as some kind of mistake). There were few of those whom we used to call dissidents.  
And don't forget, for common folk Stalin was the leader who reconstructed the country from ashes after the Civil War (there was a huge industrial growth) and who won the recent and most terrible war in which almost every Soviet family lost somebody.

----------


## charlestonian

> Originally Posted by chaika  by some of the ones still left alive. Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.   I think you are wrong. Most of the people loved him wholeheartedly, even many of those who were repressed (they saw it not as Stalin's fault, but as some kind of mistake). There were few of those whom we used to call dissidents.  
> And don't forget, for common folk Stalin was the leader who reconstructed the country from ashes after the Civil War (there was a huge industrial growth) and who won the recent and most terrible war in which almost every Soviet family lost somebody.

 Agree.

----------


## kamka

> Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.

 apparently, that's what happened in Poland, in a way, too. My grandparents told me plenty of people felt obliged to cry, or at least look as depressed as possible, for fear they might get in trouble.
And I bet the trouble in here would be nothing compared to the trouble back in the USSR. 
either way, I agree it's pretty darn difficult to measure the evil. Especially since most of the people here, at the boards, is not old enough to remember the reign of Hitler and Stalin, hence it makes it harder to compare. Obviously, we could rely on the books - but they only give you some facts, not the insight into the situation.
Besides, it seems quite useless for me to choose. They both did some pretty messed up stuff - that's undisputable.  
and having written all that, I sort of get the feeling I didn't make myself clear enough.   ::

----------


## Ramil

> by some of the ones still left alive. Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.

 No, the facts about the atrocities were made known only after his death. Really, my great-grandfather was arrested in 1940 and nobody has seen or heard of him ever since. But still my grandma told me that she too cried when Stalin had died. 
When they say about the _cult of personality_ they mean exactly that - _the cult_. He was godlike in eyes of his subject, something holy and flawless. Khrushev invested a lot of efforts afterwards in destroying that cult in the minds of people but there are still people who justify Stalins' deeds even now.   

> Maybe you could measure evil by the number of human beings killed by each of them?

 So do you say that killing a thousand men is better than killing a million? It's a rotten logic. We have to measure evil sometimes in our lives but we're doing that only to justify our actions. And we shouldn't really if we're doing something bad.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by chaika  by some of the ones still left alive. Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.   I think you are wrong. Most of the people loved him wholeheartedly, even many of those who were repressed (they saw it not as Stalin's fault, but as some kind of mistake). There were few of those whom we used to call dissidents.  
> And don't forget, for common folk Stalin was the leader who reconstructed the country from ashes after the Civil War (there was a huge industrial growth) and who won the recent and most terrible war in which almost every Soviet family lost somebody.

 +1 
It's said "Stalin took the country with plows and ruins and left it as an industrial superpower with nuclear weapons".

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by chaika  Most probably cried because they were afraid the KGB would come after them if they didn't.   apparently, that's what happened in Poland, in a way, too. My grandparents told me plenty of people felt obliged to cry, or at least look as depressed as possible, for fear they might get in trouble.
> And I bet the trouble in here would be nothing compared to the trouble back in the USSR. 
> either way, I agree it's pretty darn difficult to measure the evil. Especially since most of the people here, at the boards, is not old enough to remember the reign of Hitler and Stalin, hence it makes it harder to compare. Obviously, we could rely on the books - but they only give you some facts, not the insight into the situation.
> Besides, it seems quite useless for me to choose. They both did some pretty messed up stuff - that's undisputable.  
> and having written all that, I sort of get the feeling I didn't make myself clear enough.

 Things were different in Poland. This country has been torn out between those two and really the Poles shouldn't have any warm feelings about them both. The Red Army committed atrocities there too, many of them would have turned even an SS officer pale.

----------


## Leof

> I think the evil they have done can not be mesuared or counted, neither compared one with the other. Both them were just evil.   
> I think it is like to aks who is better Jesus or His Father.

   

> Evil can't be measured or compared. Evil is just evil, like a switch yes/no. So it's really impossible to say who is more evil they both are integral parts of evil. They and the like comprise evil. They don't have ranks there in evil empire - they are just bricks. They accumulate and evil grows.

 Ramil  ::

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Leof  I think the evil they have done can not be mesuared or counted, neither compared one with the other. Both them were just evil.   
> I think it is like to aks who is better Jesus or His Father.          Originally Posted by Ramil  Evil can't be measured or compared. Evil is just evil, like a switch yes/no. So it's really impossible to say who is more evil they both are integral parts of evil. They and the like comprise evil. They don't have ranks there in evil empire - they are just bricks. They accumulate and evil grows.   Ramil

 What? Great minds think alike, or didn't you know about it?  ::

----------


## Leof

:P    ::

----------


## Rtyom

Ramil and Leof are the one and the same person, too!

----------


## JJ

> I just wanted to make a comparison between Hitler and Stalin

 You try to compare between warm and soft stuff. What's better?

----------


## kamka

> Things were different in Poland. This country has been torn out between those two and really the Poles shouldn't have any warm feelings about them both. The Red Army committed atrocities there too, many of them would have turned even an SS officer pale.

 that's more or less what I had in mind; 'cause despite all these, people still cried when Stalin died. And there was no proper reason to do so, except for fear - and I dread to think what sort of fear it was that was able to drive them to crying over someone they most probably hated quite strongly.
anyway, it was just a digression over something that Chaika said, loosely related to the idea of who's been more evil.  ::

----------


## capecoddah

Um, C- both of the above?

----------


## TATY

Some historians write that Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Stalin. Even if this is true, people find Hitler worse for a number of reaons: Stalin basically killed people, regardless of race, generally. Hitler went out to wipe entire races of people off the face of the Earth. 
People argue Stalin was just as bad of Hitler, because even though Hitler had concentration camps, Stalin had the Gulags. Obviously both were bad, but there is something much more sinister and disgusting about the Nazi's camps. Also the Gulags were primarily populated with men. Hitler's sent people to death irrespective of sex and age.

----------


## Ramil

> Some historians write that *Stalin* was responsible for more deaths than *Stalin*.

 Ahem...  ::    

> Even if this is true, people find Hitler worse for a number of reaons: Stalin basically killed people, regardless of race, generally. Hitler went out to wipe entire races of people off the face of the Earth.

 Not only that. Those in Stalin's prison camps were arrested, charged and sentensed (at least some visibility of law was maintained). You could be arrested by the false charge but there *were* trials and there were *acquittals*. Hitler outlawed the whole nations (incluting all of the Slavs, btw, along with the Jews, the Gypsies and many others). 
People in Stalin's camps were sent there to work, Hitler's camps were for extermination. Stalin used terror for rule (he was paranoidal and saw a competitor and an enemy in anyone who raised above the general grey mass).
Hitler exterminated other nations just out of pure hatred.

----------


## Ezri

> Maybe you could measure evil by the number of human beings killed by each of them?

 In which case neither would win. 
The difference between Hitler and most other evil dictators is the way the Nazi's committed their crimes. They took the idea of Gulags and other similar institutions and turned them a notch up to not only slaughter people en masse, but to also profit from these murders in an organised way never seen before.
Also, peoples perception of mankind slowly began to change after the war due to the increase in studying the 'Nazi phenomena' by psychologists, sociologists etc. For the first time in humankinds rather bloody history it became accepted that these evil people were actually no different from the rest of us and we all have the capacity to be evil given the right stimulus. Many people wanted to disagree as this didnt leave a good taste in the mouth of ordinary people and acedemics alike, but eventually these facts were accepted.
So Hitler will always be a name on the list of evil people and rightly so. But I dont think you can, or even should measure him, or anyone else, against each other.

----------


## lyube

трудный вопрос

----------


## randir

А где пункт против всех?

----------


## Nixer

Don't understand how anybody could even to compare... Looks like blasphemy.

----------

