Most evil dictator

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of people say Stalin, but he was a man who genuinely believed in what he was doing. He was a fanatic Marxist, who believed he was following the sacred texts of communism to a T.

He betrayed Marxist ideology by not advancing a classless society. He created a powerful elite with himself at the helm. That is fundamentally at odds with Marx who believed all are crested equal. He also called for the army to be abolished, another thing Stalin ignored.
So no, he did not follow his texts "to a T".

jmayo wrote: »

Most places were less racist than US in post war period.

Yeh. That’s what I said. Look at you hating the west with your facts.

Would say Pol Pot.

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

No they didn't.

USSR, Hitler, China. How many people killed? Against democracies? Not a hope. Unless you are going to consider WW2 the democracies fault?

I said most dictatorships. But maybe not all. Juries out. Depends on how many people were killed by the US and British empires in total.

Fun fact, fascist Spain was probably less racist than the US in the post war period.

Fun fact there is more evil in the world then racism.
Like murdering millions of people like mao, stalin and pol pot, Hitler did. I wouldn't even put Spain in the same league. So the relevance of Spain being more racist is a fun fact with no relevance.

Greentopia wrote: »

Would say Pol Pot.

Pol pots ideology was quite classless though

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Fun fact there is more evil in the world then racism.
Like murdering millions of people like mao, stalin and pol pot, Hitler did. I wouldn't even put Spain in the same league. So the relevance of Spain being more racist is a fun fact with no relevance.

Less racist. Why are the facts so upsetting. The US is clearly either post western or heading that way anyway. And the US has killed millions. And Spain is clearly western.

Why the upset?

zig

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Libya and Syria. Yemen.

Obama actively stayed out of Syria and got hugely criticized for it.

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Fun fact there is more evil in the world then racism.
Like murdering millions of people like mao, stalin and pol pot, Hitler did. I wouldn't even put Spain in the same league. So the relevance of Spain being more racist is a fun fact with no relevance.

Less racist. Why are the facts so upsetting. The US is clearly either post western or heading that way anyway. And it has killed millions. And Spain is clearly western.

Why the upset?

Yes facts are really upsetting me. Democracies kill way more people than dictatorships. Yes. An upsetting fact.

zig wrote: »

Obama actively stayed out of Syria and got hugely criticized for it.

Oh ffs. The US armed the rebels. That some of the US population wanted more destabilisation is irrelevant.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Yes facts are really upsetting me. Democracies kill way more people than dictatorships. Yes. An upsetting fact.

Some democracies (vs some dictatorships). Like the US. Where you don’t live. A country which is virulently anti European. Where you do live.

Mysterypunter

Its an obvious shout but for me it his to be Hitler. I don't think this comment needs an explanation.

Greentopia wrote: »

Would say Pol Pot.

I forgot about him earlier. Yeah I think I would agree there. Truly evil.

DrumSteve

Cupp3r wrote: »

Surprised Idi Amin wasn't mentioned.

Only saved by that verse he dropped on 2pac's "hit em up"

wiggle16

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of people say Stalin, but he was a man who genuinely believed in what he was doing. He was a fanatic Marxist, who believed he was following the sacred texts of communism to a T.

This is the most historically illiterate thing I have ever read. Are you joking??

wiggle16

Ceausescu was not up there with the murderers, but he wins in terms of being completely divorced from reality. There is footage of him being jeered by people during a speech shortly before he was overthrown and the look of shock on his face would almost make you feel a twinge of sympathy for him - he genuinely couldn't believe he was not adored by the Romanians.

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Pol pots ideology was quite classless though

I didn't proffer my last post as a defence of Marxism, merely a clarification.

wiggle16 wrote: »

This is the most historically illiterate thing I have ever read. Are you joking??

Sadly I think not.

Dr. Bre

Sacha Baron Cohen

JohnnyFlash

wiggle16 wrote: »

This is the most historically illiterate thing I have ever read. Are you joking??

I'm not joking. Middle class folks living in nice social democracies like Ireland often get a romanticised idea about communism - the everyone living in peace and harmony, Che riding around on his motorbike, bit of Rage Against the Machine, sounds really lovely in practice etc.

The bit they always appear to omit through naivety, or purposely ignore, is where Marx set out that to achieve such a society you'd have to: dispense with the enemies of the revolution, tear down the religious and societal structures within a society, and implement a period of time where the proles were educated (through force if necessary) on the realities of a society where they were no longer under the thumb of the capitalist bourgeoisie. Not even the most naive communist would be deluded enough to believe that it went from Revolution to Paradise without some growing pains in between.

By any metric then, Stalin was the most communist man who has ever lived. He wasn't as obsessive about the need for a complete reboot as Mao and Pol Pot as he made the fairly correct assumptions that Russia was already a minor, if growing, player in world affairs. With huge geographic advantages (apart from warm water ports). So he implemented all the following from the Marxist-Leninist playbook:

A root and branch eradication of the enemies of communism.
Collectivised farming for the greater good of society.
Educating the more suspicious proles on the benefits of communism over other economic and societal structures by creating education camps for them to visit.
Signing an agreement with Hitler so the USSR could keep out of the imperialist war about to take place in Europe.
Murdering enemies of the revolution such as Trotsky (never trust a Trot)
Create a socialist sphere of interest with other communist leaders.
Continuing Lenin's (and Marx's stated aim) of nationalising the means of production, and implementing short-term, medium-term, and long-term plans to make the USSR an industrial and scientific superpower.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of people say Stalin, but he was a man who genuinely believed in what he was doing. He was a fanatic Marxist, who believed he was following the sacred texts of communism to a T.

Was that why he murdered all his old comrades of the revolution. I don't remember that being an important part of Marxism. He was a power hungry maniac who changed ideology depending on who was his biggest threat at the time.

PicardWithHair

RIP Robert Mugabe - the good always go so young...

JohnnyFlash

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Was that why he murdered all his old comrades of the revolution. I don't remember that being an important part of Marxism. He was a power hungry maniac who changed ideology depending on who was his biggest threat at the time.

I'm not defending the man. He murdered Trotsky and others as he believed they were undermining his ideologically pure interpretation of Marxist theory. Lenin would have had the same issues when we wrote his "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder" treatise.

Stalin didn't have the comfort of a western flank where all his neighbours were at peace with one another, or in broad agreement on the merits of Marxism. That's what separates the 'warm and fuzzy' theoretical from realpolitik.

Stalin was an unrepentant believer in the works of Marx; the legacy of Lenin, and the need for a dictatorship of the people to reach an end state of communism. I'm not even making fun of modern lefties here, but rather stating the sort of 101 stuff that isn't even open to interpretation any more by those who have more than a passing interest in 20th century politics.

Ipso

Fritzbox wrote: »

I don't think he started those - all those countries have been feuding along time before Obama arrived on the scene.

Where have you been, non Western countries conflicts are always the Wests fault.

DellyBelly

Hitler, Pol pot and Franco I think

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I'm not defending the man. He murdered Trotsky and others as he believed they were undermining his ideologically pure interpretation of Marxist theory. Lenin would have had the same issues when we wrote his "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder" treatise.

Stalin didn't have the comfort of a western flank where all his neighbours were at peace with one another, or in broad agreement on the merits of Marxism. That's what separates the 'warm and fuzzy' theoretical from realpolitik.

Stalin was an unrepentant believer in the works of Marx; the legacy of Lenin, and the need for a dictatorship of the people to reach an end state of communism. I'm not even making fun of modern lefties here, but rather stating the sort of 101 stuff that isn't even open to interpretation any more by those who have more than a passing interest in 20th century politics.

I think he murdered Trotsky and the others for power rather then their ideology. Due to the trumpted up nonsense charges that were levied against them.

I get your point though and would agree in part, but I think he was more about power then ideology in the way he changed his view dependent on who he wanted to ally with at various stages such as communism in one country that he didn't believe in until after ww2.

I don't see the split with Trotsky or the pact with Hitler as driven by ideology. I think it was because he was a power hungry maniac. But yes I am not arguing he wasn't a communist, of course he was.

Dr. Bre

Surprised Kim not mentioned much here

Cupp3r

I'm pretty sure Mao Zedong has killed the most.