Okay guys help me out here.
Who was worse? Hitler or Stalin?
Does it matter? They were both leftist socialist authoritarians.
>>821958
Stalin. Neglect through ignorance or lack of caring is one of the worst things a human can do.
>>821958
>worse
People who attempt to inject whiggish moral judgement into history.
Hitler is directly responsible for the decline of European civilization and the deaths of tens of millions of white people.
Neither, they both were spawned from the zeitgeist.
>>821958
They're two sides of the same coin.
Stalin.
Hitler started out with the best intentions for his nation and people- then descended into madness due to recieving FAR to much power.
Stalin was just power hungry, existing to further his own power at the expence of his nation and people.
>>822019
A childish and baseless analysis. You could apply those two same descriptions to both dictators, and they would fit.
>>821958
Stalin. Hitler was stopped
>>822019
>Rubbish
This high school level history. 16 year old please go
>>821958
Depends how you define worse
>>821967
hitler wasn't particularly social, he would nationalize assets then turn around and give power to corporations, whatever was best for the immediate economy.
>>821958
Worse at what?
>>821974
I don't think Hitler is single handedly responsibly though. Wasn't like he started World War 2 (French and British did) and he offered peace many times.
>>822134
>Wasn't like he started World War 2 (French and British did) and he offered peace many times.
>>822165
B-But anon he tried to make peace multiple times after starting an invasion over demands that were unjust in the first place!
>>821958
Stalin without a doubt
Even Hitler didn't kill his own generals and his bodyguards
One of them did nothing wrong
I would say it was Hitler.
Staling never opened up any death camps.
Most of the deaths followed directly after the German invasion, when the whole food supply pretty much collapsed.
How was much more careful in strategy and didn't alienated the whole world against him like Hitler did.
While a lot of German captured soldiers died at the start of the war the stats goe better as things progressed, unlike Germany who just let their captured soviet soldiers die en masse.
Staling was paranoid, sure, but that isn't to different from wanting to destroy a factory or store simply to see it not run by Jews.
>>822134
>hey lets invade poland
>now imma preach war and ethnic hate while i plan to conqure all slavic nations and wage war on the bolsheviks
>wait why did everyone declare war on me?!
>common guys i dident mean it i want peace guys even tho i have done nothing but fight wars and preach them im not a bad guy
if hitler dident rise to power ww2 would most likely never have happend
hitler might not have been single handedly responsible for the war since you need two sides to fight a war but then again he drove everyone to war with his moronic war mongering
>>821958
thats like asking whats worse cancer or aids
Hitler was worse per year, and had worse intentions. Stalin caused more harm.
Stalin and this isn't even up for debate.
>>822492
Do you understand his reason for invading Poland?
Depends on what you see as worse, killing a race in high numbers or killing your own people in extremely high numbers.
It's like asking what's worse, being drowned to death or burned to death.
>>822529
They weren't killed intentionally.
>>822036
That is a very socialist thing to do. Nationalizing assets is the most socialist thing you can ever do. If you give the state a blank check to go in and manage in detail how they go on about thing, not based on the law but based on whatever the president feels like, you are living in a socialist state no matter how high or low taxes you have.
Having a lot of huge and important companies nationalized, have em run like normal companies and on the free market, while at the same time allowing the state to go in and manage something for purely political reasons is the cornerstone for the Scandinavian Social Democracy and have been for at least the last 70 years.
>>822538
So? I'm comparing intended racism fueled death to unintended deaths of who Stalin lead.
What's worse? This would be based on if you care more about racism or the number of suffering. Where the conditions of Communist Russia worse than Concentration Camps?
May be relevant.
![Stalin_visa_on_repressions_list[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ZNYgo44.jpg "Stalin_visa_on_repressions_list[1].jpg")
>>822547
>Unintended
Russians had fucking quotas on repressed people.
>>822547
>So? I'm comparing intended racism fueled death to unintended deaths of who Stalin lead.
Making people work to death was unintended
>Where the conditions of Communist Russia worse than Concentration Camps?
Yes, a lot worst actually.
Since you want to pull the race card, anyone who followed Christianity in the USSR was on Stalin's hit list. But never mind that. Jews are somehow placed on a pedastal because they're the "chosen ones from God".
>>822558
I don't think Christians were that persecuted, they were detained and their Priests were sent to camp, but they weren't killed at first sight.
>>822558
Well, if both Hitler and Stalin were religiously motivated, we can't compare that in finding who's worse.
Stalin killed more in worse conditions.
Hitler killer less in less bad but still bad conditions.
But why did they do these mass genocides?
Hitler wanted the best race, why did Stalin do it?
>>822565
What's wrong with Eugenics?
>>822575
Except Hitler wasn't racially motivated because many Jews were allowed in the SS. Hitler's intention was not to create the best race in terms of genetics, but he wanted to create a society of noble people. That is what Aryan means. Aryan is a Sanskrit word for Noble.
>>822580
>What's wrong with Eugenics?
It's psuedo science and no one except extremists on /pol/ and places like it take it seriously. It's completely academically discredited.
>>822580
Nothing is completely inherently wrong with Eugenics, it just how Hitler did it.
If Eugenics is just, controlling the gene pool to get the best offspring, then there's nothing wrong with that intention, it sounds good, but you start to question the value of life of those you're trying to weed out, and you shouldn't have to kill the weak, just don't let them breed, but they still can, so you can't really achieve Eugenics and will the gene pool really be better? There are still recessive genes, a perfect Aryan Nation sounds too unrealistic and it might be worse, we can't know unless we try and it's hard to try.
>>822593
>Nothing is completely inherently wrong with Eugenics
Except for the part where it doesn't work. Might as well utilize some telegony while you're at it.
>>822593
Aryan means noble. It has nothing to do with race.
>>822591
If it's pseudoscience then explain how it worked for slavery in America?
>>822603
I don't mean the actually use of Eugenics, but the idea of it, it's a flawed idea but I'm trying to understand how Hitler was thinking, we have to pretend it's a good idea like he thought it was to understand his intentions, which really effect if an action is good or not.
as comedian Eddie Izzard put it:
Stalin killed people inside his own border, and apparently everyone was fine with that.
Hitler went and killed people next door, condemning him forever.
>>822606
Explain how slavery worked
>>822603
Explain how it didnt work instead of just dismissing it and saying it doesn't work.
>>821997
damn this comment.. applaud
>>822591
Eugenics, as in selective breeding, isn't a pseudo-science, it's a practice that has been intelligently carried over for thousands of years and has yielded better foods, pets (when not done for aesthetics) and beast of burden.
It's only harmful because it got tied up with racist theories.
>>822558
>Jews are somehow placed on a pedastal because they're the "chosen ones from God".
The fuck? All religions were forbidden, not only Christianity.
Bolsheviks killed my great great grandfather for being a teacher in local Jewish school
>>822526
>muh ethnic german minorities
Fuck off
>>821958
Both were trying to make the world a better place.
Hitler definitely had a much more fucked-up world view, and the massive harm he caused was very intentional, but he just didn't see it as bad, he honestly thought what he was doing was the right thing to do.
Stalin was responsible for more death and suffering, but mostly caused all his deaths through being incredibly unrealistic and unsympathetic. He didn't set out to wipe out people like Hitler did, but things just sort of ended up going that way. Granted, he didn't seem to care about all that very much. Not that he didn't care at all, just there were other things that concerned him more.
In the end, I'd say Hitler.
>>822526
Capturing gold reserves. He needed to find a way how to not bankrupt by January 1940.
>>822558
>He's never heard of the Doctor's Plot
>>821967
>I don't like them therefore they're leftists
You're probably and Austrian economist too
>>821974
Hitler or Jews?
Hitler was worse. In the end it doesn't matter how many people they are killed and their justification or motivation to do so. While Stalin definitely was a monster Hitler discredited entire way of thought so he impacted our present on more direct scale.
>>823401
/pol/tards and Republicans have been pushing this for years. I don't see how a regime that supported big business, cut taxes, was put in power by a right wing parliament, and had as a central part of their ideology the destruction of communism could be construed as "leftist".
>>821997
That would be a sick currency.
>>822019
> started out with the best intentions
> wrote Mein Kampf long before coming into power
sure thing mate
>>821958
Hitler ruined a mustache.
Stalin didn't.
>all this bluepill in one thread
Absolutely disgusting.
I guess this board is yet another "reddit lite" board that's been corrupted.
History will eventually find Hitler to be one of the greatest men who ever lived and tried to save Europe from destruction and to stop the last gasp of the British Empire trying to destroy Germany.
Stalin was a commie piece of trash.
Learn the difference.
>>822492
>most likely never have happend
WWI made WWII an inevitability
>>826553
>lost the war
>greatest man
Nope, never ever. And for that matter Napoleon is a failure as well.
>>826553
> w-why don't you people agree with my retarded view
Fuck off
>>826553
Hitler was an egomaniac who dragged his nation into misery just to pursue his dreams of grandeur. He wanted to become a modern day Frederick II,why people still defend this man is beyond me
>>826611
"Napoleon is a failure," he said, as he wiped the Cheeto crumbs from his shirt and left to go masturbate to animated Japanese girls.
>>826597
is that why there was virtually no clamor for another war until Hitler took over? that is for some fifteen years after the first war?
>>826553
Hitler was delusional and unrealistic, and had ridiculous notions about how things worked or how to accomplish things, WWII was his fault, and the third reich was doomed to fail.
If you're going to be obsessed with militaristic great men and the like, at least focus on ones who were actually inhumanly competent, like Genghis Khan or James K Polk.
>>826553
>l-le blue pill
>w-why aren' you redpilled like me
Kill yourself please.
>>826683
Because they're edgelords who think defending someone pretty much universally acknowledged as a mistake makes them cool and privy to some greater truth.
>>826903
Projecting much, cucky?
>>821958
As a person, Stalin.
As a ruler, Hitler.
They're both BAD DUDES.
>>826977
I'm not saying that he didn't accelerate it, but Versailles did the same thing that the Germans did to the french in 1870. All of the Allied Leaders(Minus the French) were certain that the treaty guaranteed another war.
>>824366
Nobody seriously thinks Hitler was a "leftist"
>>826993
>>826988
>>826683
>>826671
>>826611
Easy bait
>all these people who don't even know how many hitlers hitler/stalin were
>capcha:1488
>>822621
that's pretty well put actually
they were both madmen
>>822134
>this meme argument again
