Who is the worst of the Mass Murderers:Hitler,Stalin or Mao?

Here's the order I would put them in:

1)Mao:He had total indifference to the suffering of the Chinese People and didn't care how many had to die for His theories to work The amount of People who died during the great leap forward and the cultural revolution would by themselves put Him #1

2)Stalin:Stalin was a total Paranoid,I guess a Cult of Personality would be natural for a Man as paranoid as Him. He also had a fear of the Old Communists who knew Him a a lowly bankrobber collecting money for the Party,so He had them Killed as well. Stalin invented the Show trial,Nazi Germany closely copied the Soviet court system. The Ukrainian famine and the 1937-1939 show trials would put Him #2

3)Hitler: Hitler was scared that People would find out that His grandfather was Jewish(Shicklegrubber) so he had a huge hatred of Jewish People maybe because of His family background(He had the records about His family destroyed when Austria merged with Germany) Hitler wouldn't have been able to qualify to join His own SS. The Holocaust plus the Ersatzcommando actions in Poland and the USSR rank Him #3

Stalin was certainly the worst of the worst.He is responsibe for anywhere from 20-80 million deaths. He made Hitler look like a choir boy.

reply to post by SpeakerofTruth


Wasn't Mao responsible for over 100 million? I think I heard He was responsible for 60-100 million deaths in China.

[edit on 22-1-2010 by BigDaveJr]

[edit on 22-1-2010 by BigDaveJr]

reply to post by BigDaveJr


I thought Mao had killed more than Stalin? Making him the best mass murderer

Mao by far was #1. I think the absolute worst was Pol Pot ... his rule led to the deaths of almost a quarter of Cambodia's population in a little under 4 years. Percentage wise that is worse then anything Hitler, Mao, or Stalin did.

reply to post by BigDaveJr


Stalin gets my vote. He systemically killed some estimated 40 million people and he was a very flexible killer. He actually had a methodology that he had sociologists and psychologists develop that computed how many folks within a given population needed to be killed for the rest to comply.

He'd send his thugs into a village of say 200 and immediately kill some number, say 16. But unless it got out of control, he would only have the 16 killed. He wanted the other 184. Those folks would work all year and as soon as the crops were harvested, Stalin would send his boys back in and take all of the food, leading to mass starvation. He would take the food for his army and the elites, but it was way too much food so he would have it burned.

The notion was that at some point they would all be working in camps anyway so they would have to move and the fewer he had to move the easier it would be.

If you are so inclined, read the "Great Terror" or the "Harvest of Sorrow" by Robert Conquest. He's a serious historian and pretty much tells you the deal

All of them were bad ..

They all killed .. The Number doesn't matter ...

This is not a competition .. and shame on you for taking millions of innocent lives lost and turning them into some kind of game/competition ..

Originally posted by Polynomial C
All of them were bad ..

They all killed .. The Number doesn't matter ...

This is not a competition .. and shame on you for taking millions of innocent lives lost and turning them into some kind of game/competition ..

Exactly my stance. Any of this bastards would murder people ad infinity if had chance.

Originally posted by Polynomial C
This is not a competition .. and shame on you for taking millions of innocent lives lost and turning them into some kind of game/competition ..

But those that forget history are condemned to repeat it.

My vote is on Stalin.

I like to think outside the box:

Cheney.

reply to post by leftystrat


That's wrong,Chaney isn't a mass murderer!

Originally posted by leftystrat
I like to think outside the box:

Cheney.

I was wondering how many posts it would take until someone mentioned either Cheney or Bush.

Time to crack the books and read some history.

I thought it was Uncle Sam, but I didn't see his name on the list. Should Saloth Sar be on the list? I mean the killed almost 25% of he Cambodians.

[edit on 22-1-2010 by EMPIRE]

reply to post by EMPIRE



Wasn't the King of Belgium guilty of the deaths of over 1,000,000 in the 19th century Congo?

reply to post by BigDaveJr


Because he's only personally shot one person in the face?

(That everyone knows about at least.)

reply to post by buttking


I wouldn't want to go hunting with him,too dangerous!

Originally posted by EMPIRE
I thought it was Uncle Sam, but I didn't see his name on the list..

Uncle Sam is a fictional character.

But then again, some people think Lord of the Rings is real.

Originally posted by leftystrat
I like to think outside the box:

Cheney.

Not only do you think outside the box, I bet you are so open-minded that brains just ooze out of your head!

Cheney worse than Hitler, Mao or Stalin? If that is the case...out of Hitler, Stalin or Mao, which one do you admire most?

[edit on 22-1-2010 by Carseller4]

Originally posted by BigDaveJr
I wouldn't want to go hunting with him,too dangerous!

Would you rather go driving with Teddy Kennedy?

Hey, look on the bright side; Teddy's been sober for 120+ days now!

reply to post by jerico65


en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...