Current Events > Why is Hitler the benchmark for evil?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Stalin had a higher death toll. Mao had a higher one then Stalin and Hitler combined.
---

Also, why do people always talk about using a time machine to kill Hitler? Why not convince Hitler to stay in art school, or take up a constructive hobby? Why not introduce him to a nice Jewish woman, or man even if the theories are true?

Hitler may be the worst of humanity, but humanity is eager to be on Hitler's level it seems.

---

satan seems to have died, that's why.

---

LovingPacifist posted...

Also, why do people always talk about using a time machine to kill Hitler? Why not convince Hitler to stay in art school, or take up a constructive hobby? Why not introduce him to a nice Jewish woman, or man even if the theories are true?

Hitler may be the worst of humanity, but humanity is eager to be on Hitler's level it seems.

Shut the fuck up Dakero

---

If you've got half the brain to ask the question you also have the ability to sound it out

---

It isn't just what he did politically but also his personality. Hitler was just all sorts of fucked up, one of the strangest and most wicked men to ever live imho.

---

Death count is just part of it. Ideology and methods also play a role. I would say the only historical figure I can think of in a similar way would probably be Pol Pot.

---

Genocide and all that.

---

WaterLink posted...

Stalin had a higher death toll. Mao had a higher one then Stalin and Hitler combined.

This is factually untrue. WWII, when you factor in the holocaust, military deaths from all combatants, civilian deaths caused by military action, and civilian deaths due to war related causes, you get upwards of 90 million dead.

---

that white dude who killed like 10 million africans that no one talks about

---

MrResetti posted...

If you've got half the brain to ask the question you also have the ability to sound it out

And same applies to you. Stop having participation trophy posts that say nothing at all.

Sonic Cannon posted...

Death count is just part of it. Ideology and methods also play a role. I would say the only historical figure I can think of in a similar way would probably be Pol Pot.

I can definitely see this but at the same time it's not like Mao and Stalin were killing people for some noble cause either. What it really comes down, at least in my opinion, is Hitler lost. Stalin was on our side during the war. And the Cold War wasnt really fought on a battlefield so Mao and Stalin couldnt really be defeated in that respect.
---

Bc he was the leader of the original nazis

Do you really need this wrote out in crayon?

---

WaterLink posted...

And same applies to you. Stop having participation trophy posts that say nothing at all.

nothing at all

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

WaterLink posted...

Stalin had a higher death toll. Mao had a higher one then Stalin and Hitler combined.

This is factually untrue. WWII, when you factor in the holocaust, military deaths from all combatants, civilian deaths caused by military action, and civilian deaths due to war related causes, you get upwards of 90 million dead.

I can see this point but it's pretty shocking that you have to add war tolls on top of camp deaths to match up to what Mao did simply outside of a battlefield.
---

Lordgold666 posted...

Bc he was the leader of the original nazis

Do you really need this wrote out in crayon?

And Stalin was the leader of the Reds. Guess I can get the red crayon out for that? I'm asking a question and you're not making any points
---

And just fyi I'm not trying to sympathize what Hitler did, I'm trying to understand why his misdeeds seem to outweigh the atrocities these other leaders did. The Great Leap Forward killed like 45 million people ffs in a pretty short time
---

Because they fought for communism, a noble goal.

This is not the place to ask this question. No unbiased discussion of Hitler can take place here. All you will get are pretentious, snobby, condescending comments and you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

Default1234 posted...

This is not the place to ask this question. No unbiased discussion of Hitler can take place here. All you will get are pretentious, snobby, condescending comments and you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

---

Default1234 posted...

you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

oh look what the shitposting alt thinks

---

Default1234 posted...

This is not the place to ask this question. No unbiased discussion of Hitler can take place here. All you will get are pretentious, snobby, condescending comments and you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

LMFAO

---

The people he killed were not brown, and at the time he was fighting the US.

---

People like to sympathize with commies for some reason. Especially the type of people that liken everything they disagree with, with Hitler and Nazis.

---

Default1234 posted...

This is not the place to ask this question. No unbiased discussion of Hitler can take place here. All you will get are pretentious, snobby, condescending comments and you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

uhh...yikes

---

Delirious_Beard posted...

LMFAO

How is he wrong? Gamefaqs absolutely does not tolerate real discussion and this applies to much more than just Hitler

---

what "real discussion" in regards to Hitler do you believe that he can be referring to, sir?

---

boxington posted...

uhh...yikes

Again, how is he wrong? All you're doing is proving his point by saying "yikes"

---

WaterLink posted...

Stalin had a higher death toll. Mao had a higher one then Stalin and Hitler combined.

Mao's was incompetence, Stalin was a ruthless dictator who killed and unpersoned to keep power.

Hitler? Hitler killed millions of Jews, Romani, homosexuals, and disabled people because he hated them. THAT is why he's the benchmark. There was nothing behind his reason for doing it other than pure hate.
---

glitteringfairy posted...

Again, how is he wrong? All you're doing is proving his point by saying "yikes"

boxington posted...

what "real discussion" in regards to Hitler do you believe that he can be referring to, sir?

---

CloneTheHero posted...

eugenics wouldve played a key role in his reign.

The Rockefellers and other elites were pushing Eugenics here in America before even WW1 but ya know hes just the railroad guy, let's not acknowledge that.

Again, what it basically came down to is he lost and the winners got to tell what his story was. Mao and Stalin didnt lose, and were succeeded by people that carried on their legacy or at the very least tried to keep it from being defiled, at least soften the blow or cover up what really went on as much as possible. That's really all it comes down to imo.
---

Crono99 posted...

Let's be fair here. You'd be hard pressed to find any message board on the internet that would tolerate denying or diminishing what happened during the holocaust. And those that do are often chuck full of conspiracy theories that are easily debunked.

Holocaust deniers have been at it since the war ended. They know how to exploit all the little historical coincidences to try and convince people. Don't fall for that trap.

I'll give you an example. One thing holocaust deniers love to talk about is how, before the Bolshevik revolution, newspapers in the US said that 6 million jews were in danger of being exterminated in Russia. According to them, this is proof that the number of 6 million jews who were later exterminated by Hitler is a lie.

Now, it's a little-known historical fact that the Russian empire was very anti semitic. The last Tsar, Nicholas II, did more in his life than get his ass kicked by the bolsheviks. He was also in charge of a large-scale mass exodus of jews from their homes. There absolutely was a danger of genocide. The fabricated book "protocols from the elders of zion" was made by Russians during that time, and was even circulated in America by anti-semites.

So, how many jews were in Russia at the time? The only census conducted in the Russian Empire was in 1897 and showed an estimate of about 5.3 million jews. The actual number was probably slightly higher. The "6 million" number in american newspapers a decade later was quite a good estimate, and they truly were in danger of being exterminated.

Seriously, don't fall for the holocaust denial trap. It's not just some innocent attempt at discussing history. It's insidious, dishonest, and frankly dangerous. The crimes of the Nazis are more than well documented.

I'm not "denying" anything. Hitler was a POS. He deserves the rep he gets. What I'm saying is his contemporaries seem to get off easy when they should be looked at just as bad if not worse than him. But they were either on the right side of the war (Stalin) or not involved (Mao) so history doesnt address their atrocities as much as they should
---

if you know the answer then why are you asking

---

This is a bad topic.
---

CloneTheHero posted...

mainly because he was the only one who came dangerously close to taking over the world.

you can't take over the world.

---

ThyCorndog posted...

if you know the answer then why are you asking

You honestly wanna know why? I saw a thread on another forum asking whether you'd rather live in the USSR under Stalin or in Germany under Hitler and I thought I'd bring it here. And it just kind of irks me that Stalin and Mao mostly dont have the rep that Hitler has despite being just as bad if not worse. And I've had a few beers. So I posted this. And now it's here. There's my story
---

He was all for systematically eliminating people for no good reason. Pretty evil.

---

Default1234 posted...

This is not the place to ask this question. No unbiased discussion of Hitler can take place here. All you will get are pretentious, snobby, condescending comments and you will be modded/banned if you say anything that isn't part of the mainstream "accepted" "historical fact".

Holy fuck. Tagged appropriately.

---

WaterLink posted...

Stalin had a higher death toll. Mao had a higher one then Stalin and Hitler combined.

Stalin and Mao were on the winning team so they got a free card.

---

WaterLink posted...

The Rockefellers and other elites were pushing Eugenics here in America before even WW1

And seeing Nazi Germany take it to the logical extreme conclusion is a big part of why any serious interest in it died off.
---

mao and stalin didn't start genocidal movements that lasted until literal 2020 and going

Hitler had ambitions to kill way more people. The only reason he didn't is because he was killed before achieving his goal.

---

An_Actual_Chad posted...

Hitler had ambitions to kill way more people. The only reason he didn't is because he was killed before achieving his goal.

mustn't ever forget the atrocities they committed.
---

Stalin killed about 10 million people through famine, genocide, purges, gulags and repression.

Hitler killed 17 million people through genocides alone. Holocaust plus Generalplan Ost. He also started WW2. He has Stalin beat by every measure.

Comparing Hitler and Mao is more nuanced. Mao had a higher direct death count, but it was primarily due to famines caused by incompetent policy. Nazi Germany, on the other hand, was acting on purpose, even utilizing death camps to systematically exterminate the Jews.

You also have to consider the timeframe. Hitler only got his genocides underway in 1939, got stalled on the Eastern Front in 1941-1942, and lost the war in 1945. Had he beaten the USSR and won the war, his genocide and enslavement of the entire population of East Europe would probably have surpassed 100 million in the long term.

---

American presidents aren't completely out of the race either tbf

---

Crazyman93 posted...

WaterLink posted...

The Rockefellers and other elites were pushing Eugenics here in America before even WW1

And seeing Nazi Germany take it to the logical extreme conclusion is a big part of why any serious interest in it died off.

And America took in Nazi scientists to further their own research once occupation started. And while we're on the subject, why we dropped those bombs on Japan as well. To helicopter out figurative dick to the USSR and say "This is ours, you cant take it over"
---

Default1234 posted...

And thats a tag

---