egafd.com

If anything Mao had more people killed than either Hitler or Stalin. These three cunts were some of the worst people who ever lived.

Ever heard about King Leopold II of The Belgians and what he got up to in his personal African fiefdom, the Congo Free State?

Or met anyone from Dresden and asked them what they think of Winston Churchill?

The idea of comparing Stalin and Hitler is misguided. Hitler's accession to power was funded by powerful capitalist interests in the USA - Rockefeller, Brown Brothers Harriman, Union Bank (prop. Prescott Bush) - and the Nazi regime was supported throughout the war by IBM (you try organising mass extermination without computing power) and General Motors (you need trucks, too). After the war, the allies had to demonise the Nazis to cover up how close they had been and how sympathetic they were to Nazi ideology. Yet at the same time they were recruiting thousands of them into their post-war scientific establishment and more secretively into their security establishment - the CIA.

Stalin - and the Great Russian nationalism that he imposed onto the weakened and war-weary revolutionary working-class internationalism of Lenin's Bolsheviks when he gained power - was indeed a tyrant. But he was Russia's tyrant - all the Western powers tried to throttle the revolution. The only person who might have kept Leninism and internationalism alive after 1924 was Trotsky - and Stalin had him murdered. The failure of revolutionary marxism to prevail outside the Soviet Union (particularly the failure of the Spartacists in Germany and the murder by the Freikorps of Rosa Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht) was what gave the capitalist world the confidence to back Nazism. America and Britain weren't interested in what was good for the German working class - they simply wanted its organisations smashed and the profits from slave labour. They weren't interested in helping Jews either.

max_tranmere wrote:

> .......Any views on why Hitler is more
> infamous and reviled more than Stalin is, when the latter
> bumped-off far more people?


Hitler lost the war; Stalin didn't.

What a load of bollocks Sam ! Ask my wife's mother that question (oh you can't, you won't speak Russian) and she'll kick you there. You have no idea what he was like.

HE WAS MORE EVIL THAN HITLER COULD EVER HAVE WANTED TO BE !!

trust me !

Stalin could rip phone books in half with his barehands,hitler couldnt.

Ahhh I've awaited this topic for a long time. Essentially neither have the largest blood on their hands. Chairman Mao has that dubious honour at an estimated 70million people. As a bit of an amateur historian the myths surrounding Hitler fascinates me.

Yes, a terrible man who did terrible things, but we all know the history from our gassing of him in WW1 to the reality of antisemitism in Europe in the 1930s (it takes more than 1 man to organise something like that after all). But what really separates Hitler and Stalin apart for me is that Stalin (like Mao) predominantly killed his own people. This is true 'evil'. Hitler on the other hand promotes his own people through quite revolutionary ventures like Volkswagen etc.

The major difference to me is that with his persona, and undeniable skills as an orator Hitler COULD have gone down in history as one of the great revolutionaries, transforming a broken Germany into the epicentre of Europe. Seriously imagine Nazism without the racial hatred? I know that was kind of the point, but look at some of their ambitions aside from this and it's just staggering. Just look at Welthauptstadt.

The reason why Hitler is regarded as the face of evil now? Hollywood... thats where most people get a vast amount of their WW2 knowledge and preconceptions from. Who rules Hollywood? Jews...say no more

Muffinman, interesting stuff there. You know a lot about this.

I had no idea Franco was in power for that long. One of the longest times in office ever. Although Castro probably exceeds that.