Venom2053
Hyper Poster
LiveForTheLaunch said:
Yea my Prof. mentioned it as well. Here its called the Madagascar Plan and Hitler signed of on it apparently..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan
Most Evil Person In the Past 100 Years?
- Thread starter Darren B
- Start date
Yea my Prof. mentioned it as well. Here its called the Madagascar Plan and Hitler signed of on it apparently..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan
I find it a bit weird to have randomly shoved John Wayne Gacey and Ted Bundy into the poll. They're far from the worst serial killers. Unless it's to have a representation of THE serial killer in the poll, since they're among the better known, as well as the people responsible for genocides?
Honestly, it's a tough one to call I think. It's too easy to look at numbers and label the person responsible for the most deaths as the most "evil" (itself a problematic term, but I'm not going to get into that). It's also too easy to just say "Hitler" as well. He's more the face of an entire "evil" regime, but there's a lot more to it as people on here, with more knowledge than me on the subject, have pointed out. The close European/American connection makes it easy to scream Hitler as well, rather than considering people from further afield who we don't hear about as much or have less of a personal connection to.
Pol Pot's up there I think. There's something pretty **** ed up about killing over 20% of the population of your "own" people (NOT that I'm suggesting it's better to kill "other" people before anyone jumps on that) purely for your own political gain. What's even more **** ed up is that he was essentially allowed to get away with it after the fact. Cambodia has no oil I guess?
I can see the point that serial killers are "more evil" than mass murderers due to the nature of how they kill, as in selecting individual victims not necessarily the methods used, and the fact that they make no political case for what they do. Again, I'm not in any way suggesting there's an excuse for Hitler, Stalin et al., but they at least, in their own **** ed up heads, could argue their behaviour was for a justifiable "good" for their country. People at the time obviously thought so too, or they would never have been so "successful".
The serial killer doesn't have that as a reasoning behind what they do. They can justify it to themselves perhaps, but ultimately they're carrying out their murders for purely selfish reasons. So then who is the most "evil" serial killer? I don't think anyone can really answer that.
Evil doesn't have to even come in the form of killing, or directly ordering, the deaths of people. It can come in the form of allowing people to suffer unnecessarily, of selfishness and hypocrisy, and of stealing from the people you're pretending to be helping.
You want to see the face of evil? Take a look at this nasty old bitch:
Honestly, it's a tough one to call I think. It's too easy to look at numbers and label the person responsible for the most deaths as the most "evil" (itself a problematic term, but I'm not going to get into that). It's also too easy to just say "Hitler" as well. He's more the face of an entire "evil" regime, but there's a lot more to it as people on here, with more knowledge than me on the subject, have pointed out. The close European/American connection makes it easy to scream Hitler as well, rather than considering people from further afield who we don't hear about as much or have less of a personal connection to.
Pol Pot's up there I think. There's something pretty **** ed up about killing over 20% of the population of your "own" people (NOT that I'm suggesting it's better to kill "other" people before anyone jumps on that) purely for your own political gain. What's even more **** ed up is that he was essentially allowed to get away with it after the fact. Cambodia has no oil I guess?
I can see the point that serial killers are "more evil" than mass murderers due to the nature of how they kill, as in selecting individual victims not necessarily the methods used, and the fact that they make no political case for what they do. Again, I'm not in any way suggesting there's an excuse for Hitler, Stalin et al., but they at least, in their own **** ed up heads, could argue their behaviour was for a justifiable "good" for their country. People at the time obviously thought so too, or they would never have been so "successful".
The serial killer doesn't have that as a reasoning behind what they do. They can justify it to themselves perhaps, but ultimately they're carrying out their murders for purely selfish reasons. So then who is the most "evil" serial killer? I don't think anyone can really answer that.
Evil doesn't have to even come in the form of killing, or directly ordering, the deaths of people. It can come in the form of allowing people to suffer unnecessarily, of selfishness and hypocrisy, and of stealing from the people you're pretending to be helping.
You want to see the face of evil? Take a look at this nasty old bitch:
Darren B
Giga Poster
gavin said:
Yeah, pretty much just the representation, I could have included more from both sides, Dahmer,Gein,De Salvo,Mussolini,Eichmann etc. But the 'other' choice was there to give a broader option.
I think UC, Furie and LFTL gave a fair assumption of Hitler and the Final Solution, But i did want to add on an earlier post which stated about the Nazi leadership and their role in the second world war/Holocaust.
I wouldn't label all of the notable Nazi's as 'Evil', We have established such people as Hitler,Himmler,Borrmann,Goebbels,Eichmann and Barbie are generally put in that bracket, But for me, others not so much.
Herman Goering (Commander of the Luftwaffe), I wouldn't put him in the evil category, There are many words to describe Goering, such as 'fat', 'thief', 'drug addict' etc. But not particularly evil. Goring was always against the war and ensured that the Luftwaffe treated POW's with dignity.
Admiral Karl Donitz (Commander of the Navy, Successor to Hitler) A career naval officer, regarded as a good man and respected by the Allies, Churchill especially. There are no suggestions Donitz was linked to the Holocaust.
Rudolph Hess (Deputy Fuhrer), Yes, he was anti-semitic and loyal follower of Hitler right up until his death, but he was another member of the top brass who didn't want war, thus explaining his attempt's to end the war in 1941, which led to his arrest. The holocaust of course was after his arrest, so he can't be linked to that.
General Erwin Rommel, (not part of the Nazi leadership, but one of the most recognized figures during WW2) A great man, A great leader, but fighting for the wrong side. I can't really fault him, he held himself honourably, and commanded the respect of everyone, especially the Allies.
One note i will bring up regarding Hitler, is a suggestion to watch this http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0363163/ if given the chance. It doesn't glamourise Hitler in any way, But gives us a look into his 'human' side.
LiveForTheLaunch
CF Legend
Yah, it's pretty obvious if they went to Madagascar their fate would be pretty awful anyway. My bad for not having all the background information on that. It's a bit weird we didn't discuss it in more detail in my German Civilization class, since we went back to the early 1800s.
Really good point made here, too. When we read Hitler's Willing Executioners and Ordinary Men in class, one of the big points was how true evil is being able to go above and beyond the execution orders to purposely inflict suffering on people, which I agree with. The people who had hands in the Jewish murders (like at Jozefow, which is probably one of the most well known shooting grounds and was the focus in one of the novels I read) can't really be considered evil or be incriminated. Obviously it's wrong to kill a person in any sense, but I wouldn't say they were evil. The people who made the elderly strip down to nothing, crawl on their hands and knees, and be beaten with bats were the true evil of the Holocaust.
I wish I knew more about people like Pol Pot, etc. Maybe one day I'll look into them, but now probably isn't the time considering as of this moment I'm taking a break from studying for a history exam and that would probably interfere
.Random note, but does anybody know the person who was behind the Armenian Holocaust? That is a huge thing in history that is generally forgotten about, which saddens me. As awful as the German Holocaust was, it makes me upset that situations like Rwanda and Armenia are forgotten about because most classroom discussions are focused around Germany. Germany has an amazing history but it's nice to kind of stray away from it once in a while.
Gavin, the old lady in your post is such a peach <3
Thanks! I wasn't into nursing as much as I hoped. I think I would have loved the job but I wasn't into the classes and wasn't motivated enough with the work. I'm doing majors in history/classic civilization and a minor in German language and culture, which is all fab <3
tomahawk
Strata Poster
^Ordinary Men <3 absolutely loved that book.
In the Nazi Germany and the Holocaust class I am just finishing this week, we didn't discuss Madagascar Project at all, I asked my professor about it and he said since nothing ever materialized from it, it wasn't as importance as some of the other things that happened during the time period.
A great book to read on the Nazi people is "Drowned and the Saved" by Primo Levi. He was an Italian Jew who spent time in Auschwitz and survived and wrote 2 books about it. The first one, can't recall the name, focused on his time there, but The Drowned and the Saved is more of a psychological viewpoint and explains some of the mentalities the Germans had and how they tried to distance themselves from committing the crimes.
History degree is full of win.
In the Nazi Germany and the Holocaust class I am just finishing this week, we didn't discuss Madagascar Project at all, I asked my professor about it and he said since nothing ever materialized from it, it wasn't as importance as some of the other things that happened during the time period.
A great book to read on the Nazi people is "Drowned and the Saved" by Primo Levi. He was an Italian Jew who spent time in Auschwitz and survived and wrote 2 books about it. The first one, can't recall the name, focused on his time there, but The Drowned and the Saved is more of a psychological viewpoint and explains some of the mentalities the Germans had and how they tried to distance themselves from committing the crimes.
History degree is full of win.
LiveForTheLaunch
CF Legend
^ I loved it, it was such a different perspective to the usual "all people who were involved were evil, disgusting human beings" viewpoint. I really liked the chapters that focused on how they tried to save some of the Jewish people. Some of it was really emotional, too. I'll be taking the Auschwitz and Holocaust class I think next year, so hopefully that'll be in the readings and if not I'll check it out.
LiveForTheLaunch
CF Legend
We clearly haven't spoken in a while. I went backpacking with Brad for three weeks in the summer, during my 3 month stay there, and went to Berlin and Munich as two of the stops along the way. Loved the history of Berlin, and Munich was also a beautiful place with a rich history. We went to Dachau as well, which was a very emotional place to be.
My minor is in the language and the culture. I didn't want to do simply language because I'm very interested in German history. So it's just basically the German language, 3 hours a day for four days a week for eight months, but the classes count as two credits because they're so damn hard. Then we have to take German cinema and German civilization (the latter I already completed, very nearly got a 90% but my stupid attendance brought it down into the 80s).
I'm thinking of doing a study abroad to Germany or England in my fourth year (I have to do four and a half or five years because I switched programs). I can't remember the city name but I know it's close to Heidelberg.
I have to admit, I don't know too much about people like Goering, etc. so I can't really comment. I know the gist about them but can't really say whether or not they were evil. It's undeniable that most people who had any sort of participation had at least a bit of a twisted mind, but not sure about evil.
A bit off topic, my bad. But when I get a chance to reply to UC in a fashion that's NOT arguing and bantering back and forth, I have to take the opportunity
.
tomahawk
Strata Poster
To add to the Stalingrad comment, another reason they went South was oil fields were near Stalingrad and they wanted to cut off Russia's oil supply and gain it for themselves to help with the distance from the homefront. Hitler was an absolute idiot involving the military, he shouldn't have even messed with it. His refusal to upgrade the guns, Stalingrad, Normandy, all just giant blunders. Even worse was his "no surrender" orders, so essentially if you were German and you lost a battle, you had to be killed. Also after one of the assassination attempts he made the top leadership swear allegiance to him again to ensure all were "faithful" and all that jazz. Even though at this time they were defeated but he was being his stubborn self and made it go on longer.
Xpress
Strata Poster
I hear this talk of world leaders committing mass genocide... Yet I still feel that Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech mass murderer, 2007) is at, or above, these mass genociders... My reasons for him being as such are quite lengthy and I'm not going to bother posting them here. But if I were to pick one, Seung-Hui Cho would be it...
LiveForTheLaunch
CF Legend
I know you can't just place a label of evil on any of these people, which is why I liked Ordinary Men and Hitler's Willing Executioners. I was even having a discussion with my mom the other day about how people wrongly say that anyone who followed Hitler was an awful person. Hell, having seen the propaganda and the convincing way in which Hitler spoke, I can't say for sure that I wouldn't have supported him had I been alive at the time. 95% of the German population was receiving crazy amounts of social benefits from Hitler and his party, children who had parents supporting Hitler were given free school allowing them to get their Arbiter/diploma which was super expensive otherwise, mothers of soldiers were given monthly payments, women were given the Mutterkreuz for having children, unemployment was declining, etc. He was doing a LOT for the people and so, rightfully, a lot of people supported him. Nobody in this day and age can say "oh, I would have done something about his hatred towards the Jews" because we didn't live then and don't know the extent of the brainwashing or the fear of being punished for helping the Jews. It's narrow minded to say they were evil right off the bat simply because they participated. Like someone before said, there's a difference between following orders and then carrying them out beyond the call of duty to the point where the victims are made to suffer and have a prolonged death. Obviously I don't agree with them killing the Jews to begin with, but I don't slap the evil label on them because I'm not that narrow minded.
MouseAT
Hyper Poster
It's hard to pick the "most evil" person. I know many of the names on the list. I even have some idea of what many of them have done. Others I just see the name and think "scum" without knowing the specifics. Yet others I have no idea.
The chances are that the "most evil" person in the last 100 years is not one of the ones on this list.
It's easy to look at the list and say Hitler or Himmler due to the sheer amount of innocent people killed purely because of who they were. However, who's to say that there aren't far worse killers who would have performed much worse acts given more resources. Hitler and Himmler required the resources of the Third Reich in order to exterminate millions of people. I'm sure there's plenty of other twisted people in the world that would commit equal or worse atrocities given the opportunity. They just never get the opportunity. Does that make them any less evil.
If we get too hung up on the the idea that you must kill in order to be evil, we miss an equally important category of people - the malicious, subtle, long term schemers who screw over large numbers of people over the long term. Who's worse? The man who manages to kill millions, or the man who manages to destroy the lives and hopes of billions?
The chances are that the "most evil" person in the last 100 years is not one of the ones on this list.
It's easy to look at the list and say Hitler or Himmler due to the sheer amount of innocent people killed purely because of who they were. However, who's to say that there aren't far worse killers who would have performed much worse acts given more resources. Hitler and Himmler required the resources of the Third Reich in order to exterminate millions of people. I'm sure there's plenty of other twisted people in the world that would commit equal or worse atrocities given the opportunity. They just never get the opportunity. Does that make them any less evil.
Exactly. A death can potentially be over quickly and cleanly. Capital punishment still enjoys popular support in many nations around the world, when it ultimately boils down to exactly that: killing or directly ordering the deaths of people. Yet strangely enough, not only is it not considered to be evil by many people, in the USA the legal system defines that it's not cruel or unusual.gavin said:
If we get too hung up on the the idea that you must kill in order to be evil, we miss an equally important category of people - the malicious, subtle, long term schemers who screw over large numbers of people over the long term. Who's worse? The man who manages to kill millions, or the man who manages to destroy the lives and hopes of billions?