# Most evil person to have ever existed?



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Who do you think was the most evil person ever existed?

I have tried to rack my brain, and do extensive research to compile this list of top 10 evil people.


* *





Osama bin Laden
n








Osama bin Laden was an Islamic terrorist leader that lead the terrorist organization called the Al-Qaeda. He is responsible for the 9-11 attack, which injured more than 6,000 and killed about 3,000. He is also responsible for bombing attacks on the United States Embassies in Dares Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. 212 people were killed and 4,000 were injured. He sponsored the Luxor massacre of 17 November, which killed almost 70 people. Osama has caused other Al-Qaeda bombings throughout the world. The 2004 Madrid train bombings, which killed 191 people and injured 2,050. In October 2002 in Bali, 3 bombs exploded, killing 202 and injuring 209. The 2004 SuperFerry bombing killed 119 people. Thousands of Iraqis have died from Al-Qaeda bombings. In 2007 alone, bombs exploded in Qahtaniya and Jazeera, Iraq, killing 796 and injuring 1,562 people. Osama encouraged other Terrorist groups to attack the United States. He caused the War on Terror, which killed 127,170 to 1.2 million people. Osama was killed on May 2, 2011.






Caligula








He was Rome’s 3rd emperor from AD 37 to AD 41. He was wild, extravagant, with a penchant for sexual adventures. In the first 3 months in his reign of terror, over 160,000 animals were sacrificed in his honor. He later got a brain fever that made him mentally ill. He then believed he was a god. Under Caligula, the law became an instrument of torture. He believed prisoners should feel a painful death. He began to brutally murder for fun. He would kill his opponents slowly and painfully over hours or days. He decapitated and strangled children. People were beaten with heavy chains. He forced families to attend their children’s execution. Many people had their tongues cut off. He fed prisoners to a lions, panthers and bears and often killed gladiators. One gladiator alone was beaten up for 2 days full days. He sometimes ordered people to be killed by elephants. His cruelty caused people to commit suicide. He demanded sex with a lot of women including his 3 sisters. He would force husbands to give up their wives. He exiled his sisters and had his brother in law put to death. He caused many to die of starvation. Sawing people was one of his favorite things to do, which filleted the spine and spinal cord from crotch down to the chest. He liked to chew up the testicles of victims. He killed some of his most important friends and his father-in-law. One time Caligula said “I wish Rome had but one neck, so that I could cut off all their heads with one blow!” In AD 41, Caligula was killed by Casius Chaerea, a man whom Caligula had mocked at court for his effeminacy.
Attila the Hun








Attila ruled the Huns from 434 to 453. He was the leader of the Hunnic Empire which stretched from the Ural River to Germany and from the Baltic Sea to the Danube River. He was a bloodthirsty, cruel and ruthless barbarian that was a lover of battle. He wanted to destroy the Roman Empire and everyone in his way. If you were a citizen in Rome and begged for mercy, he would kill you. He was as great a menace to the Teutonic tribes people as he was to the Romans. He was so destructive that people believed he was a punishment from Heaven. His nickname was Attila the Scourge of God. Attila and the other Huns thought that other people’s lives were meaningless. He would torture and destroy his enemies, his own people and entire population of cities. He rampaged Roman cities and may have killed up to hundreds of thousands. People were sometimes torn limb by limb. One time Attila found Saint Ursula, the perpetual Virgin, and wanted to marry her. She refused which made Attila angry and had her killed along with 11,000 of her companions. It is said that he might have drunk a women’s blood. He eat 2 of his sons and killed his brother. Attila coughed up blood and died in 453.

Genghis Khan 








He was Khan of the Mongolian Empire from 1206 to 1227. In that time he conquered most of China and all the land through the Caspian Sea. He was ruthless, vengeful, cruel, and bloodthirsty. He and his army destroyed countless numbers of cities, solders, civilians and children. People were killed by having molten metal and silver poured into their eyes and ears. In one massacre alone, 700,000 people were killed. At another place, the poor were decapitated and the rich were tortured to find out where their treasure was. Women were sometimes raped in front of their families. Hundreds of thousands had their lives ruined. It is said that if his army of men had no water they would cut a horse’s vein and drink its blood. He would use people as human shields. Tens of thousands became slaves. He would order you to be killed immediately if you were an enemy, if you betrayed him or if you were disloyal to him. Genghis and his army killed 20 to 60 million people (or 10% to 30% of the known world’s population). He killed three-fourths of the population of the Iranian Plateau which was 10 to 15 million. He also killed his brother at age 13 just because his brother had stolen a fish from him. Genghis Khan once said “The greatest happiness is to scatter your enemy to drive him before you, to see his cities reduced to ashes, to see those who love him shrouded in tears, and to gather into your bosom his wives and daughters.” Genghis Khan died of natural causes in 1227.


Ivan the Terrible








Ivan was Tsar of Russia from 1533 to 1584. Ivan was cruel, brutal and merciless even as a kid. When he was young, he had had habits of taking creatures like dogs, cats, bears, and other creatures to the top of tall buildings and then throwing them to the ground. Ivan killed people when he was a teenager. Ivan found them fun and amusing. When Ivan became Tsar of Russia, he became paranoid and started to see enemies everywhere. Ivan forced thousands to move from their lands and made them homeless. Ivan became obsessed with killing and torturing anyone he saw as enemies but most were innocent people. Ivan destroyed hundreds of villages, towns and cities. In the Novgorod Massacre, 60,000 were tortured to death. Ivan had his own personal torture chamber. Ivan tortured and destroyed entire families. Hundreds of parents were forced to see their children tortured and killed. Ivan ordered hundreds of people to be eaten by bears and wolves. He personally killed and tortured people with his long and hard staff. If Ivan ordered someone to be killed, he would often want to watch the execution. Some his executions were as long as 15 hours. He enjoyed seeing people’s blood and suffering from being tortured. Ivan ordered people to be beheaded, strangled, hanged, blinded, burned, stabbed, boiled, disemboweled, buried alive, impaled and fried. Ivan would often remove people’s ribs with red hot pinchers. Peasant girls were often tortured, whipped, raped and used for target practice. Religious leaders were tortured and killed if they begged Ivan to stop his killings. He blinded his architect and boiled his treasurer. Ivan killed one of his wives a day after their marriage. He even killed his favorite son in a rage. Ivan died while he was playing chess with one of his friends in 1584. Most likely he was poisoned.
Adolf Hitler 








Hitler was Chancellor of Germany from 1933 to his death in 1945, becoming Germany’s Fuhrer. Before he gained power, he wanted to be an artist, but he failed. Then he decided that he wanted to be a member of the German army, he became solder in World War I. When the German army surrendered, Hitler escaped and returned to Germany. He believed that Germany lost because they had surrendered, and it made him bitter. He then turned his attention to the Jews. He believed that the Jews were the cause Germany’s problems and he also believed that the Jews did not count as human beings. His plans were to eliminate every Jew in Europe and to gain world control. He once said “by the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.” Hitler would kill any Jew, enemy, or anyone that he thought was a problem. He used wounded people that were in hospitals for test experiments for ways of killing, like carbon dioxide gas. These experiments killed over 300,000 people. Every Jew in Germany was sent to concentration camps. Jews in other countries were also sent to concentration camps. All were expected to work until they died or they were killed. Millions of Jews had to watch friends and members of their families die. Jews died from gas chambers, crematories, firing squads, lethal injections, force labor, starvation, poison, exposure, disease, execution, death marches and medical experiments. More than 90 percent of Poland’s Jews were killed. Millions of children died because of him. Hitler betrayed friends and allies in the war. Hitler had a breading program. If the child fell short of Nazi-defined perfection, the child would be killed. Hitler himself was responsible for the deaths of more than 11 million people (5,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses, 15,000 homosexuals, 100,000 Freemasons, 100,000 of the mentally ill, 500,000 Gypsies, 750,000 Slavs, 3 million non-Jewish Poles, 3 million Russians and 6 million Jews) but his actions caused the deaths of over 50 million people. On 1945, Hitler committed suicide by gunshot and cyanide poisoning.



Joseph Stalin








Stalin was dictator of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1953. When he was young he was a bank robber, an agitator, and an assassin. After a long road to get into power, he became a paranoid, ruthless, unforgiving, brutal and vengeful dictator. He created a 30 year reign of violence, terror, destruction and murdering. Anyone who spied on him, displeased him, or voted against him was doomed to die. His first plan was to create the Soviet Union into an industrial superpower country. To do that would cause the deaths of countless numbers of people. People were sent to slave labors and were forced to work to death. Huge industrial schemes became a living hell for hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions. He signed the death warrants for tens of thousands of people. Stalin only liked people who fourfold his orders, but if you were a popular figure, an intelligent, and independent person, Stalin would order you to be tortured, imprisoned for many years or life, or shot you. He would kill family members of people who loved him and family members of people who horned him as a god. Stalin once kissed a small girl in public, she had become famous and thought Stalin cared for her and her family, but he later killed her parents. People were sometimes killed with an ice pick. About 10 million people died in a famine. Stalin once said “One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is simply a statistic.” He killed the wives of some of his friends. He exiled his daughter’s boyfriend, Aleksie Kapler. Stalin’s wife was driven into despair by his treatment of her, which caused her to kill herself. His son died in a Nazi concentration camp after Stalin refused to trade for his life. He would even kill people who were defending their country against the Nazis. People were in prison were force to fight in World War II, but if they returned they would be sent back to prison. Hundreds of thousands of people from other countries were tortured, raped, or killed. People were often killed by mustard gas bombs. More than 1.5 million German women were raped from the Soviet Union. Recent evidence shows that Stalin had his own Final Solution in which hundreds of thousands of Jews were exiled or killed. Stalin wanted the Soviet Union to become a country strong enough to rival the U.S., but if they were stronger than the U.S., he would want the 2 countries to fight a war. Stalin killed 20 to 60 million people. He died in 1953 from a stroke.
Vlad Dracula








Vlad was prince of Wallachia a total of 3 times, in the years 1448, 1456 to 1462, and 1476. He is best known for inspiring the Dracula ledgend, the cruel methods he used to torture and kill people and how much he enjoyed killing people. His last name, Dracula, means little devil. The most common method he used to kill people was impalement. Vlad had a horse attached to each of the victim’s legs and a sharpened stake was gradually forced into the body. The end of the stake was usually oiled and care was taken that the stake was not be to sharp. Normally the stake was inserted into the body through the buttocks and was often forced through the body until it emerged from the mouth. However, there were many times where victims were impaled through other bodily orifices or through the abdomen or chest. He was so found of doing this that he is now known as Vlad the Impaler. The height of the stake ranked the victim. Vlad also loved to impale animals. It was possibly of the most gruesome and painful way of dying in history. Victims would endure this for hours or days. Everyone in the city Amlas, including every children, went through this, which was up to 20,000 people. Vlad did not want the stake to be too sharp because the victim would die to soon and it would not be as much fun to watch. He would impale children and babies through their mother’s chests. Impalement was his favorite way of killing people but it was not his only method. Vlad ordered people to be poisoned, blinded, strangled, hanged, decapitated, stabbed, disemboweled, skinned, exposed to extreme elements and animals, hacked, dismembered, burned, boiled, scalped, roasted, nailed in the head, buried alive, etc. He would like to cut off people’s noses, ears, hands, feet, limbs, and sexual organs. He often cut of peoples private parts (especially in the case of women) and would keep them. People were sometimes worked to death. He also smashed the heads of people into hard walls. He liked to eat and drink around bodies of dead and naked people that had stakes through them. He destroyed many of his villages on his way into battles. He roasted children and forced their parents to eat them. Vlad hated people who were sick, weak, poor, beggars or vagrants. He invited all of the poor and sick of Wallacha to a fake party. He asked them if they wished to be be anything other than poor people. When they all said yes, they were all burned immediately. He murdered his wife had had her sexual organs cut off. There were rumors that Vlad loved to drink blood. Vlad killed over 100,000 people. If that is true he killed 20 percent of Wallacha’s population. Nearly all of those people went through horrible ways of killing that would take a long time. Vlad was decapitated in 1476.


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

None of them.

Most of them weren't aware that they did something wrong. In their perspective, the things they did were good just like IS terrorists really think they are doing good to this world. Don't forget the time perspective too for people that didn't live in the last two centuries. Being gay was a bigger crime than being Genghis Khan and killing millions of people in wars.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Lakigigar said:


> None of them.
> 
> Most of them weren't aware that they did something wrong. In their perspective, the things they did were good just like IS terrorists really think they are doing good to this world. Don't forget the time perspective too for people that didn't live in the last two centuries. Being gay was a bigger crime than being Genghis Khan and killing millions of people in wars.


But they were pretty evil objectively.

I mean, lets just throw the whole book out on what evil means and declare murder a sacred privileged then; hallelujah!


----------



## Noir (Jun 20, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> But they were pretty evil objectively.
> 
> I mean, lets just throw the whole book out on what evil means and declare murder a sacred privileged then; hallelujah!


Would you consider killing someone in legitimate defense evil (let's say he targets someone very, very dear to you)?

At any rate, I voted Joseph Stalin.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Donald Trump? Are you fucking kidding me?

Besides him, Adolf Hitler is probably the least evil person on this list.

The only real reasons why people would think he's that bad is 1: Because the events are recent history. 2: Because of both western and eastern propaganda. 3: Because it's popular to hate him more than anyone else. 4: Because he committed genocide against a race, which is bullshit, because hating him for killing a specific race of people, rather than just hating him for simply killing people, is racist, even when you acknowledge that he targeted a race of people. Americans nearly succeeded in committing genocide against the Native Americans, and the Spanish and Portuguese actually did succeed in wiping out the Native South Americans. If you hate Hitler more than America, Spain and Portugal, you're racist, and also biased.

I'm biased to pick Stalin, because of what the Soviet Union did to the world, and what they did to Germany, but in comparison to the other historical figures, he isn't all that bad. He's a psychopath, but not inherently sadistic.

Everyone else on the list are psychopathic sadists who enjoyed torturing others and seeing them in pain, and no particular person qualifies as more cruel and sadistic than the other, so I'm gonna go by quantity.

*Genghis Kahn* wins, in this regard.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Lakigigar said:


> None of them.
> 
> Most of them weren't aware that they did something wrong. In their perspective, the things they did were good just like IS terrorists really think they are doing good to this world. Don't forget the time perspective too for people that didn't live in the last two centuries. Being gay was a bigger crime than being Genghis Khan and killing millions of people in wars.


"Killing" is an understatement. He didn't just kill, he wiped out entire villages just because he could. He is one of the most notorious rapists in history, probably having the highest world record for raping people in human history. Their men also raped people in front of their families, took their wives and daughters to be raped as well, and not to forget the sadistic and cruel methods of how he and his men tortured others. Many people were sick fucks, but Genghis Kahn wins in scale, as he did it more than the others.
His whole life philosophy was built on psychopathic sadism.

Genghis Kahn is the sickest fucking psychopath in human history.


----------



## Surreal Snake (Nov 17, 2009)

You missed Chairman Mao who apparently killed more than anyone in history


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Surreal Snake said:


> You missed Chairman Mao who apparently killed more than anyone in history


Really? I've heard it stated by some that he actually did well to China and turned it into a better country. Is it perhaps just propaganda? I decided to only do the most prolific because there's so many horrible human beings out there that it is difficult to decide. 

Anyway, communism can work.


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

Emologic said:


> "Killing" is an understatement. He didn't just kill, he wiped out entire villages just because he could. He is one of the most notorious rapists in history, probably having the highest world record for raping people in human history. Their men also raped people in front of their families, took their wives and daughters to be raped as well, and not to forget the sadistic and cruel methods of how he and his men tortured others. Many people were sick fucks, but Genghis Kahn wins in scale, as he did it more than the others.
> His whole life philosophy was built on psychopathic sadism.
> 
> Genghis Kahn is the sickest fucking psychopath in human history.


That's seven centuries ago. Raping woman was seen as normal or maybe as a privilege. He wasn't educated properly.



Noir said:


> Would you consider killing someone in legitimate defense evil (let's say he targets someone very, very dear to you)?
> 
> At any rate, I voted Joseph Stalin.


Absolutely not.

________________

Donald Trump is not the most evil person to have ever existed. Let's be serious. Except for insulting people and not being polite always (and part of that is also tactical), he didn't do a lot wrong. Although i don't know his private life well enough. Yes he isn't perfect. He is not the most friendly or most concerned guy, but be serious. It's quite *sadistic* to put him even in this poll.


----------



## Noir (Jun 20, 2014)

Emologic said:


> Donald Trump? Are you fucking kidding me?
> 
> Besides him, Adolf Hitler is probably the least evil person on this list.


I'm not entirely sure what Vlad the Impaler is doing there either.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Noir said:


> I'm not entirely sure what Vlad the Impaler is doing there either.


Whatever that is supposed to mean...


----------



## Surreal Snake (Nov 17, 2009)

Mao's Great Leap Forward 'killed 45 million in four years' | The Independent


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Joseph Stalin was the only person on this list who didn't convince himself that he was helping a few people by killing others.

Not as *successfully* homicidal as Mao Zedong just going by the numbers, but Joseph Stalin *would've* killed everybody else on the planet if it would've benefitted him in some way. Mao Zedong wouldn't have taken the same opportunity.


----------



## Vahyavishdapaya (Sep 2, 2014)

From the list you've given I would pick Dubya, but overall, the most evil person would be somebody like Marcus Licinius Crassus, Alexandrina Victoria Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Nicholas Romanov, or Marcus Porcius Priscus Cato.

Killing someone is not really all that evil in the grand scheme of things. At least you're giving them a quick out. Enslaving someone, and exploiting someone for their lifetime, however...

I'd much rather be killed by a Mongol horse-archer or gassed at Auschwitz than bow down and genuflect in a gesture of abject slavery to that vile fucking hag malignant cunt Victoria.


----------



## Vahyavishdapaya (Sep 2, 2014)

Now that we have done the most evil, why not discuss the most heroic? The shortlist of contenders:

- Lucius Junius Brutus
- Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus
- Gaius Sempronius Gracchus
- Leonidas
- Spartacus
- Marcus Junius Brutus
- Robin Hood
- Maximilien de Robespierre
- Louis Antoine de Saint-Just
- Toussaint L'Ouverture
- Leon Trotsky
- Bhagat Singh
- Ernesto 'Che' Guevara


----------



## leictreon (Jan 4, 2016)

Caligula. He literally tortured people for fun. At least the others did _some_ (even minuscule) good, but Caligula? Nop, nada.


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

This is pointless


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Simpson17866 said:


> Joseph Stalin was the only person on this list who didn't convince himself that he was helping a few people by killing others.
> 
> Not as *successfully* homicidal as Mao Zedong just going by the numbers, but Joseph Stalin *would've* killed everybody else on the planet if it would've benefitted him in some way. Mao Zedong wouldn't have taken the same opportunity.


Why do the Chinese hold him in such high regard then?


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

leictreon said:


> Caligula. He literally tortured people for fun. At least the others did _some_ (even minuscule) good, but Caligula? Nop, nada.


I think they all did. I mean, that was probably at the heart of why they all did anything in the first place, because they were all murderous psychopath's. I mean Vlad would impale people just for fun but he also made sure that the stakes were never pointy enough so that his victims would stay alive and suffer complete agony for a few days. Genghis Khan would pour hot molten iron in people's faces, which may not be "slavery" but I think in pure gruesome agony is pretty evil. 

Stalin was so evil. He kissed a little girl on the cheek at some public ceremony one day, and then just because it made her feel good, he murdered her parents. He just murdered everyone, and then murdered more people for the sake of it. It's like he was the most maniacal evil murderous psychopath that ever existed. He just tried to gain as much power and notoriety so he could go out of his way and notoriously murder people. 



soop said:


> This is pointless


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Tommy Vercetti said:


> Now that we have done the most evil, why not discuss the most heroic? The shortlist of contenders:
> 
> - Lucius Junius Brutus
> - Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus
> ...



No one cares.

What are you? an idealist? ah ha ha, you obviously do not understand people at all.

And Robin Hood was not real.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> Why do the Chinese hold him in such high regard then?


 They do? I was under the impression the Chinese broke ties with the Soviets and considered them potential enemies.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Simpson17866 said:


> They do? I was under the impression the Chinese broke ties with the Soviets and considered them potential enemies.


Did Mao Really Kill Millions in the Great Leap Forward? by Joseph Ball | Monthly Review

|"Over the last 25 years the reputation of Mao Zedong has been seriously undermined by ever more extreme estimates of the numbers of deaths he was supposedly responsible for. In his lifetime, Mao Zedong was hugely respected for the way that his socialist policies improved the welfare of the Chinese people, slashing the level of poverty and hunger in China and providing free health care and education. Mao’s theories also gave great inspiration to those fighting imperialism around the world. It is probably this factor that explains a great deal of the hostility towards him from the Right. This is a tendency that is likely to grow more acute with the apparent growth in strength of Maoist movements in India and Nepal in recent years, as well as the continuing influence of Maoist movements in other parts of the world."


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

@Meteoric Shadows OH I thought you were talking about Stalin.

Yeah, Mao and his people were incredibly persuasive at making people think they didn't cause more deaths than Hitler.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Simpson17866 said:


> @*Meteoric Shadows* OH I thought you were talking about Stalin.
> 
> Yeah, Mao and his people were incredibly persuasive at making people think they didn't cause more deaths than Hitler.


How do you know though for certain?


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> How do you know though for certain?


 I read

https://www.google.com/#safe=active&q=people+who+died+in+the+great+leap+forward


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Simpson17866 said:


> I read
> 
> https://www.google.com/#safe=active&q=people+who+died+in+the+great+leap+forward


'Before addressing the question of the authentication of sources, the context for the discussion of these issues needs to be set. Communism is a movement that generates a massive amount of opposition. Western countries waged an intensive propaganda war against communism. In power, communist governments dispossessed large numbers of people of their capital and land. The whole landlord and business class was robbed of its social power and status across much of Asia and Europe. Unsurprisingly, this generated much bitterness. A large number of well-educated people who were born in these countries had and still have the motivation to discredit communism. It is not “paranoia” to ask that those who write about the communist era take pains to ensure that their sources are reporting fact and are not providing testimony that has been distorted or slanted by anti-communist bias.
In addition, the U.S. government did have an interest in putting out negative propaganda about Chinese communism and communism in general. Too often discussion of this is dismissed as “conspiracy theories” and the evidence about what really happened does not get discussed very widely.'


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

I don't know who the most evil one was. Vlad Dracula sounds like the most disgusting of all of these guys. 
George W. Bush wasn't a good president. He let Dick Cheney run the government for four years, but I wouldn't put him on a list with Vlad Dracula, Hitler, and Genghis Khan. I also wouldn't put Donald Trump on that list, either. He's never actually killed anyone. So far, all he's done is to "fire" them.


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> Really? I've heard it stated by some that he actually did well to China and turned it into a better country. Is it perhaps just propaganda? I decided to only do the most prolific because there's so many horrible human beings out there that it is difficult to decide.
> 
> Anyway, communism can work.


I actually heard the Genghis Khan was pretty peaceful, that is if you formally agreed to be ruled over him. However if you didn't, then your point comes in. But actually it is said that once the Mongolian Empire was established, the lives of its inhabitants improved.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

_Ionic said:


> I actually heard the Genghis Khan was pretty peaceful, that is if you formally agreed to be ruled over him. However if you didn't, then your point comes in. But actually it is said that once the Mongolian Empire was established, the lives of its inhabitants improved.


Yes, I suppose the threat of having hot melting iron pouring all over your face, or boiling people alive would strike fear in the fears of the land for all to succumb to his psychopathic and murderous rule.

I am starting to see a pattern here.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/could-you-be-related-genghis-khan/


----------



## ShatteredHeart (Jul 11, 2014)

Hillary Rodham Clinton









Honorable Mentions

Grigori Rasputin









Emperor Nero









Louis Farrakhan









Ruhollah Khomeini


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Emologic said:


> Besides him, Adolf Hitler is probably the least evil person on this list.
> 
> The only real reasons why people would think he's that bad is 1: Because the events are recent history.


I voted for Adolf Hitler-- mainly because I thought it was ridiculous no one had voted for him yet-- (and Joseph Stalin may well have been worse, I don't really know)--
but also because I think when the events took place matters. 

Overall, humanity has been getting less evil as the centuries go by. For example, it used to be completely okay to murder people for no reason and now it's not, in most places. So, I think Hitler was likely the most evil _relative to his time in history. _ i.e. Hitler was much more evil relative to his contemporaries than Genghis/ Attila/ etc were relative to _their_ contemporaries. 
And that overall makes Hitler more evil objectively, because the society you grow up in shapes how you act and what you think is okay and not okay .

*BUT* I really don't know anything specific about most of the people on that list, so I could be wrong-- I just wanted to make this point. 


And, as for this kind of stuff,



Lakigigar said:


> None of them.
> 
> Most of them weren't aware that they did something wrong. In their perspective, the things they did were good just like IS terrorists really think they are doing good to this world.


Really. _Really_. Realllllly. 

No. They weren't/ aren't idiots. They know what they're doing. Don't be such an apologist.

Also why is there such an obsession with evil people on these forums, and Hitler in particular? Well whatev you guys are probably like 15 and still in that "evil is so cool and fun!" stage. Though to be fair I did also post on this thread so. but just sayin


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Time will only tell.


----------



## Noir (Jun 20, 2014)

Emologic said:


> Whatever that is supposed to mean...


Vlad Dracula. He was far from being even close to the most evil person on earth.


----------



## Vahyavishdapaya (Sep 2, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> No one cares.
> 
> What are you? an idealist? ah ha ha, you obviously do not understand people at all.
> 
> And Robin Hood was not real.


Your mum's not real. Sod off!


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Noir said:


> Vlad Dracula. He was far from being even close to the most evil person on earth.


I don`t know, being a wealthy son of a nobleman and going around your countryside impaling unsuspecting victims for fun sounds like a serious contender to me. I`m sure there would be more outrageous stories involved with some of them had recording devices for historical events been more advanced.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Noir said:


> Vlad Dracula. He was far from being even close to the most evil person on earth.


I thought it was supposed to be sarcasm, as in Vladimir Dracula being an obviously evil person, and that implying that Adolf Hitler is of the same caliber.

Yeah, Vlad the Impaler was also a sadistic psychopath, but he was more moderate and controlling of where he unleashes his personality. He mostly impaled Turks, which, besides satisfying him, also demoralized them, which was beneficial to Romania, as Ottoman Turkey was Romania's enemy at the time.


----------



## Madman (Aug 7, 2012)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> But they were pretty evil objectively.


That only make sense if there is such a thing as objective morality, which I am pretty sure is not the case. So, no they were not evil objectively.


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

charlie.elliot said:


> Really. _Really_. Realllllly.
> 
> No. They weren't/ aren't idiots. They know what they're doing. Don't be such an apologist.
> 
> Also why is there such an obsession with evil people on these forums, and Hitler in particular? Well whatev you guys are probably like 15 and still in that "evil is so cool and fun!" stage. Though to be fair I did also post on this thread so. but just sayin


But why choosing who is the most evil person to have lived. It just doesn't matter.


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

Because of some of the poll options, it's impossible to take this poll seriously.

If we are being serious, Pol Pot should at least get a mention among the most evil people of history...And why oh why is Chairman Mao not on the list?!


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

I voted Stalin, mostly because communism and communist ideas are continuing to spread world class damage to everything it comes in contact with.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Lakigigar said:


> Anyway who even consider to compare Trump with the other candidates in this poll is just incredibly stupid. Yes, the media wants you to believe that he is like Hitler because they are biased and all want that the establishment-candidate wins. Yes, he insulted some people (but that's campaign tactics (what just says more about the people in the USA than about the candidate itself), but Hillary did that too (deplorables?).
> 
> Trump is absolutely not the most evil person to have ever existed. Not even one of the 1 million most evil persons that have ever existed. He's not an angel, but most politicans aren't. Bush also shouldn't be included in this poll, although i don't like him. I even hate him.
> 
> ...


I think you're taking "evil" in too literal of a man; and obviously it's kind of up for personal interpretation and very dependent on the context to which it's used. 

It's hard not to say that human beings take action to carry out feats of such malicious intent that it's hard not to outright see it as going beyond the normal reigns of well adjusted human behavior and instead doing something almost malicious and deeply unsettling. It's easy to make excuses for lack of knowledge or progress but a the same time we fundamentally still possessed the same reasoning and empathetic abilities. There is really no empirical way to feel that like holocaust an entire population is somehow a little cruel and inhumane. 



Anyway, I personally still think that Hitler was still one of the in the list; there is something about the methods and means and to he extent of what he did that sends shivers down my spine. I just find it very unsettling and somehow horrible. 

The Nazi doctors, the sick experiments and the way the treated the people they thought were unworthy and perhaps the whole goal of the "Ubermensch" 

I think maybe that's why; it was the reason behind it that I felt so unsettling and the terror that must have been inflicted and the way they treated the |Jews and many others. Hearing about "gas-chambers" and furnaces not to mention piles of bodies is just horrible and not to mention willingly convincing and getting so many people to take part. The Nazi's really must have been an transpiration for all to follow.



Anyway, this thread was OBVIOUSLY tongue in cheek. The internet seems to have no humor...


----------



## gyogul (Jan 26, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> But they were pretty evil objectively.
> 
> I mean, lets just throw the whole book out on what evil means and declare murder a sacred privileged then; hallelujah!


They aren't objectively evil as what's "good" and "evil" are very contextual and subjective terms that vary across the world. There is no true consensus of what these things are.

Many people say murder is "evil" but will justify it in certain cases, such as self-defence or protection of a person (a child or lover). This inconsistency alone only showcases that there is no objectivity to what "evil" is, which would not rely upon something as fickle as cultural and individual contexts/opinions.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

gyogul said:


> They aren't objectively evil as what's "good" and "evil" are very contextual and subjective terms that vary across the world. There is no true consensus of what these things are.
> 
> Many people say murder is "evil" but will justify it in certain cases, such as self-defence or protection of a person (a child or lover). This inconsistency alone only showcases that there is no objectivity to what "evil" is, which would not rely upon something as fickle as cultural and individual contexts/opinions.


Whether or not you agree with any at all notion or assumption of "evil" it is merely irrelevant to state now as this was not the point or reason of this topics existence thus far. It is true that there are many different notions and cultural ideas as to what exactly "evil" and thus all related moral quandaries. But though they generally differ from culture or place; they generally follow the same basic ideas and principles. 

It is only therein how you would define and label what acts as such; and not in actuality whether you believe in the existence of such or not. I'm not attempting any such thing here.


----------



## gyogul (Jan 26, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> Whether or not you agree with any at all notion or assumption of "evil" it is merely irrelevant to state now as this was not the point or reason of this topics existence thus far. It is true that there are many different notions and cultural ideas as to what exactly "evil" and thus all related moral quandaries. But though they generally differ from culture or place; they generally follow the same basic ideas and principles.
> 
> It is only therein how you would define and label what acts as such; and not in actuality whether you believe in the existence of such or not. I'm not attempting any such thing here.


It doesn't have to be indicated in the OP for me to comment on it. You made the post so you clearly found it relevant enough to talk about, so that's more of your problem and not mine.

You seem to have a misconception of what objectivity is. Objectivity relies on external sources/facts and does not adhere to personal/cultural experiences and opinions. Also there isn't exactly a general consensus of how murder is "evil". It varies in different cultures, but obviously is similar in certain regions. Even in a hypothetical situation where there was a general consensus, it is still comprised of personal experiences and opinions instead of a science/logic. Using a bandwagon fallacy to support your beliefs doesn't make it logic; it does the exact opposite to believe that something is true simply because a lot of people believe in it.

This isn't to spark a debate on whether "evil" and "moral"/"good" exists. I was doing nothing more than commenting on your misuse of the word objectivity.


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

g_w said:


> Hitler invaded other countries, rounded up the Jews, and had them executed -- from mass machine gunning of civilians on the Eastern Front, to Zyklon B in multiple concentration camps. He didn't round up the Jews and send them back to Israel until they had applied for a green card.
> 
> I know that may seems like a subtle distinction to some, who are otherwise addicted to hyperbole. But political rhetoric can get pretty accusatory -- even Mark Twain wrote short stories about it.
> 
> Judas...it would have been better for him if he had never been born. Not a happy position.


I don't disagree about Hitler. I'm only comparing Trump's rhetoric. But Trump is about as much of a moving target as they come. I strongly suspect he will just be another average Republican President, if elected.

I'm arminian so I believe Judas could have repented after the fact but chose to kill himself instead. No Scripture says that he couldn't have...only that he wouldn't (the prophecies in the OT). There is only one unpardonable sin and it is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, although Hebrews talks about crucifying the Son of God unto oneself again (the unpardonable sin of apostasy)...however I think the difference is Judas did not have the Holy Spirit...he had not tasted in the heavenly gift of the age to come but simply known Jesus was the Messiah...who really knows. I've spent many hours spinning my head around these subjects.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Lakigigar said:


> That's seven centuries ago. Raping woman was seen as normal or maybe as a privilege. He wasn't educated properly.


I think you're forgetting something:

*Genghis Khan was a tactical genius*, capable of ruling over a 2-digit percentage of the world population, capable of conquering more than half of Asia, 16% of the entire world land area at the height of his empire, and all of this in the 13th century.
Considering this, do you _really_ think that education even matters?

Also:

The fact that it happened a long time ago doesn't make it less cruel, like the fact that the Holocaust is recent doesn't make it more cruel. All it means is that Genghis Kahn had much less of an affect on you than Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin.
The societal norms also don't dictate what is cruel or not.



> Donald Trump is not the most evil person to have ever existed. Let's be serious. Except for insulting people and not being polite always (and part of that is also tactical), he didn't do a lot wrong. Although i don't know his private life well enough. Yes he isn't perfect. He is not the most friendly or most concerned guy, but be serious. It's quite *sadistic* to put him even in this poll.


People think Trump's ideology is evil, and that such a person attempting to gain the highest power in the country is completely messed up.
However, I actually agree to what you're saying, minus the last sentence, despite being a joke.


----------



## g_w (Apr 16, 2013)

Popinjay said:


> I don't disagree about Hitler. I'm only comparing Trump's rhetoric. But Trump is about as much of a moving target as they come. I strongly suspect he will just be another average Republican President, if elected.
> 
> I'm arminian so I believe Judas could have repented after the fact but chose to kill himself instead. No Scripture says that he couldn't have...only that he wouldn't (the prophecies in the OT). There is only one unpardonable sin and it is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, although Hebrews talks about crucifying the Son of God unto oneself again (the unpardonable sin of apostasy)...however I think the difference is Judas did not have the Holy Spirit...he had not tasted in the heavenly gift of the age to come but simply known Jesus was the Messiah...who really knows. I've spent many hours spinning my head around these subjects.


Please explain to me a bit more (if you would) what "Arminian" is? I don't believe I've run across any such, in the United States.
What geographic area are they from, more or less, and what other denominations are they most similar to?

Kudos btw for quoting Jesus and St. Paul directly on this one.


----------



## g_w (Apr 16, 2013)

gyogul said:


> They aren't objectively evil as what's "good" and "evil" are very contextual and subjective terms that vary across the world. There is no true consensus of what these things are.
> 
> Many people say murder is "evil" but will justify it in certain cases, such as self-defence or protection of a person (a child or lover). This inconsistency alone only showcases that there is no objectivity to what "evil" is, which would not rely upon something as fickle as cultural and individual contexts/opinions.


Or it shows those people are sophists and/or idiots. You've got to back up a step and define your terms, for some would argue killing someone about to rape your children is not murder in the first place, but your responsibility to defend your children from harm.

Or, to put it another way, some say the Western world needs to be more multicultural and embrace the values and behaviours of other cultures. Does this include female genital mutilation, as practiced in parts of Africa? Or throwing homosexuals off of buildings, as done in Iran? Or does this moral relativism conveniently just get shuffled in for use on *other* people's values which restrict hedonistic behaviour *you* want to engage in?


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

g_w said:


> Or it shows those people are sophists and/or idiots. You've got to back up a step and define your terms, for some would argue killing someone about to rape your children is not murder in the first place, but your responsibility to defend your children from harm.
> 
> Or, to put it another way, some say the Western world needs to be more multicultural and embrace the values and behaviours of other cultures. Does this include female genital mutilation, as practiced in parts of Africa? Or throwing homosexuals off of buildings, as done in Iran? Or does this moral relativism conveniently just get shuffled in for use on *other* people's values which restrict hedonistic behaviour *you* want to engage in?


I'm pretty sure at this point that "multi-cultural' is simply just a rhetoric term anyway, that often used when you don't really have any personal concern or vested interest as to how different intersecting cultures will interact or mesh together and simply just want to cash in on the act itself; or foster a superficial idea of "peace" on the surface (or just look like you do)

Of course by "them" I mean most often, politicians.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Genghis Khan had trade routes though.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

gyogul said:


> It doesn't have to be indicated in the OP for me to comment on it. You made the post so you clearly found it relevant enough to talk about, so that's more of your problem and not mine.
> 
> You seem to have a misconception of what objectivity is. Objectivity relies on external sources/facts and does not adhere to personal/cultural experiences and opinions. Also there isn't exactly a general consensus of how murder is "evil". It varies in different cultures, but obviously is similar in certain regions. Even in a hypothetical situation where there was a general consensus, it is still comprised of personal experiences and opinions instead of a science/logic. Using a bandwagon fallacy to support your beliefs doesn't make it logic; it does the exact opposite to believe that something is true simply because a lot of people believe in it.
> 
> This isn't to spark a debate on whether "evil" and "moral"/"good" exists. I was doing nothing more than commenting on your misuse of the word objectivity.


yES, BUT YOU COULD OOBJECTIVELY SAY THAT MOST PEOPLE BEINGS INNATELY HAVE SIMILAR NOTIONS OR IDEAS OF WHAT EXACTLY CONSTITUTES AS RIGHT OR WRONG. IT IS IN GENERAL, WHY SO MANY LOOK AT SOME POINT IN THEIR LIVES FOR DIVINE PURPOSE OR MEANING IN THEIR LIVES AND TURN TO RELIGION OR SPIRITUALITY; AND TYPICALLY WHEN WE LOOK TO PAST KNOWLEDGE AND IDEAS WE OBVIOUSLY THEN ARE INFLUENCED BY ALREADY EXISTING CULTURE CONCEPTS AND NOTIONS. 

wHICH NOW MOST LIKELY ARE SPARSE CONSIDERING ARE WIDELY SPREAD IDEAS ARE NOW. 

oops sorrry, i did not realize caps was on


----------



## gyogul (Jan 26, 2014)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> yES, BUT YOU COULD OOBJECTIVELY SAY THAT MOST PEOPLE BEINGS INNATELY HAVE SIMILAR NOTIONS OR IDEAS OF WHAT EXACTLY CONSTITUTES AS RIGHT OR WRONG. IT IS IN GENERAL, WHY SO MANY LOOK AT SOME POINT IN THEIR LIVES FOR DIVINE PURPOSE OR MEANING IN THEIR LIVES AND TURN TO RELIGION OR SPIRITUALITY; AND TYPICALLY WHEN WE LOOK TO PAST KNOWLEDGE AND IDEAS WE OBVIOUSLY THEN ARE INFLUENCED BY ALREADY EXISTING CULTURE CONCEPTS AND NOTIONS.
> 
> wHICH NOW MOST LIKELY ARE SPARSE CONSIDERING ARE WIDELY SPREAD IDEAS ARE NOW.
> 
> oops sorrry, i did not realize caps was on


i can't read this post without laughing at the caps

anyway the field of psychology is a very nuanced field of science as it pertains to a mixture of innate human biology as well as the study of human emotions. Humans are complex in the sense that our mental process can often be very illogical and inconsistent, which pretty much defeats the purpose of objectivity when working with those two factors 



g_w said:


> Or it shows those people are sophists and/or idiots. You've got to back up a step and define your terms, for some would argue killing someone about to rape your children is not murder in the first place, but your responsibility to defend your children from harm.
> 
> Or, to put it another way, some say the Western world needs to be more multicultural and embrace the values and behaviours of other cultures. Does this include female genital mutilation, as practiced in parts of Africa? Or throwing homosexuals off of buildings, as done in Iran? Or does this moral relativism conveniently just get shuffled in for use on *other* people's values which restrict hedonistic behaviour *you* want to engage in?


Well let's not pretend that most people are intelligent. The majority of people simply ride the wave with what has been established, and in regards to culture many aspects are purely for efficiency or the hierarchy's own benefits.

I agree with Shadows on the multicultural bit. Multicultural societies are heavily segregated and actually do not create a harmonious environment for people of different ethnicites; in fact, it does the opposite. So I find it a farce how western countries try so hard to strive for diversity and to create a fantasy world that includes everyone where the stats show that it does exactly the opposite. 

I find that the only value most people have for a "diverse" community is for the culture it brings into a country (mainly food and entertainment) and for the people who certain racial preferences a larger dating pool.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

gyogul said:


> i can't read this post without laughing at the caps
> 
> anyway the field of psychology is a very nuanced field of science as it pertains to a mixture of innate human biology as well as the study of human emotions. Humans are complex in the sense that our mental process can often be very illogical and inconsistent, which pretty much defeats the purpose of objectivity when working with those two factors
> 
> ...


Then the objective answer or outlook and logical answer would be that human beings are not circular logical, or objective based creatures first; and it becomes more imperative to work within that already existing framework.

Things like "Good" things that are beneficial, healthy, positive and sustaining to life. 

It is when I suppose that when you objectively define these terms in a different manner do they take on different meanings but are still "subjectively" for yourself; "good" things, it is just that the objective purpose of what those exact things are changes.


----------



## katemess (Oct 21, 2015)

What the fuck is Donald Trump doing on this list?


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

g_w said:


> Please explain to me a bit more (if you would) what "Arminian" is? I don't believe I've run across any such, in the United States.
> What geographic area are they from, more or less, and what other denominations are they most similar to?
> 
> Kudos btw for quoting Jesus and St. Paul directly on this one.


Jacobus Arminius was a Dutch theologian in the late 1500's who resisted Calvinism. He did not subscribe to unconditional election, the limited atonement, and irresistible grace. He did subscribe to grace for all...not in the sense that all will be saved but that all can choose or not choose Christ. Therefore, one can fall from the prevenient grace of God by willfully rejecting Christ and therefore being twice dead, mists without a storm, etc. Hebrews is one scary book of the Bible. I can handle the unpardonable sin verses (because I'm fairly certain I've never committed it). I can handle the verses in Peter and Jude and Romans that condemn twice-dead sinners (though they make me shake a little). But Hebrews...one terrifying book. I pop an Ativan or two before delving.

John Wesley championed Arminianism. The Methodist movement led to a holiness movement which led to Azusa which led to my church denomination (Assemblies of God). I am not Pentecostal myself...I have no spiritual gifts and I sometimes question certain tenets of Pentecost (healing in the atonement, for example) but the AG is still my home and it's where I grew up. I also really like the music although the Seeker Sensitive movement (I could spend a whole thread on that topic) has greatly altered what was once a very decent denomination. There is a video of Hillsong AG Church in Australia with people in a little Churchy rave singing, "You spin me right round Jesus right round like a..."...it should make any serious Christian vomit.


----------



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

There have been times in my life where if I had access to a magic button that'd kill everyone on Earth, I'd press it, so I have to vote myself most evil person.


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

Since you put some modern ones in there (Bush and Trump), you really should include Clinton too. Just saying.


----------



## Vahyavishdapaya (Sep 2, 2014)

Binge Thinker said:


> There are probably some infamous bankers who deserve a mention in this thread too.


The Rothschild family, Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman, JD Rockefeller, the Medici family; etc. 

These would be my financial picks.

Historically however main force was a greater avenue to commit atrocities than economic control.


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

Tommy Vercetti said:


> The Rothschild family, Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman, JD Rockefeller, the Medici family; etc.
> 
> These would be my financial picks.
> 
> Historically however main force was a greater avenue to commit atrocities than economic control.


Yes yes! And don't forget the Demon (well _Dimon_, most accurately pronounced with the former spelling).


----------



## Vahyavishdapaya (Sep 2, 2014)

Snowflake Minuet said:


> Since you put some modern ones in there (Bush and Trump), you really should include Clinton too. Just saying.


Why stop there

You ought to proceed to add virtually every political figure, particularly those in all countries that use the Anglo-Saxon Model of economy, as opposed to other, superior ones such as the Nordic Model.

Supply side economics, the essence of neoliberalism, must be by far and away and without a shadow of doubt, the worst and most contemptible idea in the history of the universe. It's just evil, therefore its proponents are also evil.

Get me Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, Tony Blair, John Howard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull all up there too. They're the most evil people of our time by far - or at least, their paymasters are. These are just patsies and PR representatives. Those who own them are really the source of evil, but, by abandoning their people and selling their souls, the above listed political figures are just as evil in my estimation.


----------



## ShatteredHeart (Jul 11, 2014)

katemess said:


> What the fuck is Donald Trump doing on this list?


Because leftist indoctrination


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

g_w said:


> Hitler invaded other countries, rounded up the Jews, and had them executed -- from mass machine gunning of civilians on the Eastern Front, to Zyklon B in multiple concentration camps. He didn't round up the Jews and send them back to Israel until they had applied for a green card.
> 
> I know that may seems like a subtle distinction to some, who are otherwise addicted to hyperbole. But political rhetoric can get pretty accusatory -- even Mark Twain wrote short stories about it.
> 
> Judas...it would have been better for him if he had never been born. Not a happy position.


Controversial opinion time: if Hitler had chosen any other group of people, we wouldn't even know/care about him today.


----------



## nichya (Jul 12, 2014)

Rofl, Donald Trump? He is a saint in this poll. No, seriously...


----------



## Lakigigar (Jan 4, 2016)

Tommy Vercetti said:


> Why stop there
> 
> You ought to proceed to add virtually every political figure, particularly those in all countries that use the Anglo-Saxon Model of economy, as opposed to other, superior ones such as the Nordic Model.
> 
> ...


And Erdogan or our north korean leader right now.

Even they wouldn't fit in this poll (although some have the potential to do cruel things (and the korean leader already is doing that on a smaller scale).

And the crazy part is that some evil persons are even widely appreciated in their home region (Pablo Escobar, Jozef Stalin, Recep Tayyif Erdogan, Mao Zedong, ... )

Donald Trump is at worst a bullier and a hustler. But most people are.


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

Emologic said:


> His whole life philosophy was built on psychopathic sadism.


Lol, come on. This is blatant anachronism. You're applying present day morals to the past in a context where they don't make sense and aren't valid. You're acting like this was Genghis Khan's personal philosophy that he pioneered himself. It was clearly in the spirit of the times.

"What evil times," you might say. Still anachronistic, and probably naive, but at least that's not a ridiculous statement.


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

This list should have included people like Ariel Castro and Ted Bundy instead of important world leaders in my opinion. "Evil" is a matter of intent, not outcome.


----------



## Hei (Jul 8, 2014)

@OP Bush does not belong on this list, wether or not you like him. Likewise Trump is just a sociopathic demagogue.

@*Tommy Vercetti* To call Robespierre or Guevara heroes is to be extremely ignorant of their actions. Nor are they pure villains.

@*Simpson17866* Stalin is definitely one of the worst psychopaths in history, and it is remarkable to think many people may also owe him their lives. It is often argued the Germans underestimating Stalin's capacity for cruelty to the Russian populace cost them tremendously in WWII.

Personally I think Mao or Attila are the most appropriate choices. Then again you can argue Mao is not responsible for every individual he radicalised. Nor Attila much different than conquering nations, just only very successful on an individual level. In general this poll is a waste of time.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

The London Watch said:


> @*Simpson17866* Stalin is definitely one of the worst psychopaths in history, *and it is remarkable to think many people may also owe him their lives*. It is often argued the Germans underestimating Stalin's capacity for cruelty to the Russian populace cost them tremendously in WWII.


 Fun fact: the British government stopped trying to kill Hitler when they realized that he was winning the war for them.


----------



## Hei (Jul 8, 2014)

Simpson17866 said:


> Fun fact: the British government stopped trying to kill Hitler when they realized that he was winning the war for them.


I am not overly familiar with that. I believe it was argued in hindsight that had an assassination plan occurred and been successful that it may have only soured the situation. Incited greater resistance from the German population, and that was just the issue, the issue itself was not Hitler, but the radicalised Germans and what could have continued in the absence of the man power to push back and squelch them. Things could have carried on.

But yes it is certainly true that Hitler's paranoia, disregarding his advisors, did a lot of damage in Germany losing. But I do not think that diminishes the significance of Stalin and his Russian death toll had in fighting the Germans. If you can, please do share any good source with me, I would genuinely appreciate it! ^^


----------



## marblecloud95 (Aug 12, 2015)

Top







most Savage ****** to ever walk this muthafuccin earth boi


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

The London Watch said:


> @OP Bush does not belong on this list, wether or not you like him. Likewise Trump is just a sociopathic demagogue.
> 
> @*Tommy Vercetti* To call Robespierre or Guevara heroes is to be extremely ignorant of their actions. Nor are they pure villains.
> 
> ...


Attila was a master diplomat. He didn't even have to lift a finger, since the threat of invasion itself was enough to have the Romans scrambling.


----------



## Hei (Jul 8, 2014)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Attila was a master diplomat. He didn't even have to lift a finger, since the threat of invasion itself was enough to have the Romans scrambling.


It is hard to imagine such a man not being able to backing up his own words... promises.... threats XD Quite diplomatic hahahaha


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

I voted Caligula because I think under certain conditions, torture can be far worse than death, but this list isn't very comprehensive.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Controversial opinion time: if Hitler had chosen any other group of people, we wouldn't even know/care about him today.


That, and propaganda from all sides.

Native Americans were almost extinct, nobody cares.
So were the victims of the Armenian Genocide by Ottoman Turkey, nobody bats an eye.
The Holodomor, the artificial Ukranian Genocide by Soviet Russia - nobody gives a fuck about the Ukrainians.

..._But once the Jews get treated inferior, they cry "antisemitism" and everybody loses their minds._


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

I find the lack of faith disturbing...


It seems as though humanity is doomed to repeat the mistakes of our past...


* *


----------



## VoxPopuli (Aug 21, 2016)

Mao is responsible for the most deaths of any human in History and yet not on this list..


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

The unspeakable evil that is about to be unleashed...
* *


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)




----------



## DoIHavetohaveaUserName (Nov 25, 2015)

Emologic said:


> That, and propaganda from all sides.
> 
> Native Americans were almost extinct, nobody cares.
> So were the victims of the Armenian Genocide by Ottoman Turkey, nobody bats an eye.
> ...


You forgot the British empire .The royal family has huge support . The mindset of overthrowing monarchy system in other countries ,and allowing them to exist in some is a good example of how divided the world is and how stupid it is.


----------



## DoIHavetohaveaUserName (Nov 25, 2015)

If humans were civilized ,why would we need governments ,law enforcement ?? All we can do is have a seat and enjoy the show . Often in the history the victor presents himself to be good guy and his rival, well he is dead so he should obviously be evil .


----------

