The Cruelest Leader

I'll say:

1) Stalin
2) Hitler
3) Genghis Khan

I voted for Stalin, but I definitely think Pol Pot was the cruelest leader in history.  In Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia if you left the government alone you had a reasonable chance of having them leave you alone more or less, or at least not being killed.  In Khmer Rouge Cambodia everyone was either a slave or a master in the purest sense of the word.  I think Khmer Rouge Cambodia is the closest we have ever gotten to 1984 on Earth.

yeah, you know what he said: The happiest thing for a man is killing his enemies and taking their daughters and wiives........

Originally posted by dirtnap Genghis Khan - because this dude just rolled over everyone... It would take a nuclear war to achieve the number of casualties this guy finished off. Cruelest? Khan was fond of pouring molten silver into the ears and eye sockets of "soon to be not living" political enemies. Anyone could argue the cruelest...

Probably Stalin. True he was trying to eliminate as many opponents as he could-all it took for somebody to be sent to gulags (or executed) was tipp off from your next door neighbour. He also enjoyed reading long lists of those who were to be executed. This dictator wouldn't exchange his own son for a certain german general during WWII.

Estimated no. of casualties during his reign was about 20 million people. His director of secret police-Beria could also be considered as one of the cruelest figures of authority ever.   

Originally posted by dirtnap I think Pol Pot should be added to this list in place of Vlad.

The thing about this poll is that these men were cruel in different ways, each with its own appalling mystique. Vlad were terrible because he so much enjoyed a personal experience in which victims were tortured and killed for his pleasure. Stalin, for the mass production bending of the nation to his plans and the killing which often accompanied it. Hitler, for his brutal racial killing and killing on an industrial scale. Mao, for his overzeal and vain glory that rushed his people into the Great Leap Forward and through neglect and lack of realism killed tens of millions. Pol Pot, for his atrocious slaughter of those constituting the educated and doing more than any man to push civilization back into the stone age. In each case there is a particular macabre aspect to each, how bad each is depends on the subjectivity of the individual.

I'll say Stalin. People had to clap after his speeches for hours and wait for a bell to ring to stop. If anyone stopped before that they were killed. Also Stalin had thousands of Jews about to be sent to Siberia, but was stopped only because of his death. That added on to all of his other massacres puts him at the top in my mind.

I got my information form the History Channel so I think its accurate.

Edited by Donasin

Cezar, you may not be aware of this, but Vlad Tepes was portrayed very very badly by German chroniclers, and his cruelty exaggerated. This was likely due to his persecution of German merchants from Brasov. Hence his image in the west has always been very different from his image in Romania or a few other countries in Eastern Europe such as Russia. There's a topic on this in the Medieval Europe section, if you're interested.

Anyway, the whole poll is very subjective. I think that cruelty and ruthlesness or pragmatism are often confused. Also, cruelty implies a certain pleasure taken in punishing or killing someone else. It is very arguable whether the leaders mentioned in this poll were actually cruel. My guess is that most of them abstractized the deaths of the people taht they were responsible for. They did not likely think of them as humans. Take Hitler for example: he was a vegetarian. I wouldn't be my house on it, but I don't think he necessarily would have enjoyed watching someone getting tortured for example. He probably did not consider the Jews, Gypsies, etc. as human beings and in all likelihood he did not watch any of them get killed. For Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. the people getting killed were a means to an end, and a statistic. Could they really have stomached and even enjoyed watching millions of people dying? I think not.

I believe the cruelest person ever is gavrilo princip, sure he was doing for a good cause, but to kill a someone over it! Like Cain and Abel all cruelty comes from(as we know it in the 20th century) from a murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand which launched WWI that led to a detorioration of the Russian gov. that led to the bolshevik revolution and subsequently Stalin, also led to the defeat of germany which shoved hitler into power, without doubt the cruelest person, while doing a supposed good thing!

Ones choices do make differences

P.S. Who got Princip into the black hand

I would have to say hitler.......

Originally posted by Jahangir going even further back Pope urban II launched the first crusade against muslims, which led to islamic expansion into europe which led to a split in the balkan nations which is what Princip was fighting for, so... kudos Pope Urban II

Not really, the Islamic expansion into Europe had been going on centuries before Urban II. Whatever Urban did, the Turks would continue their struggle with Byzantium. The Crusaders probably slowed the process of expansion down, if anything. In Spain, they actually assisted in the success of the reconquista.