What if Stalin was as bad as Hitler?

[Hnau]

What do you make of this question? I myself don't have any huge opinion as to whether or not Stalin was as bad as the "Most Influential Person of the 20th Century", but one thing stands out in my mind... Adolf was all about getting rid of the untermensch and creating the ubermensch. So there was the Holocaust and various other ethnic cleansing. If he had won, the Jews and Slavs of all stripes would be much lower in numbers, because they would be killed. Stalin and other Communists wanted to create the "New Soviet Man" and destroy the "counter-revolutionaries", the "kulaks" and so on, but instead of initiating organized mass murder, he had most people imprisoned or shuffled around the country. Some say the Holodomor was on purpose to destroy the Ukrainian nation, but in the very least, it wasn't a direct campaign to destroy the Ukrainians... it would look very bad if some traveling Europeans discovered that Kiev was entirely Russian by the 1930s. Many died in the gulags and after the massive population transfers under Stalin, such as the Cossacks, Poles, Chechens, Tatars... but they could have been marched into huge open graves if the Swastika was flying over Moscow.

In what other respects do you think Hitler was worse than Stalin... and what do you think would have happened if Stalin more closely paralleled the ruthlessness of his enemy? Certainly a worse world, but how so?

 

[lothaw]

Hitler killed eight million Jews and undesirables and was honest about his hatred of them.

Stalin killed over twenty million of his people then hid it from the world.

I know who I think is worse.

 

[Hnau]

Hitler most definitely killed more than just six million Jews (got your numbers wrong, mate), and I'm not saying Stalin didn't kill people, but I'd like to see what you think the breakdown was for those 20 million deaths. I'm curious. Some historians have said only 4 million people were killed by Stalin, others have named 50 to 60 million, so its a subject we can't agree on a whole lot. But, for example, do you think the deaths incurred during collectivization of agriculture should be blamed on Stalin? Do you think that he really wanted his people to die during that episode? Because some people think that he really meant well, he wanted to apply pressure on the peasantry but not to outright kill them by the millions, and that deaths by collectivization were all a huge accident... one that Stalin could have alleviated, true, but still.

 

[Blue Max]

In all likelihood, Stalin-Hitler would wind up competing early with Lenin because of his outsided ego and aggrandizing attitude.

Stalin goes into exile, never comes to power. +100 points of Hnau, for proving that two wrongs can indeed make a right!

 

[MerryPrankster]

Disagree with the notion that Stalin was better than Hitler, but he can be even more genocidal than he was in OTL.

He decides human nature needs to be changed through eugenics to create the "New Soviet Man."

Thus we have deliberate mass killings and sterlizations of ethnicities opposed to Communism--Cossacks, the Caucasian peoples deported to Central Asia en masse, etc. They're allegedly prone to reactionary mindsets due to their genes. Those who aren't (by virtue of being good Communists) can be allowed to reproduce.

Essentially survival of the most servile and/or more ideological.

He might also try an even bigger mass killing of Jews than OTL (during the purges a disproportionate # of the victims were Jewish and he was apparently plotting something very nasty in response to the alleged "Doctor Plot" before he died) due to the Jewishness of Leon Trotsky as well.

 

[Nikephoros]

Just counting death tolls:

Hitler had approximately 13 million(an oft-argued figure).
Stalin's number was approximately 20 million (also an oft-argued figure).

But Stalin had a longer time to commit his death toll. Now, i'm not arguing that Stalin was some kind of peaceful, gentle, man. But Hitler was definately more deadly.

Now, that doesn't mean that it is improbable for Stalin to be worse than Hitler, just change a few events (not sure which) and your ATL might have Stalin be just as deadly.

 

[NKVD]

Easy POD for a Soviet Holocaust:

One of the little voices in Stalin's head tells him that the Jews are plotting to overthrow him.

 

[RGB]

Easy POD for a Soviet Holocaust:

One of the little voices in Stalin's head tells him that the Jews are plotting to overthrow him.

They get deported somewhere, some of them die since it's November and nobody thought of building shelters. The vocal ones get shot. Stalin dies, they come back.

At least that's what it was like for everyone else. Try again.


EDIT: Also, he was already pretty anti-Jewish, what with the doctor's plots and the fifth paragraph and the suppression of Yiddish national expression. So yes, he did think they were out to get him, and we do know what happened next. As I said, try again.

---------

And MP: seriously, man. Targetted mass killings and sterilizations as opposed to moving around of latest scapegoat minority population? And a Stalin that believed in genes? What have you been smoking? You'll be saying there really was a Ukranian Genocide next.

--------

EDIT the SECOND: This is not a very exciting topic, and comparing bad to bad only leaves everyone bad. I'd just really like to see people suggest a POD that is less lazy and more plausible. I know it's easy to say "oh, nut he WAS as bad" or "crazy man does crazy thing" but I think a loot at the context helps, and the actual history does not seem to bear out what you suggest.

 

[MacCaulay]

Actually, I was thinking of a POD of...WI this was posted in Chat?

I like that one thread that talked about Stalin being a nice guy. Where we had the idea of Stalin throwing roses and Hershey's Kisses on the Red Square Parade every year, then going home and crying over a picture of Trotsky because he'd had his heart broken.

 

[Tellus]

Surely you mean What if Hitler was as bad as Stalin?

Organized mass famines may appear less glamorous than death camps, but one guy's death toll is twice higher than the other, and entirely inflicted on his own people (Most of Hitler's fatalities were in occupied countries, though German Jews obviously didnt get off lightly), I have a hard time not giving him the top prize right away.

Hitler just gets extra bad rep because the west fought a war against him (and gaz chambers are extra sexy in terms of evil). Stalin was worse in terms of results, though, and yet, he was a novice compared to Mao.

 

[Hnau]

Yeah, but, guys, Stalin wasn't genocidal. That's what really separates him from Hitler, and I think that makes the Fuhrer that much more scary. If Stalin had really been as bloodthirsty as Hitler, there wouldn't be any Ukrainians left, and the Caucasus would be entirely dominated by Georgians and Russians, and he wouldn't just divide the various Central Asian nationalities into different SSRs to break their will... he'd ship them to Siberian gulags as slave labor and replace them with Slavic peoples.

Furthermore, one should remember that before his rise to power, few predicted that Stalin could go to such ends in order to create his communist utopia. He could be even more crazy and ruthless than he was, and still hide it. Instead of making it known he is a genocidal maniac in the early days, he keeps it hidden until he's taken control of the Party.

Hitler just gets extra bad rep because the west fought a war against him

Well, I'd contend that a lot of you only think Stalin was worse because the West was locked into heated ideological combat and proxy wars against his country for forty-five years. That argument really doesn't get anywhere far.

 

[The Federalist]

Towards the end of his life, Stalin was consumed by antisemitic paranoia. He held that Soviet Jews were loyal to America and Israel and his Jewish doctors were trying to poison Soviet leadership, this was known as the Doctor's Plot. Rumors abound that around the time he died, he was planning for a Second Purge of Soviet leadership and a mass deportation of Jews to Siberia and Central Asia, a "Second Holocaust", as a means of provoking the West and starting a Third World War. These rumors also suppose that Stalin was assasinated by Beria on the night before the day that he was supposed to sign the orders to initiate the deportations.

And I am of the opinion that Hitler and Stalin were just as evil as each other, the main difference being how the two dictators killed. Hitler would kill you if you were a Jew, Gypsy, Slav, Homosexual, disabled, etc. but Stalin would kill you no matter what you were, a Russian, a Ukranian, a Georgian, a Pole. So in Hitler's Germany, one would not have to worry if he was a pureblooded German who abided by the laws of the Nazi regime but in Stalin's Russia, everyone of every race and class, from the highest Party official to the lowliest peasant had just as much to fear from Stalin. Hitler killed with discrimination while Stalin did not, there was true equality in the USSR for everyone was equal, in front of an NKVD firing squad.

 

[MacCaulay]

...but were either of them worse than the Draka!?

I bet not! And I bet neither of them were so sketchily written, either.

 

[MerryPrankster]

And MP: seriously, man. Targetted mass killings and sterilizations as opposed to moving around of latest scapegoat minority population? And a Stalin that believed in genes? What have you been smoking? You'll be saying there really was a Ukranian Genocide next.

--------

EDIT the SECOND: This is not a very exciting topic, and comparing bad to bad only leaves everyone bad. I'd just really like to see people suggest a POD that is less lazy and more plausible. I know it's easy to say "oh, nut he WAS as bad" or "crazy man does crazy thing" but I think a loot at the context helps, and the actual history does not seem to bear out what you suggest.

I'm saying if you wanted to make Stalin worse, you could have him do that. You could simply get rid of Lysenko somehow and have some eugenicist take his place.

And there was a Ukrainian Genocide. They even have a name for--Holodomor.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Well, I'd contend that a lot of you only think Stalin was worse because the West was locked into heated ideological combat and proxy wars against his country for forty-five years. That argument really doesn't get anywhere far.

Or perhaps Hitler's atrocities were broadcast to the entire world and his regime drowned in blood and fire, while Stalin's misbehavior was less well known.

(In part due to the presence of ideological sympathizers like Walter Duranty, who Stalin rewarded with opium and women for lying about the famines in Ukraine in the NYT)

Plus there's the demographic issue--more of Hitler's victims lived in the West than Stalin's did.

(One Canadian board member said a lot of Ukrainians settled in Western Canada and the Holodomor gets a lot of attention there)

 

[MerryPrankster]

...but were either of them worse than the Draka!?

I bet not! And I bet neither of them were so sketchily written, either.

Nobody's worse than the Draka. They're the most evil regime ever depicted in reality or fiction.

 

[Carinthium]

In terms of evil consequences for the world (although that standard is disputable), Hitler was clearly worse- a point worth pointing out. Consequences of each one:

Hitler:
-Democratic West Germany and Italy (he failed)
-Communist Eastern Europe
-The slaughter of millions
-Eugenics and racism fall out of fashion in the West
-Creation of Israel (could be argued good or bad)
-Contribued to the collapse (inadvertently) of the colonial empires and resulting impoverishment of countries relative to before
-Most of World War II and the resulting slaughter of millions on the Russian front

Stalin:
-Communist Eastern Europe
-Communist Russia
-The slaughter of millions
-Communism has a problem to deal with after his death, but thanks to the image of Soviet Russia it doesn't fall out of fashion in his life. (It appears to be working, and people tend to respect power even after Stalin dies)
-Unless you count not surrendering, World War II is not his fault
-Fear of Communism increased the chances of the colonial empires falling

Hitler had some good points, but he was clearly the worse.

 

[BlackWave]

Asking whether Stalin or Hitler was worse is a bit like asking whether you would like to get shot in the face or poisoned, but IMO it was Hitler. Stalin reigned for much longer, giving him more time to kill people, and furthermore had Hitler somehow succeeded in bringing the Nazi regime through WW2 we'd eventually be looking at worldwide massacres. Ultimately, however, they were both maniacs, and death counts are irrelevant.

 

[Markus]

What if Stalin was as bad as Hitler?

Where are the users from eastern europe? Picking up pitchforks, tar and feathers I guess.

 

[Johnrankins]

This is a debate that is hard for either side to win. It is like asking if you would rather have smallpox or the bubonic plauge. The result is likely the same.