WI: Stalin and Hitler didn't have abusive fathers

Despite being bitter enemies, Hitler and Stalin had a good deal in common. One of these was having abusive fathers, which many historians believe contributed to them being such resoundingly terrible people as adults.

But what if they weren't abused by their respective dads? Might it have resulted in them being less warped and monstrous individuals?
 
Despite being bitter enemies, Hitler and Stalin had a good deal in common. One of these was having abusive fathers, which many historians believe contributed to them being such resoundingly terrible people as adults.

But what if they weren't abused by their respective dads? Might it have resulted in them being less warped and monstrous individuals?
I think Stalin stay in the seminar and become a priest..dunno about hitler honestly
 
Well they wouldn't be hitler and stalin. But if Oversimpified is to be believed, Hitler basically did everything he could to spite his father, including his german nationalism and dislike of Austria. But if Hitler's dad isnt abusive, he might support Adolf's artistic interests, or at least not hold them in contempt. Dude could wind up a Austrian Propaganda Artist
 
Stalin and Hitler suffered objectively shitty childhoods, especially from a modern perspective. However, compared to the majority of men at the time, what they experienced was typical and maybe even above average. Millions of young men, including some who reached positions of power, suffered childhood abuse without being responsible for the deaths of millions. Stalin and Hitler's basic lack of respect for the value of human life stem from much deeper issues than occasionally being beaten because they resisted the will of their parents. I know more about Stalin's background than Hitler's, and from what I understand he lived a pretty decent childhood for the time. His family was poor and his father was an abusive, absent drunk, but Stalin was always surrounded by wealthier family friends who gave enormous favors to Stalin and his mother because of his obvious talent. They paid to make sure he went to the best schools and gave him money for clothes, so Stalin wasn't exactly some supervillian chained to a radiator and beaten until he was evil. What sets Stalin apart was his early fascination with violence, a rigid us-vs-them mentality, an obsession with wielding power, and being an enormously gifted student.
 
Stalin liberated Europe from Hitler and then started a period of relative peace in the continent for decades. Even the few wars inside of Europe that have erupted since WWII are bloodless comparatively speaking. Even the Yugoslavian wars of the 1990s look like peace missions by comparison.
 

VVD0D95

Banned
Stalin liberated Europe from Hitler and then started a period of relative peace in the continent for decades. Even the few wars inside of Europe that have erupted since WWII are bloodless comparatively speaking. Even the Yugoslavian wars of the 1990s look like peace missions by comparison.
He also killed more people than Hitler. Peace or not he was a fucking monster
 
Honestly the real interesting part about Hitler was how mediocre he was until he joined the Nazi party. Usual when you have guys like Hitler, they tend to have a history where you can somewhat see that they destined for greatness. Beside Hitler being above average intelligence, there was nothing which really made him stand out and made you think that he had any destiny.
 
Heydrich was equally as evil as these two but lived a comfortable life surrounded by family, his father was a notable composer and musician.

Evil isn't dependant on upbringing.
 
He also killed more people than Hitler. Peace or not he was a fucking monster
I seriously can't believe you honestly believe something as blatantly false as this.

Yeah, let's forget about the fact that he almost caused World War III by blockading Berlin over a dispute of what currency a united Germany should use.

That's the best you can come up with? "He almost started another war but didn't, then rebuilt Europe and initiated a period of peace for decades".

...and promptly re-enslaved half of it, that being his intention the whole time.
Rebuilding Eastern Europe and getting it rid of concentration camps sure sounds like slavery to me.



Also, to everyone here:

People, Stalin is a dictator and did horrible things, but he is on the level of Napoleon at worst, not on the level of Hitler. Also, for those wont to equate the Ukrainian famine with the Holocaust:
 
Last edited:
Rebuilding Eastern Europe and getting it rid of concentration camps sure sounds like slavery to me.
...please tell me you're kidding. Eastern Europe was rebuilt into Soviet-controlled communist dictatorships with their own terror apparatus. In fact, some of the Nazi concentration camps were re-opened under Soviet control!
 
...please tell me you're kidding. Eastern Europe was rebuilt into Soviet-controlled communist dictatorships with their own terror apparatus. In fact, some of the Nazi concentration camps were re-opened under Soviet control!
Some of them can be said to be dictatorships, but even those dictatorships improved the living conditions of people and were a far cry from the genocidal Nazi occupations or puppet regimes they were under. You cannot compare Eastern Europe during the Cold War with Eastern Europe during WWII, especially when, you know, the former was at peace and not suffering from the bloodiest war in history. Also, even if what you say about the camps is true, fact is that none of these regimes did anything close to the Holocaust, even in comparison to the extent of the Holocaust in their respective countries (for instance, Communist Poland killed nowhere near Auschwitz).

People apparently think Communist peaceful rule where there wasn't the bloodshed of WWII is somehow comparable to WWII. Stalin liberated Europe and inaugurated an era of peace. Get over it. He is nowhere near Hitler.
 
Last edited:
Rebuilding Eastern Europe and getting it rid of concentration camps sure sounds like slavery to me.
And the fact that this rebuilding of Eastern Europe started with massive ethnic cleansing also says nothing negative about Stalinism? NKVD camps are Western propaganda for sure? Just like Soviet tanks in Budapest and Prague?
 
Ban
And the fact that this rebuilding of Eastern Europe started with massive ethnic cleansing also says nothing negative about Stalinism? NKVD camps are Western propaganda for sure? Just like Soviet tanks in Budapest and Prague?
The part about the "ethnic cleansing" is definitely propaganda. Refugee resettlements are not ethnic cleansing, and it was nowhere near what the Nazis did either. Also, stop bringing red herrings. I never denied Stalin did horrible things, I even explicitly said so above. The point is he is nowhere near Hitler. Even the NKVD and tanks in Hungary and Czechoslovakia are nowhere near the crimes the Nazis committed. Heck, the latter two only led to a few hundred deaths. Horrible, but there are worse things done under Latin American juntas and dictatorships or even in places like Spain and even Northern Ireland with the Troubles (where the death toll seems to be as high as 60,000 during the Cold War). Even Plan Condor makes Stalin's secret police look like peace corps, even though the NKVD was certainly horrific.
 
Does it really matter whether those claims about Stalin killing more people than Hitler are true, or it was all Nazi and Cold War propaganda and Stalin 'only' killed 9 million people?

It is clear anyway that both weren't the friendliest persons.
 
Stalin and Hitler suffered objectively shitty childhoods, especially from a modern perspective. However, compared to the majority of men at the time, what they experienced was typical and maybe even above average. Millions of young men, including some who reached positions of power, suffered childhood abuse without being responsible for the deaths of millions. Stalin and Hitler's basic lack of respect for the value of human life stem from much deeper issues than occasionally being beaten because they resisted the will of their parents. I know more about Stalin's background than Hitler's, and from what I understand he lived a pretty decent childhood for the time. His family was poor and his father was an abusive, absent drunk, but Stalin was always surrounded by wealthier family friends who gave enormous favors to Stalin and his mother because of his obvious talent. They paid to make sure he went to the best schools and gave him money for clothes, so Stalin wasn't exactly some supervillian chained to a radiator and beaten until he was evil. What sets Stalin apart was his early fascination with violence, a rigid us-vs-them mentality, an obsession with wielding power, and being an enormously gifted student.
Exactly, putting a modern ethics frame on a different time doesn't work.
Some eggs are just rotten if given no check and balance.

Many are molded by events around them.. But Stalin was far from abused, and while Hitler may not have had the best childhood, that doesn't mean he was abused either.. I agree with you fully
 
I have a hard time believing that Stalin killed more than Hitler. Hitler started a war that killed more than 60 million people.
Numbers aside, both had little regard for those not in their favor, everyone seems to write history and paint a slightly different picture, so once we get above a certain number it really is a mute point.

Both had serious issues
 

Grey Wolf

Donor
Honestly the real interesting part about Hitler was how mediocre he was until he joined the Nazi party. Usual when you have guys like Hitler, they tend to have a history where you can somewhat see that they destined for greatness. Beside Hitler being above average intelligence, there was nothing which really made him stand out and made you think that he had any destiny.

Well he did win the Iron Cross as a corporal and survived the war. It's something
 
Top