Who Is the Worst Person in Human History

[Jesus The Inane]

Who was the worst person in human history. I say was, because he/she has to be death by now. Also, please no responses with "the first person who stole" or something like that. Also, you have to name the person and then say why you think so.

I don't know how the criteria should be. Lets discuss it first before naming people.

Perhaps on how they affected technology? or civilization?

[Lee1026]

abraham. he started 3 religions that caused more pain and suffering then anyone else.

[Xiaodun]

Im tempted to say Hitler or Stalin, but as ignorant, idiotic, and disgusting those baffoons were, they cannot match up to the pure hatred I have for Marie Antoinette, to me she is the pinnacle of sheer patheticness a human being can achieve.

At least Hitler and Stalin had a goal, and as genocidal and selfish as those goals were, they do elevate their status above most men (only to be plunged because their other many many many many vices). Marie Antoinette was a pathetic and disgusting creature, not worth being called human. While her people starved she would wear the worlds fanciest and most expensive dresses (hand made by the dozens by her personal tailors every day), and live in the worlds most gorgeous palace (which she grew tired and asked her husband to build more of). A human that revels in extravagancy and wealth, especially one so ill deserved, with no goal, no ambition, is the most pathetic creature ever.

[hannibal89]

We have many of those sick$hits in today's 3rd world countries too.
I dont want to give examples...

Hannibal89

[ShangTang]

It'd have to be Goring. Ordering soldiers to use babies as target practice? Yeah, that's pretty horrible.

[hannibal89]

It'd have to be Goring. Ordering soldiers to use babies as target practice? Yeah, that's pretty horrible.

That would be an atrocity of the modern world.
You can still pick out some from the classical and the medieval.

Hmm it is pretty difficult to decide. Some could argue that the nuking of japan by president truman is just as sinister.
Others might say that the burning of Carthage thx to the words of the S.O.B Cato was the worst atrocity of the Classical Age.
Supposedly the largest killing of non combatants in an area prior to World War 2

Hannibal89

[O'brien the Protector]

its hard to neme the worst person in history, just becuase tyhe furhter bac in history you go the worse they become, becuase back the certian things werent thought of as bad as they do today. And hitler ( in my opinion) wasent to bad of a guy. He did terrible ( and in my opinon insanly small minded) but he did what he thought was best for humanity. A bad person in my opinoin is someone who does thigns hen knows to be wrong, somehitng that is quite in-frequent in history...

anyways my chioce would be stalin ( becuase he commited genocides and killed coutnless poepole like hitler, but he did it only to hold on to power).

[WarriorHart of America]

most atrotious? i'd say ghengis khan, hell, he boiled his enemy generals alive

worst overall, i'd say Pope Urban II, ohh what a tragic mistake the crusades were...

[ShangTang]

Originally posted by hannibal89@May 27 2005, 09:37 PM
Supposedly the largest killing of non combatants in an area prior to World War 2

Actually that was the Taiping Rebellion. 20 million dead.

[Americanus Supremus]

I would have to say the Khans. (not sure of the first name) AS they completly destroyed severel cultures. And the ones they didnt destroy, havent even closely gotten back to the prosperity they had once achieved almost 1200 years on. Im talking about the Arab World (though and American myself, go figure) One can only imagine if we would be facing the problem we are today if the Muslim world was just half of what it once was. All of this destruction was brought on by the rejection of a single Mongolian emmisarrie. (I think)

I would also agree with the choice of Abraham. But one could also pin the blame on the Persian King (forgot his name at the mo) who in 722 bc decided not to folow thru with a siege on Jerusalem. For he had already laid seige to 47 Judean settlements, and thought the destruction of one more would not be worth the trouble. The besieged took this as an omen from YAHWEH, that he would protect them as being his true subjects, and the basis form judism was formed. No matter that 20 years later Jerusalem was again besieged, and this time fell to the Persians. But the foundation for Judism was already set. Altough YahWeh had not protected the city. The priests of judism in a mark of absolute :wub:, told the Jewish people who were now being sold into slavery and taken from there lands, that in fact they were being punished for not living to the letter of the law as Yahweh had set it out. So began the Jewish Babaloyian captivity.

HC

[danzig]

Originally posted by deathdoom56@May 28 2005, 12:00 AM
Marie Antoinette was a pathetic and disgusting creature, not worth being called human. While her people starved she would wear the worlds fanciest and most expensive dresses (hand made by the dozens by her personal tailors every day), and live in the worlds most gorgeous palace (which she grew tired and asked her husband to build more of). A human that revels in extravagancy and wealth, especially one so ill deserved, with no goal, no ambition, is the most pathetic creature ever.

I think Antoinette gets a bum rap (and most historians agree) and certainly not deserving worst person in history. She was basically thrust into the role of a queen at a rather young age and unprepared for it.

[Spetsnaz]

Hitler or Stalin

I dont agree,Hitler was a sick idiot,but he (ofcourse not alone)conquered Europe,and when people saw him they said "Hai Hitler",Stalin was a ignorant , powerfull ruler ,but he was a great strategist ,he was born in a poor family and became leader of the biggest country.76%of Russians dont think of his as of a devil.
I think it was ether Roman emperor Nero ,Vlad Dracula,and Batii( a mongol khan)

[MoROmeTe]

Vlad Dracul only did what he had to do to protect his country (and, of course, earn a name for himself in the process). He ruled Walachia and did not have enough military forces to resist full attacks by the Ottomnas so, when he won against smaller forces, he made an example out of them hoping to make fear a powerful enough weapon so that the Ottomans would think not twice but thrice(?) before sending armies against him. It worked for a while...
I'd go for a tie betweeen Hitler and Stalin. with the latter edging a few inches in front...

[Bruticus the Steadfast]

Eve. No, just joking. I am not sure. But Hitler, Vlad Dracula, Nero, and the Khans are up there on the list. Truely, I dont think many people are truely bad. I think that most "bad" people have serious mental problems. Problems that have causes that could of been fixed. And mental problems that could have been controled.

[Spetsnaz]

If he was bad then why did we love him?? :whistle
Also all maniacs,they all deserve death penalty.

[DimeBagHo]

If Abraham is going to get the blame for all the Judaic religions, the Marx ought to get the blame for all the varieties of communist insanity. On the other hand, if you want someone more directly responsible for atrocities then I suggest Pol Pot. he worked on a smaller scale than Mao or Stalin because Cambodia is a much smaller country. But his version of communism was more thoroughly evil than any other.

[hannibal89]

Spetsnaz

If he was bad then why did we love him??

Because the "cult of the leader" (as the term goes) succeeded.

He killed 10 million russians. He was a sick ******. You might love him because the war was won. And Russia emerged more powerful than before. But do those 10 million kulaks and "potential opponents" love him. Hell no.

Remember his saying "When you kill one it is a tragedy, when you kill 10 million it is a statistic"

Hitler was also up there; genocide against jews and gypsies, mentally handicapped as well as physically being killed.... And the communists too.

Moromete

Vlad Dracul only did what he had to do to protect his country (and, of course, earn a name for himself in the process).

That is Vlad Dracula (Vlad Dracul was his father)

I dont believe he was the most cruel person in the world.
Again i repeat its hard to judge, but Hitler, Stalin, Cato, Timurlang (burned Damascus, Baghdad) and many others win

Hannibal89

[Spetsnaz]

"When you kill one it is a tragedy, when you kill 10 million it is a statistic"

He said- "one death is a tradegy,milloin is statistic" he didnt even mention "kill".Still Stalin can be compared to Chingis-Khan , he killed millions but made a empire.In that time the country was ruined by Lenin and other "bolsheviks" and "mensheviks",Stalin tried to make it better,but he also killed many civilians(though he didnt kill them directly,like Hussein gassed kurds)He wipedout the farmers class,and built a new class.Ofcourse people in other countries think of him worser than in his own country,Because in my country i can say that Napoleon was bad because he fought with us,or the same to Dracula, "MOromeTOtheDacian" thinks that he was not that bad,but i can say"oh my god he killed thousands,put people on stakes,and drank their blood!how can he be good?".

[Centurion Quintus]

If by "worst", you mean "evil" Hitler works. But he was not "bad" at what he did. In fact, he was the opposite, quite brilliant. In such a sinister, and sickening way.

[Spetsnaz]

Wouldnt say that,Hitler had good generals,and helpers.