Grimbringer Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 There are many evil people in the world, and in history. Here are a few.1 Heinrich Himmler - Aside from hitler Himmler was the designer of the Final Solution for the jews, during WW2. 2 Stalin - Took more lives of his countrymen than the war did. 3 Caligula - Somethings got to be wrong with someone who disembows his sister and rips the unborn child from her womb with his bare hands.Whats your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Hitler himself, of course. Mao, Pol Pot, the usuals.Tamerlane: infamous for his bloody conquests (outdoing Genghis when it comes to the bloody part) and making skull towers from his slain enemiesAl-Hakim: really disturbed fellow. Forced christians to wear large wooden crosses around their necks, opressed jews as well. Eventually a choice was given: 1) convert, 2)die or 3)pay a huge fine. Egypts current christians are mostly descendents from those who were rich enough to choose 3).I'm sure there are many others that stand out, but right now only these two come to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 There were many churches in Egypt, each with a certain patron, and when there was a feast of that patron, christians made always a big show, even during ramadan or muslim mourning feasts. Muslims were of course attracted by it. Then came an epidemy caused by diseased pork in al-Qahira, so he forbidden any such public patron-feasts. Another 'oppression' was, that he allowed muslims to pray in christian churches (and christians and jews in mosques as well). All this dissing of al-Hakim is done either by christian monks of medieval Europe, who never set a foot there, or by his family, which despised the fact he inclined more to the imamite branch of shi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 That's an intersting alternative image you portray of the "mad Caliph" Caid. No doubt, you're better read in islamic history then I am, but I've seen numerous tales of his oppression and have seen them confirmed by many people, including historical scholars. Where did you get your info? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 It seems like there is a strong bias towards political and military leaders when drawing up any lists of evil people (because only such leaders have the power to commit large-scale murder to begin with).How about some non-political evil people for a change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 I think it's more because evil committed by authorities tends to be well remembered.But go ahead Edric, name one ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 George W. Bush - for sending 20.000 innocent people to their deaths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exatreide Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Alec Baldwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbringer Posted February 2, 2007 Author Share Posted February 2, 2007 People that hold no office and are vile?, Martha Steward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMA_1 Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Margaret Sanger. heheWould love to hear someone say that at a feminist rally. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khan Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Mary whitehouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 That's an intersting alternative image you portray of the "mad Caliph" Caid. No doubt, you're better read in islamic history then I am, but I've seen numerous tales of his oppression and have seen them confirmed by many people, including historical scholars. Where did you get your info?Iraqi sources...but perhaps they preferred him more than militant Buwayhids ;D Actually Qahira was very prosperous during his reign; and of course not in the way as Samarqand did under Timur. Well, Timur's reign had his positive sides too, at least for Russians and Greeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 In Dutchland we have a saying, that goes a little something like this: "one mans dead is anothermans bread"The meaning is probably obvious. Just because some people (Turkic people mostly) have reason to like Timur, doesn't mean the guy wasn't evil for some of the other stuff he did. No matter what regime, there are always some who prosper. Timur made Genghis Khan and his offspring look like gentle stewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Of course. However, one is certain, it was easier under Timur to trade ie with China than under Genghis. Or that his descendants Shahruh or Ulugbeg were great promoters of education. Also his organization of army, economy and logistics was on a very high level.I wouldn't say he was evil, perhaps ruthless would be more suitable, for anyone mentioned here. Same for al-Hakim, Stalin or ie Leonid Kucma, to be a little actual. In comparision, Caligula or Pol Pot were utterly wicked. Hitler stands somewhere between, I would say. And really bad rulers are those, who are incompetent or irresponsible, what these people weren't (either with positive or negative effect). But to say about someone being evil, that's going into deepness of soul, where we don't see. Who knows how much did ie Stalin see into the effects of his brutal administrative and repression systems? No apology for him, he should have known and carried the responsibility...but one cannot judge a person, just an act. To prevent it being done again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 Of course. However, one is certain, it was easier under Timur to trade ie with China than under Genghis.Hehe, if Timur had lived a few years longer though... ;)Also his organization of army, economy and logistics was on a very high level.He was a sucessful military leader. Not really so in the civilian field. He had to spend a lot of time and effort to reconquer parts of his empire over and over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 Meh. Evil. Too subjective a concept to make a basis for judgement. Only by specifying what 'evil' is do we begin to get somewhere. Is 'evil' the number of people killed? Stalin, or possibly mosquitoes. Or is it the methods used to killed them? Vlad Tepes. Or maybe the reasons for having them killed? Adolf Hitler. Or perhaps the specific type of victim makes the crime that more reprehensible? Gilles de Rais.Smaller people, not rulers or military? Plenty of examples. I suppose I should probably point out that the link is not for the faint of heart. No pictures, just words.Evil is subjective though, and without an agreed definition it hasn't got much to say for itself. And since I don't believe in evil, well, I'm hardly one to talk about it, am I? Edit: Also, I'm pretty sure it would be "history's," not "histories," the latter being a plural and not... whatever it's meant to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbringer Posted February 4, 2007 Author Share Posted February 4, 2007 Well, if the world evil doesn't apply to genocide what would you use?, the FCC Term? Politically incorrect?- OJ Simpson, One who murders his wife then writes a book about it, yet still gets away with just court costs.- Johnny Cockren(Donno how to spell his name) for making it all possible.- Peewee hermen, dudes just sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 Or, if you can define them so, the Dirty Chanzes-gang from MTV. They are so disgusting they become evil... ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyouta Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 Vile != Evil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 Point, but vile is subjective as well. I only tend to use such labels under the proviso that it's just my opinion on a subject, not a statement of fact. Furthermore this topic title isn't much good either. 'Of the' should just be replaced with 'in.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyouta Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 I don't get it... it was changed half-way through, then went back to the original title when Grimbringer posted. ???Plus, "Histories Most Vile People." is wrong too. Should be "History's Most Vile People"Still, nevermind. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khan Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 Grimbringer changed the original post, which was "Histories" but the subsequent posts didn't change. Anyway should be "The most vile people in history".Still, nevermind. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemafakei Posted February 4, 2007 Share Posted February 4, 2007 "latter being a plural and not... whatever it's meant to be"Genitive is the technical term, possessive is probably more common a term.When judging the cruelty/vileness/evil of individuals, you have to decide if you're going to take the society they're part of into account, and if you're going to measure their actual personality or their 'acheivements'. If everyone in a certain society was required to kill a dozen new-born puppies before being considered an adult, then do we consider every member of that society more evil than those of others? On the other hand, where do we draw the line between overtly and universally indoctrinated cruelty and cruelty that is no less the result of unconscious indoctrination but which happened only to affect that one person? I'm not really sure we can. Then again, put it another way: can we really praise someone for good character when much of it is taught? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbringer Posted February 5, 2007 Author Share Posted February 5, 2007 To be honest with you, I haven't touched the title, someone else edited it for me... more than once. lol.Grimbringer changed the original post, which was "Histories" but the subsequent posts didn't change. Anyway should be "The most vile people in history".Still, nevermind. :)Oh and if you can point out someone named here, who's society demanded that they do immoral acts, please feel free.For some reason I feel that your going to state someone who did something because of religious views. . . Oh well, Templar's, Jihads, and Inquisition can sure make this list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 any idea of a legal violence (no matter if apologed in a humanist or religious way) could then be seen so...however, that's why people create states, to have something capable of defending themselves (while attack is the best defence, you know what I mean ;) ), vileness is not always a thing of ideas, but means of their fulfillment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.