Hitler almost conquered the world and vigorously imprisoned and eliminated large populations of Jews (genocide). After conquering him, we discovered the full extent of his atrocity with concrete and detailed evidence. That's enough to hate anyone, really. We never conquered Stalin, so the evidence isn't as clear or forthcoming, but people hate Stalin a lot, too. But Stalin didn't wage war against the West directly, and he didn't target the Jews for extermination, so we see a difference in how it affects the West and likewise, how we feel about him.
2007-01-09 04:28:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Andy 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Hitler is the most amazing person ever. What he did was the worst thing in the history of the world, but who else could convince an entire country to attempt to wipe an entire group of people off the earth. People hate hitler more than stalin because hitler tried to take out an entirely different group than his own. Whereas the battle with stalin was more of a country vs. country. People hated the USSR more than the leader because of the Cold War.
2007-01-09 04:26:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Zach H 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Good question, as both were horrible people. The propaganda machine known as the media, is largely responsible for glorifying the hatred of Hitler, while ignoring Stalin. The only other factor I could think of is the fact that we were fighting Hitler, while Stalin was also fighting Hitler, which sorta makes Stalin our friend in a twisted way.
2007-01-09 04:25:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Personally, I think it's for several reasons.
First, they don't know what Stalin did. His body count, if you trust historians, greatly eclipses Hitler's, but many people don't know about what Stalin did to his own countrymen.
Second, Hitler was seen as the center around which the Axis powers rotated in WWII. He was, and still is, considered the ultimate evil responsible for the war. When you consider WWII, Stalin is sort of "just another one of the Allied powers".
Third, Hitler committed genocide, and tried to wipe one entire group of people off the face of the earth. And it wasn't accidental--the conference at Wannsee and the codifying of the "Final Solution" are well documented. He had a plan for a world without Jewish people. Stalin, on the other hand, had no specific plan to wipe out an entire population of people.
Fourth, Hitler took his show on the road, and invaded sovereign nations to achieve his goals. He was an aggressor. Stalin did his killing in his own country, which makes it easier for people to dismiss it as "internal conflict" or "a national matter". Look at the difference, even today, in how we treat genocide and mass killing when it is perceived as an internal problem or the result of civil war (in Yugoslavia, for example), and when it spills over international borders (as with Hitler).
In my book, they both merit Evil with a capital E, and both are equally wicked and bad, but I think that Hitler's crimes are more well known and reviled than Stalin's, even if Stalin was responsible for more death and misery.
2007-01-09 04:38:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bronwen 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Education, people are taught more about the atrocities of Hitler and not so much about Stalin.
2007-01-09 04:24:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by vertical732 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because Hitler's fascism and aggression extended to countries throughout Europe and Africa, and countries around the world were involved in fighting him. Stalin's atrocities were larger in scale, but were carried out almost entirely within Russia.
2007-01-09 04:23:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by TimmyD 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hitler was unique. He was close to exterminating a race and taking over Europe. Stalin was just a mass murdering tyrant. He was very good at it, but there has been a lot more mass murdering tyrants around.
2007-01-09 04:23:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Take it from Toby 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, it's pointless to "hate" either one. But it would be wise to understand that both were responsible for incredible acts of violence, terror, and hatred against vast numbers of innocent people. Hitler's atrocities were more widely known outside of his own country at the time; Stalin's came to scholarly knowledge, but a lot of people who haven't studied much history are not aware of them.
2007-01-09 04:22:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by MOM KNOWS EVERYTHING 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Um ''in consumer-friendly words 6 million''? honestly, he all started an total international warfare, 60 million human beings died. Hitler personally is to blame for a minimum of each of the thousands and thousands of holocaust victims. No guy has ever carried out such evils. You havent killed 50 million children*. They were no longer born. They were no longer human..few cells..anyhow human beings arent too foud of u . s . of america both to be straightforward..
2016-12-28 12:54:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hitler is more well known. It's the same reason that there's so much hatred for Bush when a lot of his actions are taken on the advice of Karl Rove.
Stalin was terrible, but he didn't commit genocide; he committed mass murder. I assume some people view genocide as worse.
2007-01-09 04:22:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋