You know, I always considered Stalin's treatment of human life the scarier of the two. There's no defense of Hitler's actions (though, let's get over ourselves - more than a few of Civ's leaders did things that were indefensible - they just don't get the press of guys like Hitler of Stalin), but the reasons are clear and the targeting discriminate. The party's warped perspective was that peoples of certain types were lesser human beings, or considered not human at all, and as such, bereft of natural human rights and harmful to society. Warped, twisted, evil - but something else that is well documented is that the party was very much devoted to the improvement of life of its citizens and, in general, the human beings the party valued as human beings. In spite of how twisted their values were, there was a clear valuation of human life (with a big footnote defining exactly what worthwhile human life was) in the case of the Nazis. Sounds terrible? It should, because it is. But do take note that there was a clear value of human life, and their treatment of life was ultimately not indiscriminate. Forward to Stalin. The man dealt with human life like you deal with weeds in the garden - if it's unsightly, whatever it is, it gets trimmed. The fundamental valuation of human life - even the twisted valuation of the Nazis - just wasn't there. Colleagues and friends, peoples of any race and creed, they weren't treated like anything more than numbers on financial ledger - if they needed to trim a few digits to get the figures to balance, Stalin would pursue such a course without hesitation. Stalin coldly and completely devalued any and all human life that stood in the way of the goal of power. So, you're right. Stalin's purpose was to cement his authority, and human life of ANY kind had literally zero value in the face of this goal. His pursuit of this goal lasted decades and the cost in human life was significantly higher than the toll racked up by Hitler and his cronies - even within the same time frame. Personally, I consider a cold and absolute devaluation of human life even more frightening and deplorable than a twisting of a valuation of human life. Hitler discriminately killed peoples and discriminately valued others - Stalin indiscriminately killed any groups who didn't quite measure into his scheme. I do have to ask though... You say "No one can defend those actions. There is just no defense." Do you have the troubling audacity to suggest that Stalin's actions are defensible? Just to be clear, I don't think Hitler should, all considered, be in the game. The man isn't the best representative of Germany there is, not the second, or third... But the fact is, inclusion of deplorable human beings like Shaka who were of *far* less historical consequence than a guy like Hitler sets the bar so low I could see his inclusion being justified. That justification would largely be on the grounds of recognizability - simply put, he'd probably be in the top 3 well known leaders in Civ if he was put in it. And all of this is academic either way because he'll never be in the game - the German market is too valuable, and Hitler is still a figure that people judge with their heart more than their head, even moreso than some of the other terrible human beings Civ cartoons up for us.