Top 5 WORST Leaders ever

[PotatoSamurai]

US
1. William Henry Harrison, idiot of Tippecanoe.
2. Andrew Jackson. America's Hitler.
3. George Washington. American hero, limp-dicked president.
4. Gerald Ford. Saying a pardon would allow America to move on is like saying that ripping out the last chapter of a mystery novel keeps you in suspense. On top of that, clearly a do-nothing president.
5. George W Bush. Honestly, only a portion of recent failures are directly his responsibility; the widespread Republican scandals, the gay marriage debacle, and others would be better attributed to those in power in general or just the Repubs.

World
1. Hitler. Even ignoring the Holocaust, he still wins #1 for the incredible damage he did Germany that has taken decades to reverse.
2. Montezuma. So, white man with beard = god. Okay, I can see that. Also wins for earning the hatred of all non-Aztec groups nearby, helping the Spaniards immensely.
3. Pol Pot. Killed every educated citizen in his country and wonders how the Vietnamese kicked his ass out. Heckuva job Potty.
4. Stalin. Killed more than Hitler, but the end result at least helped Russia in the long run, even if it wasn't nearly worth the deaths.
5. George III. You can blame a lot of his stupidity on his mental illness, but regardless this guy was the reason America had to fight a war to become independent.

 

[Traitorfish]

5. George III. You can blame a lot of his stupidity on his mental illness, but regardless this guy was the reason America had to fight a war to become independent.

No he wasn't, at least in anything but a symbolic sense- by the 1770s, the monarchy had become a figurehead, with effective power lying in the landed aristocracy and, increasingly, wealthy industrialists, exercised through Parliament. After all, the complain of the Colonies was that they were not represented in Parliament, an obvious recognition of the power it exercised.
No British monarch reigned with absolute power since 12th century, and by the late 1600s, the Civil Wars and Glorious Revolution had cemented Britain as a constitutional monarchy.

 

[Azale]

HEY! Hoover was a good president!

He might have had the best character of any US president, that's for sure.

Using my little book on dictators, I have drawn up a decent top 5:

1. Josef Stalin, USSR
2. Kim Il Sung/Kim Jong Il, North Korea
3. Pol Pot, Cambodia
4. Francisco Solano Lopez, Paraguay
5. Elizabeth Bathory, Transylvania

And for my own country, here my top 5 worst Presidents:

1. James Buchanon
2. Warren Harding
3. Andrew Johnson
4. Jimmy Carter
5. Franklin Pierce

 

[Archbob]

I'll just do world:

1. Adolf Hitler
2. Joseph Stalin
3. Mao Ze Dong
4. Nero
5. Empress Cixi

 

[vb1]

He might have had the best character of any US president, that's for sure.

Using my little book on dictators, I have drawn up a decent top 5:

1. Josef Stalin, USSR
2. Kim Il Sung/Kim Jong Il, North Korea
3. Pol Pot, Cambodia
4. Francisco Solano Lopez, Paraguay
5. Elizabeth Bathory, Transylvania

IMO its just wrong to put Stalin up there.
Sure he was a monster, but he managed to industrialize Russia, and defeat Hitler in WW2.
What have those other dictators done apart from destroying their respective countries?

 

[Traitorfish]

5. Elizabeth Bathory, Transylvania

Why? I mean, yeah, she was murdering psycho, but she was never in a significant enough position of power to be placed on a list of "Worst Leaders Ever". Hell, she barely qualifies as a leader at all.

 

[Azale]

IMO its just wrong to put Stalin up there.
Sure he was a monster, but he managed to industrialize Russia, and defeat Hitler in WW2.
What have those other dictators done apart from destroying their respective countries?

I happen to buy into the higher end of the death tolls predicted from Stalin, which would make him the greatest mass murderer in history. He totally ran away from Lenin's ideology (I am no fan of communism but I would rather live in Lenin's idea of Russia for 10 years than in Stalin's idea of Russia for 10 days).

He took being a paranoid, power hungry Russian (well, he was Georgian, but you catch my drift) to new heights. He organized and expanded the Gulag system which "employed" more people than any other "business" in Europe.

He also was perhaps the most important man of the 20nth century. Hitler came and went, Stalin crushed him and lived on.

The rest destroyed their respective countries in SPECTACULAR fashion, which makes them bad leaders. The Kims have killed millions and stunted generation after generation all while rewriting the book on propaganda and leader worship. Pol Pot's extreme degeneration project failed so incredibly it deserves a mention. Lopez killed 3/4 of his people or some insane number like that. Bathory skinned virgins and bathed in their blood, 'nuff said.

 

[Azale]

Why? I mean, yeah, she was murdering psycho, but she was never in a significant enough position of power to be placed on a list of "Worst Leaders Ever". Hell, she barely qualifies as a leader at all.

I know it's a double post but it deserves double mention. Skinning virgins! Come on, I mean seriously. Who does that?

If you want a more serious one I could throw Hitler, King Leopold, or Sese in their I suppose....but did they ever skin virgins and bathe in their blood in the hopes of finding a fountain of youth?

 

[Swedishguy]

US
1. William Henry Harrison, idiot of Tippecanoe.
2. Andrew Jackson. America's Hitler.
3. George Washington. American hero, limp-dicked president.
4. Gerald Ford. Saying a pardon would allow America to move on is like saying that ripping out the last chapter of a mystery novel keeps you in suspense. On top of that, clearly a do-nothing president.
5. George W Bush. Honestly, only a portion of recent failures are directly his responsibility; the widespread Republican scandals, the gay marriage debacle, and others would be better attributed to those in power in general or just the Repubs.

World
1. Hitler. Even ignoring the Holocaust, he still wins #1 for the incredible damage he did Germany that has taken decades to reverse.
2. Montezuma. So, white man with beard = god. Okay, I can see that. Also wins for earning the hatred of all non-Aztec groups nearby, helping the Spaniards immensely.
3. Pol Pot. Killed every educated citizen in his country and wonders how the Vietnamese kicked his ass out. Heckuva job Potty.
4. Stalin. Killed more than Hitler, but the end result at least helped Russia in the long run, even if it wasn't nearly worth the deaths.
5. George III. You can blame a lot of his stupidity on his mental illness, but regardless this guy was the reason America had to fight a war to become independent.

George III makes it to the World list, but not to the US list?

 

[vb1]

I happen to buy into the higher end of the death tolls predicted from Stalin, which would make him the greatest mass murderer in history. He totally ran away from Lenin's ideology (I am no fan of communism but I would rather live in Lenin's idea of Russia for 10 years than in Stalin's idea of Russia for 10 days).

He took being a paranoid, power hungry Russian (well, he was Georgian, but you catch my drift) to new heights. He organized and expanded the Gulag system which "employed" more people than any other "business" in Europe.

He also was perhaps the most important man of the 20nth century. Hitler came and went, Stalin crushed him and lived on.

The rest destroyed their respective countries in SPECTACULAR fashion, which makes them bad leaders. The Kims have killed millions and stunted generation after generation all while rewriting the book on propaganda and leader worship. Pol Pot's extreme degeneration project failed so incredibly it deserves a mention. Lopez killed 3/4 of his people or some insane number like that. Bathory skinned virgins and bathed in their blood, 'nuff said.

Exactly so why would Stalin qualify for the worst leader?
Imo the worst leaders are the ones that either no one remembers simply because they havent done anything of importance, or those who set their countries BACKWARDS, or destroyed them.
Certainly Pol Pot, both Kims and Francisco Lopez would qualify here.
I would also add Montezuma here, just because he allowed his nation to be conquered with almost zero resistance. (But one might argue that the diseases would have done their job anyway).

 

[LightSpectra]

George III makes it to the World list, but not to the US list?

... George III was never a leader of the U.S.

 

[Mirc]

5. Elizabeth Bathory, Transylvania

HUNGARY, not Transylvania. Neither the principality of Transylvania nor the region of Transylvania. Hungary.

 

[LightSpectra]

Also, İsmail Enver. He lead the Ottomans to an embarrassing defeat in WWI and authorized the Armenian genocide.

 

[Traitorfish]

I know it's a double post but it deserves double mention. Skinning virgins! Come on, I mean seriously. Who does that?

Well, yeah, I agree, but that's not the point. This is a poll of "Worst Leaders", and Elizabeth Bathory was never actually a leader. She was merely an aristocrat and, living as a female in the 1600s, was a more or less powerless one.
Besides, her murder, while gruesome, never had a significantly negative effect on the state of her country, which is really what the poll is about.

 

[innonimatu]

I'll just do world:
4. Nero

I never understood why Nero got such a bad name. Apart from the mess his family was (which might actually be an excuse), and they way he allowed himself to be overthrown, he seems to have been at least as competent as most roman emperors.

 

[Azale]

HUNGARY, not Transylvania. Neither the principality of Transylvania nor the region of Transylvania. Hungary.

She was the Duchess of Transylvania

Exactly so why would Stalin qualify for the worst leader?
Imo the worst leaders are the ones that either no one remembers simply because they havent done anything of importance, or those who set their countries BACKWARDS, or destroyed them.

The "progression" of the industry of the Soviet state could have been done slower with less human sacrifices, but alas that was not the Stalin way. He certainly destroyed plenty.

He was a horrible leader, known because he was in charge of a world superpower. He should not be disqualified because he killed enough people to be remembered more Or because some people are still delirious enough to follow his ideas.

 

[vb1]

The "progression" of the industry of the Soviet state could have been done slower with less human sacrifices

But was there time to progress slower? With every capitalist nation viewing the Soviet union as the potential enemy.
Also with the lack of industrialization, WW2 would almost certainly be lost by the Soviets, maybe not completely lost, but all key locations would be overran by the Germans which would force the Soviets into a long guerrilla war.
The Germans would obtain more resources and production potential, and who knows what would happen then, almost certainly they would be the first to create a nuclear weapon.

Imo Stalin was one of the key figures of the 20th century which allowed our modern history to shape like it did.
Besides do not forget that most Russian leaders who changed or modernized Russia ruled with an iron fist. Think about Peter, who certainly murdered his fair share, Lenin wasnt exactly an angel either.
Catherine would not have spared peasantry in her plans of conquest either.

 

[Azale]

Peter and Ivan were also terrible tyrants, Catherine was slightly more benevolent and Lenin himself was scared of Stalin's potential as a leader. Perhaps it is the nature of the beast, but when did the Gulags become a necessity? The incredibly stupid forced collectivization?

Perhaps if Stalin had not been so shortsighted in dealing with Hitler and had listened to his advisors when it came to the Soviet lines of defense, he would have never been pushed so close to the brink to begin with. Or if he had not been so incredibly paranoid and killed off most of his competent officers and completely ransacked the upper class of the Red Army.

 

[cybrxkhan]

For first place, i make a tie between: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. No need to explain here. (this is NOT in terms of actual effectiveness of making the country more industrialized, etc., but in terms of how humane they were!)

 

[Cutlass]

For worst leaders I would think of those who made bad decisions and whose bad leadership caused their nations the most harm. There clearly were a lot of people who fit that description.

Hitler and Tojo started wars their nations had no hope of winning and their nations were crushed in the process. Mao ran roughshod over his own people and killed untold numbers. The Tsars and the French monarchs and aristocrats as a group so mismanaged their nations that they fell into revolutions which cause generations of harm to their people.