What do you consider to be the most abhorent atrocity in human history?

[Sidhe]

The massacre of good television with the coming of the "reality" TV age. They get rid of Firefly, Futurama, Family Guy (for a while), but they kept the Bachelor and all that crap? Atrocious!

Your TV had a golden age for a while but now it's lowest common denominator pap that pulls in the ratings. It's like the prole mushroom has spoken and crap is what he/she wants? England isn't exactly proud either we've gone the same way, and man the number of Dramas on terrestrial TV is just incredible. There are like zillions of 'em some of 'em are good but for heavens sake mix it up a bit.

OT but it had to be said, I'm not sure I'd put it up there with 9/11 or Hitler but it's an atrocity none the less.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Well, I am a self-centred jerk, so I perceive TV as affecting me more. Not like all that stuff that happened "over there".

 

[Riesstiu IV]

I’d say it’s a tie between Hitler’s Holocaust and Stalin’s purges. It’s amazing how many people died as a result of these two men. Some of these poll options shouldn’t really be there. Yeah, 9/11 was bad but it was nowhere near the scope as something like the Rwandan genocide. Also, if you happen to be an atheist, then the crucifixion of Jesus is nothing special when compared the execution of all individuals throughout Roman history.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

I feel somewhat slighted on behalf of the British Empire. We really ought to be up there.

I'm sure Ram's got some pretty good stats on this, but, for a starting point, can I note that we completely exterminated the native Tasmanian people in a period of about 70 years ?

That's completely exterminated. No mixed breeding, no Schindlers, no other nations coming in and (perhaps belatedly) stopping the massacres.

We killed every single one of them.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

Funny you should mention the Tasmanians. We've been focusing on that group in my Anthropology class. Tasmanian aborigines have not been exterminated completley, though they came very close to extinction. There are many inhabitants who share both European and Tasmanian heritage but there is some speculation of whether a full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal still exists. IRC, the last full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died 130 years ago.

 

[Sidhe]

I feel somewhat slighted on behalf of the British Empire. We really ought to be up there.

I'm sure Ram's got some pretty good stats on this, but, for a starting point, can I note that we completely exterminated the native Tasmanian people in a period of about 70 years ?

That's completely exterminated. No mixed breeding, no Schindlers, no other nations coming in and (perhaps belatedly) stopping the massacres.

We killed every single one of them.

Yes very Englishcentric consider that a strong contender in the genocide stakes. But as you can see it's single greatest atrocities in fairly short terms in history I.e one mans influence, not all the atrocities in history of one Empire, thus I felt England or a single Englishman fell somewhat short of Hitler or many of the others. Not that we don't deserve an honourable or should I say dishonourable mention. I thank you for that Where to start concentration camps inveneted by the British to intern the Boers, the persecution of India, the manipulation of China in the age of opium trading, and all the wars that were about profit etc,etc,etc.

FYI I put 9/11 in because I picked 15 categories and was running short of ideas at that point. Should of left it at 10. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Funny you should mention the Tasmanians. We've been focusing on that group in my Anthropology class. Tasmanian aborigines have not been exterminated completley, though they came very close to extinction. There are many inhabitants who share both European and Tasmanian heritage but there is some speculation of whether a full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal still exists. IRC, the last full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died 130 years ago.

Well, that's somewhat heartening (perhaps marginally so at best, though), and though it doesn't tally with my sources, I'll accept that your anthropology class ought to have access to the more reliable source(s).

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Yes very Englishcentric consider that a strong contender in the genocide stakes. But as you can see it's single greatest atrocities in fairly short terms in history I.e one mans influence, not all the atrocities in history of one Empire, thus I felt England or a single Englishman fell somewhat short of Hitler or many of the others. Not that we don't deserve an honourable or should I say dishonourable mention. I thank you for that Where to start concentration camps inveneted by the British to intern the Boers, the persecution of India, the manipulation of China in the age of opium trading, and all the wars that were about profit etc,etc,etc.

Not to mention our role in the slave trade, our treatment of the Irish (potato famine, anyone ?), the treatment of the Scottish highlanders (the Highland clearances) - hell we could go on for quite a while, eh ?

I accept what you're saying about the atrocities generally, though, and retire contented with the dishonourable mention. I bet Ram could helps us out, though, with some individual names of British military leaders whose actions would render them worthier of inclusion than, say, 9/11.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Japanese atrocities across asia is definetly in the top 3 in my opinion. I can't believe that was left out of the poll.

 

[Silent Spectre]

The Holocaust, the atempted elimination of a race that had done nothing wrong is vile.

 

[Sidhe]

Agree but they did lead to Jesus's demise because he pronounced himself a King amongst men, not a King of the Jews but a prince amongst men, at the time their fragile authority couldn't accept it so they past the responsibility for the so called "balsphemy" onto the Romans, something they Knew would lead to Jesus's crucifixion( to satisfy the unrest amongst their subjects) Even the "real" King of the Jews, Herod, wouldn't touch the issue with a barge pole (incidently he is noted as a pretty decent man, if you don't read the whole truth into the biblical accounts of him) Essentially the Jewish Rabbis could not tolerate Jesus so they passsed the buck. Whether they should have been persecuted for it is beside the point admittedly, it certainly doesn't justify the holocaust, but it does explain the feelings of bitterness towards Jews, as does there wealth because Christianity forbade money lending as preached by Christ, so they became bankers and wealthy and let's face it everyone hates banks, the hatred is historical, it's outcome is disgusting, but that's human nature for you, persecute a race for their beliefs, chastise the sons for the sins of the father and their practices, utterly inhumane

A real short version of the reasons for Jewish hatred admittedly but if you've seen all the crap they got labled with historically you'd wretch. Germany needed a scapegoat, Poles and Jews were it.

 

[Elrohir]

As a Christian, I would say the killing of Jesus, the Son of God, was the single worst crime in all of human history. Even if God let it happen because it was necessary for the salvation of the human race, it was still the worst thing ever.

The worst atrocity as in genocide would probably be all the things Stalin did. But Stalin, Hitler and Mao all rank up there in the tens of millions of deaths area, so it's hard to say which one was truly the biggest Genocide.

 

[Xanikk999]

As a Christian, I would say the killing of Jesus, the Son of God, was the single worst crime in all of human history. Even if God let it happen because it was necessary for the salvation of the human race, it was still the worst thing ever.

The worst atrocity as in genocide would probably be all the things Stalin did. But Stalin, Hitler and Mao all rank up there in the tens of millions of deaths area, so it's hard to say which one was truly the biggest Genocide.

Give me a break, jesus is one person.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Killing one human person is not nearly as bad as killing millions.

 

[Urederra]

Yes, I mean the whole genocide.



Yes, and that, my friend, is why they make up only 2% of the population.

I voted other. The truth is what suffers the most in human history.

2% ein? What population?, USA population? I believe that there are at least 20 million mexicans in the USA, and last time I checked mexicans are not europeans, most of them have high percentage of native american genome.

 

[Urederra]

I’d say it’s a tie between Hitler’s Holocaust and Stalin’s purges. It’s amazing how many people died as a result of these two men. Some of these poll options shouldn’t really be there. Yeah, 9/11 was bad but it was nowhere near the scope as something like the Rwandan genocide. Also, if you happen to be an atheist, then the crucifixion of Jesus is nothing special when compared the execution of all individuals throughout Roman history.

Plus, he resurrected three days later, so, what's the big deal?

 

[Ramius75]

Japanese atrocities across asia is definetly in the top 3 in my opinion. I can't believe that was left out of the poll.

Agreed. Im quite saddened that it was left out, as usual. What the Japanese did during the WWII to the Chinese, Korean and other Asian countries dwalfed what the Nazi did during the holocaust. More than 30 million Asian Civilians was killed during that period. And most in quite brutal methods too, not to mention the comfort women and stuffs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comfort_Women

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

And lastly, the Japanese managed to get away with very little punishments. All will never be forgotten thou.

Also i need to mention the Nazi killing of 20 million Russian. Starving the whole city.

These are the worst atrocities against mankind.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Well, I would have to say that Stalin was responsible for a LARGE share of those 20 million Soviets (Ukrainians and Belorussians made up a disproportionately large number of the dead).

Unless you were talking about Leningrad in particular, in which case yes that was fully German.

 

[Danghis Khan]

Maybe because they were not genocides?

The Black Legend of the Spanish is pretty much as good a description of genocide as you can get. Yes disease killed a huge number of them, but slavery destroyed those that were left. Disease was actively and deliberately used by most european nations as a means of destroying indian communities. By the time Cortes landed in Mexico there were virtually no surviving indians anywhere on the islands of the Caribbean. Cortes exterminated the city of Cholula, then destroyed the city of Tenochtitlan. In Peru the Spanish exploited the Inca labour system basically sending hundreds of thousands of Incas to their deaths in the mines of Potosi.

And why the ? That was only the deaths of anywhere from 25 to 100 million people.

 

[general_kill]

I'm the only one to vote for Pol Pot? That guy was a freggin maniac, I don't remember the specifics but I do remembered that he killed about 1/4-1/3 of the population of Cambodia.