[Generalissimo Talonius]

I'd go with one of two choices : Napolean or Stalin, because I think the benefitted their countries more than any other rulers. Napolean was a great military genius, who turned France from a constant "also ran" to a massive Empire that spanned almost all of Europe and into Asian and Africa, and Stalin turned Russia from a backwards country of illeterate farmers to a world power that was rivaled only by the United States and the German Reich. I would also include on this list Alexandre the Great, but he was more of a brilliant general and not so much of a dictator, so I don't think he really counts

But what do I know ? Who do you guys think was the greates dictator/monarch of all time ?

[Wilhelm]

Napoleon betrayed the republic just to conquer Europe. Stalin achieved progress etc, at the cost of killing people. I would dare say, as of now there has never been a great dictator.

[Adrien]

Still biased with my "historico-nationalism" i will say Napoleon.

In fact, i think that historically speaking, dictators must be more fascinating for the people of their own countries, because they are generally a big part of history themselves.

[edit: by "historico-nationalism" here i mean being proud, sometimes very proud of your country, of your nation, of being part of that nation, only when you look back on its history. Nevertheless, i will never say that my nation is better than any other, looking or not at its history. Well, that's another debate. ]

[Generalissimo Talonius]

Napoleon betrayed the republic just to conquer Europe. Stalin achieved progress etc, at the cost of killing people. I would dare say, as of now there has never been a great dictator.

Keep in mind that w/o Napolean, the Republic would have been torn to pieces by the Empires of Great Britain and Prussia. He SAVED France . And Stalins killings were all justified : he mainly killed enemies of the state and counter-revolutionaries. What's wrong with that ?

[Umoja]

Bloodytalon, what if someone called you an enemy of the State for your beliefs, would you accept being killed?

Personally, I'd say the best Dictator was Ceaser or Napolean. They both were popular leaders, which generally leads to a succesful country and Napolean went against Monarchist, so how can I disagree.

[Generalissimo Talonius]

It is not for beliefs that people would be killed, but because they worked to undermine the State and the goals of the State : in Stalin's case, creating a perfect socialist country. If you worked against socialism and the socialist cause, than you were not only harming the state, but the people it was put in place to guide towards a better future.

BTW, I would never betray anything I swore an oath to : in my opinion, Oath-breakers are some of the worst scum in the world. If I swore loyalty to a gov't, than that is that.

And also, which Caesar are you reffering to ? ( It's a title, not just one person's name ). If you mean Julius Caesar, he never actually was emperor of Rome : he was killed before he assumed power. After his death, the Republican forces tried to take over Rome, lead by Generals Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius, but they were defeated by the Second Triumvirate of Marcus Antonius, Octavius Caesar ( Caesar's nephew ) and a General Gaius Lespidius. After that, Lespidius died, and Octavius defeated Antonius in a great battle at Egypt, subsequently becoming the first Caesar of Rome ( Marcus Antonius and his lover, Queen Cleopatra of Egypt, had commited suicide once defeat was inevetable ). And as for the greatest Caesar, I would say it was Caesar Titus Flavius Vespasianus, who followed Nero's disastorous reign by bringing Rome into a new era of prosperity and glory ( he also built the great Coliseum in Rome ) . Just my 2 danari .

[Russian]

If we were talking about a video game where people are just a resource and you win by having a high score then ill go with Stalin... the reality is that Stalin's hyper-modernization of Russia came at horrendous cost of thousands of human lives.

[Skullers]

ends justify means. people are expendable.
good thing that he sacrificed thousands for the benefit of millions.

[Generalissimo Talonius]

Good point : is killing, say, 100,000 people, justified if it benefitted 1 billion ? I think so : like Skullers said , the ends justify the mean. The societal whole must always be placed before individual rights. That is the only way progress can happen.

[CasX]

Good point : is killing, say, 100,000 people, justified if it benefitted 1 billion ? I think so : like Skullers said , the ends justify the mean. The societal whole must always be placed before individual rights. That is the only way progress can happen.

No, people shouldn't be 'sacrificed' for the BENEFIT of others; eg simply to make those still alive lives' a little better.

There is a world food shortage. The answer is 'simple'. Kill everone else so I can have enough food.

It doesn't seem to work...

[Skullers]

actually, there is enough food - it's just not distributed right.

[Umoja]

I was thinking Julius, but yes your right bloodytalons. I guess Augustus was pretty cool then, besides the being scared to death of that Jesus guy.

I'm not gonna argue the killing enemies of the states one....

[KurtFF8]

And Stalins killings were all justified

[Wilhelm]

Killing some for the benefit of others... That's capitalism.

[C-Kokos]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ends justify means. people are expendable.

Yup, that makes you expendable too, and I'd love to sacrifice you for the benefit of the people

[KurtFF8]

Killing some for the benefit of others... That's capitalism.

not really

[Skullers]

Yup, that makes you expendable too

Yes.

, and I'd love to sacrifice you for the benefit of the people

sacrificing me - how? killing me would harm the people since i'm so smart and talented. and it would also be a waste of a worker...

Killing some for the benefit of others... That's capitalism.

exploiting the majority for the benefit of the minority - that's capitalism. (and some other non-socialist things too)

[Russian]

Many other countries went through industrialization without sending their citizens to the frozen wasteland to do slave labor... Commies like to bitch about Russia being backward before Stalin... and its true but Russia's industrialization was as primitive and as backward as they come. The whole point of the government is to serve and govern its people not to view them as expandable resource. “vote for me and you’ll become my bitch” won’t get you anywhere in a democratic elections… that’s why communists always resort to dictatorship

[Skullers]

Many other countries went through industrialization without sending their citizens to the frozen wasteland to do slave labor...

not many countries have frozen wastelands, you know

Commies like to bitch about Russia being backward before Stalin... and its true but Russia's industrialization was as primitive and as backward as they come. The whole point of the government is to serve and govern its people not to view them as expandable resource.

who views who as an expendable resource? i R saying individual people (or groups) are expendable for benefit of whole society.
(enemies etc)

“vote for me and you’ll become my bitch” won’t get you anywhere in a democratic elections…

"democratic elections" should be abolished

that’s why communists always resort to dictatorship

dictatorship... of the proletariat!

[KurtFF8]

*sigh* i dont think ill take all of your views as seriously after seeing threads like this lol