U.N; North Korea responsible for Nazi-like atrocities.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I dunno... I think you could make a case they were worse than the Nazis...

No. No you could not.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'm not disputing the gross insanity and brutality of the Kims, but they haven't attempted to mass-exterminate entire races of people (though TBF there are basically no minorities in either Korea) or embark on aggressive global conquest.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'm not disputing the gross insanity and brutality of the Kims, but they haven't attempted to mass-exterminate entire races of people (though TBF there are basically no minorities in either Korea) or embark on aggressive global conquest.

This is more a consequence of circumstance then intent.

Yeah, there's a lot of really extraordinarily racist material in the propaganda that North Korea produces for domestic consumption.

It still doesn't change the fact that North Korea, brutal as it may be, has not committed crimes anywhere near the scale of the Third Reich.

This reason of scale (as well as the whole industrial genocide thing) is why Adolf Hitler is more often called "the most evil man of all time" than Kim Il-sung, or Ante Pavelic, or Pol Pot, even if the latter three were arguably just as brutal at an individual level.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'm not disputing the gross insanity and brutality of the Kims, but they haven't attempted to mass-exterminate entire races of people (though TBF there are basically no minorities in either Korea) or embark on aggressive global conquest.

This is more a consequence of circumstance then intent.

Yeah, there's a lot of really extraordinarily racist material in the propaganda that North Korea produces for domestic consumption.

It still doesn't change the fact that North Korea, brutal as it may be, has not committed crimes anywhere near the scale of the Third Reich.

This reason of scale (as well as the whole industrial genocide thing) is why Adolf Hitler is more often called "the most evil man of all time" than Kim Il-sung, or Ante Pavelic, or Pol Pot, even if the latter three were arguably just as brutal at an individual level.

No it's the fact that he lost and his victims was Europeans/White which is the reason (..and it's western phenomen, Indians, Africans, Middle Easterner or East Asians would mention other people). If we focused on scale Stalin and Mao likely killed more people, even Djengis Khan may beat him. But Stalin and Mao won.

Stalin probably didn't kill more people--most people actually survived the gulags, the purges were at most a million or so, and the Holodomor/other famines/massacres bring his toll up to 10 million, more if you count the Nazis killed on the Eastern Front (which is dumb). The majority Chinese deaths were the simple issue of mass famine in a developing country/sheer government corruption/incompetence, though Mao himself had plenty of blood on his hands too.

As for the Hitler thing, Jews at this time weren't particularly highly-regarded anywhere despite being "white", nor were Roma, homosexuals, or communists.