Which Historical Figure Would You Erase From Existence?

I would personally, even as a Christian, erase God. I think we would have less wars, hatred, and discrimination. I know this is an unusual answer because there's no proof he exists, but there is proof of the war waged in his name, which makes him exist at least as an invisible figurehead, if that make sense.

@ of dru's being.
I'm inclined to agree with you. I was going to jump in and say the predictable answer "Hitler", but I think that if it weren't for the Abrahamic God (whether as a real entity or just an idea), then we wouldn't have a lot of the evil dictators (Hitler included) in the first place. Obviously there have been dictators whose evils haven't been religiously influenced, but I also believe in Chaos Theory, so I'm inclined to think that maybe Stalin, Pol Pot etc. might not have committed their atrocities if it weren't for the concept of God. Not from a causal point of view, but just from the idea that one change in the course of history can affect a hell of a lot down the line.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be evil in the world, of course. Maybe there would have been completely different atrocities that were just as bad as the ones we know.

I'm gonna have to say Hitler.

@ Alex; periphery. @ of dru's being.
You both bring up excellent points, but without religion humans might still be a bunch of primates. XD

@ Dreamer's Aly Cat
How so? Firstly, religion is just a group of people worshipping God in the same way. If you're talking about God making humans into humans, that has to do with God Himself and not religion. God can exist without religion.

Secondly, I think the creation story is a God-version of science. I think God/gods/whatever use science to do their 'magic'.

@of dru's being.
I don't think @Dreamer's Aly Cat is referring to God at all. At least, I'd leave God completely out of this topic since he could not even exist for all we know.

To me, the main point here -and the one we can't get rid of, doesn't matter how hard we try and how far the science progresses- is the fact that there will always be people believing in " superior forces" and that this belief had a great influence on humanity, and it still does, since Prehistory.

By saying God should be erased from human culture you're implying that God does exist.
I understand that as a Christian that's what you believe and I'm ok with it, but being an agnostic myself I prefer not to make such an assumption. I would say, if there's something to be erased here, then it should be the belief in God from human culture rather than the existence of God itself.

@ of dru's being.
What I meant was not the creation of man (which I'm totally on the fence about), but more that humans advanced with religion—something to "believe" in other than what we know for facts.

Does that make more sense?

@ berghain sunrise
I tried to touch on that in my first answer. Regardless of the existence or non-existence of God, He has still been the reason for a lot of shit and if He didn't exist figuratively or literally, none of that would have happened, imho.

As a Christian, at the core, if God didn't exist then nothing would because He created the world.

I'd definitely say Hitler. I'm half-German and the knowledge that my grandparents were in the middle of that war as children just makes me cringe.

For me, it's Stalin. He was directly responsible for the deaths of millions of people, the death toll at 100,000 people murdered a year by him and the Soviet Union long before WWII even began. Even after the war, he was still responsible for genocides. Truthfully, I think all dictators who were cruel and torturous should be erased, but Stalin's number one on the list, Hitler coming in (very) close second.

@ dare to wonder.
Whoa, 50 million? Not to sound snippy, but do you have a reliable source for that number?

During the Great Purge, the death toll was estimated to be anywhere from 600,000 to 1.8 million. Millions more died due to famine and other causes. The popular number is 20 million, which even some historians believe to be a slight exaggeration, so 50 million sounds way out of the question. I mean, I guess if you count the Soviet casualties of WWII, than you could probably easily get to 40-50 million, but I don't think that's the same as dying as a direct result of Stalin's rule (i.e. the Great Purge).

---

As for who I think should be erased, Adolf Hitler, hands down. Far, far worse than Stalin imo, as well as all the other famous dictators--Pol Pot, Mussolini, etc. None of them had shit on Hitler. It blows my mind that so much death, long-lasting destruction, and misery could be inflicted by one person and in a relatively short period of time.

@ chai latte

It's uncertain how many people died during Stalin's dictatorship, really. Some estimates are as low as ranging from 10-20 million to 40-60 million, even as high as 100 million which, obviously, is far out of the question. However, according to the documentary "Stalin, Portrait of a Monster in Blood," he was responsible for 60 million deaths. This could be an exaggeration, but he was responsible for many deaths, including his own people and Red Army soldiers.

In Stalin's case, there's little distinction between killing people and simply letting them die of neglect in labor camps. He had his own people worked to death and executed much like Hitler did, so there's really no comparison; both were equally twisted and evil. I suppose you are right, though, Stalin himself was only directly responsible for an estimate of 20 million deaths, but when you put the number of casualties due to his poor war tactics and deaths caused by the Soviet Union under his rule, it's a mess of statistics and big numbers.

Okay, eep. Sorry for the mini essay. It was my mistake, I phrased that wrong and looking back at it I think I sound like a bit of a dummy, but I think the point was made. Stalin killed a lot of people. The fact that they were all his own people just makes me cringe.

@ dare to wonder.
Thanks for clearing that up! I think we were both right, just our definitions of "people Stalin killed" were different. Certainly if you count the Soviets who were casualties of war than yes, the death toll under Stalin has got to be among the highest in history.

But yeah, thanks again! I hope I didn't come off as curt in my initial post. :)

@ chai latte

Oh, no, not at all! :)

This may be weird...but I feel like...without any of the historical "bad guys" , society as a whole would have never learned from the chaos in the past. Meaning that instead of Hitler, or Stalin...maybe someone else would have been able to rise up, and do the same thing they did, in a different time period. I hate to get all "everything happens for a reason" but sometimes...I think...maybe it does?

icomein_peace:

This may be weird...but I feel like...without any of the historical "bad guys" , society as a whole would have never learned from the chaos in the past. Meaning that instead of Hitler, or Stalin...maybe someone else would have been able to rise up, and do the same thing they did, in a different time period. I hate to get all "everything happens for a reason" but sometimes...I think...maybe it does?

I kind of feel the same way. I don't think everything happens for a reason, but if one person was eliminated, someone else would have had the same ideas and done the same thing or something similar.

I wouldn't erase Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot or any of the other truly evil dictators of history. I firmly believe that evil begets good, and human society needs evil leaders to keep all the checks and balances in place. I don't think progression would ever happen if our history books were full of good guys. I totally agree with icomein_peace and Kurtni.

I guess I wouldn't erase anyone.

My grandmother, just to see what would happen. It'd be fun on the bun.

I wouldn't erase God (if he exists) since people will still find ways to be dicks to each other. That's human nature for you. Similarly, the dictators in history never worked alone...all that I think would change is you'd have some other guy's name down in history.

@ The Master.
One would think, however, that a few people being dicks to each other is not as bad as thousands of people killing each other in the name of God.

@ of dru's being.

They'd easily find something else to fight in the name of. Ideologies, territories...

@ The Master.
I just feel like people lose their logical sensibilities when religion/faith is thrown in. I'm sure they'd fight over other things, but because they wouldn't be using a non-consultable individual as they're fighting point, they might not be as illogical.