10 Most Evil Empires in History
- Thread starter waves
- Start date
Quid est Veritas?
In Memoriam to CS Lewis
This list has a number of problems, but chief amongst them is the very idea of calling certain empires 'evil'.
It is always a mixed bag of good and bad effects for most of them, with some like the Third Reich perhaps actually deserving the term due to its minimal positive effects.
There are problems with the characterisation of many of the entries, but I will focus on number 1 to illustrate:
Calling the British Empire the most evil is patently absurd. The Indian famines mentioned weren't man-made nor intentional. They were merely following accepted 19th century economic theory which taught that Malthusian checks were necessary and to interfere in the free market would merely worsen the next cycle. Today we no longer think this, but it is silly to execrate someone merely for being wrong.
They had no intention to starve the Indians while the Soviet Union intentionally caused a famine to destroy a whole class of peasant. I find it absurd that the Soviets are considered less 'evil' than the British.
Likewise, the Boer concentration camps were deadly, but they weren't meant to be so. It was merely mismanagment, disease and a few sadists that inevitably crop up when people are imprisoned, that made them so terrible. I say this as someone whose ancestors lived through those camps, who grew up with horror stories of them. While the British did try to destroy the agrarian Boer way of life to try and trap the Kommandos and Anglify South Africa, it was not an extermination camp nor meant to have high death rates.
Taken against the Mongols that built a pyramid of human skulls when Baghdad was seized or Tamberlaine's killing spree in India, it pales in comparison.
In my opinion, the British probably don't even belong on a list of top ten 'evil empires'.
The British did many positive things like ending the Atlantic and Indian Ocean Slave trades, ending slavery in their realms, spreading Industrialisation and modern medicine, spreading modern western values etc.
It is always a mixed bag of good and bad effects for most of them, with some like the Third Reich perhaps actually deserving the term due to its minimal positive effects.
There are problems with the characterisation of many of the entries, but I will focus on number 1 to illustrate:
Calling the British Empire the most evil is patently absurd. The Indian famines mentioned weren't man-made nor intentional. They were merely following accepted 19th century economic theory which taught that Malthusian checks were necessary and to interfere in the free market would merely worsen the next cycle. Today we no longer think this, but it is silly to execrate someone merely for being wrong.
They had no intention to starve the Indians while the Soviet Union intentionally caused a famine to destroy a whole class of peasant. I find it absurd that the Soviets are considered less 'evil' than the British.
Likewise, the Boer concentration camps were deadly, but they weren't meant to be so. It was merely mismanagment, disease and a few sadists that inevitably crop up when people are imprisoned, that made them so terrible. I say this as someone whose ancestors lived through those camps, who grew up with horror stories of them. While the British did try to destroy the agrarian Boer way of life to try and trap the Kommandos and Anglify South Africa, it was not an extermination camp nor meant to have high death rates.
Taken against the Mongols that built a pyramid of human skulls when Baghdad was seized or Tamberlaine's killing spree in India, it pales in comparison.
In my opinion, the British probably don't even belong on a list of top ten 'evil empires'.
The British did many positive things like ending the Atlantic and Indian Ocean Slave trades, ending slavery in their realms, spreading Industrialisation and modern medicine, spreading modern western values etc.
Upvote
0
Radrook
Well-Known Member
- Feb 25, 2016
- 11,536
- 2,724
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
The Roman Empire with its crucifixions and Gladiatorial Entertainment has to be up there in the top ten. One display of its evil that comes to mind is the crucifixion of Spartacus' 5000 men along the Appian way in order to terrorize slaves from attempting any further efforts at freedom. Another is its exceedingly cruel, unjustifiable, maliciously cunning behavior towards Carthage which led to the Third Punic War.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yeah, horrific! Not like modern civilised countries who bomb people seeking freedom from half a planet away.
Upvote
0
Jack of Spades
I told you so
The Mongol empire was probably the worst one in my books, in terms of body count.
Nazi Germany was probably the most intensively evil in terms of body count / time period. The problem with Nazi Germany though, was that it had basically just one government during it's short life time, so it doesn't really compare to empires which had many rulers and periods of more and less intensity.
You seem to have read not very much history if public execution of 5 000 men is something of a top 10 evil things - material for you. Making an example of rebels was the norm for couple thousand years pretty much everywhere.
Nazi Germany was probably the most intensively evil in terms of body count / time period. The problem with Nazi Germany though, was that it had basically just one government during it's short life time, so it doesn't really compare to empires which had many rulers and periods of more and less intensity.
You seem to have read not very much history if public execution of 5 000 men is something of a top 10 evil things - material for you. Making an example of rebels was the norm for couple thousand years pretty much everywhere.
Upvote
0
Jack of Spades
I told you so
Technological and administrational effectivity also plays a role in the outcome, so different time periods are not all that comparable. Nazis and Stalins Soviet Union were both very effective organizers, whereas some ancient insane tyrants only terrorized mostly their own small inner circles.
I am sure there have been plenty of rulers who would have done the things Stalin and Hitler did, had they just had the means. With historical rulers, evil in outcome doesn't equal with evil in character.
Upvote
0
Quid est Veritas?
In Memoriam to CS Lewis
I disagree Rome belongs on such a list. The Pax Romana kept much of the mediterranean world at peace for hundreds of years. They built roads and public works. They gradually extended citizenship to every free man in the empire. They allowed a lot of local say.
There is a sketch from Monty Python's Life of Brian which illustrates this nicely. The Jewish separatists ask "What have the Romans ever done for us?" only for replies to come thick and fast. I would have posted it here, but I am not the most technologically inclined.
Spartacus's revolt resulted in much devastation in Italy and they had an opportunity to leave, but chose to return to pillage further. So, I don't think Crassus's response was too far off of the norms of the period.
The Third Punic War was deplorable, I agree. There are other examples of Roman cruelty I could mention, but I don't want to undermine my argument. But on balance, Rome did far more good than ill in my opinion. There were far worse empires in history.
As Lord Wavell said of British involvement in India: "We tried to be your Romans, not your Normans". You don't get mentioned as an exemplum unless you did some things right.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
