Most underrated evil person in history?

[TDAS04]

Well, Mao's evil is underrated compared to the evil of his rivals for biggest mass murderer, Hitler and Stalin (dax00's post is proof of that).  Many Americans who aren't history geeks don't know much about Mao, and Mao is still widely honored in the most populous country on Earth.  Can you imagine public tourist areas of Germany displaying pictures of Hitler today?

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Che Guevara.  He's literally hailed as a hero by most young/liberal Americans, in spite of his status as a racist, sadistic, cold-blooded killer.  Bob Beckel even called him a "freedom fighter" on TV.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Definitely. It's easy to point out Chairman Mao...

Name one thing he did that was intentionally bad for the people.

...

fck's sake, one maoïst-trumpist was more than enough, we really didn't need another.

[RightBehind]

Mao, Pol Pot and Genghis Khan I wouldn't call underrated. When one Googles or YouTubes the most evil people in history, those names usually pop ups with Hitler and Stalin.

Some of the people mentioned here I have never heard of. I have to admit, the Richard Quest one was humorous, but it goes to show how history tends to forget some people's deeds.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

For American examples, J. Edgar Hoover was pretty evil.

Also for non-government affiliated evil: John Brown. Al Capone also doesn't get enough hate.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

John C. Calhoun. He may not have been a mass murderer himself, but he was directly responsible for inciting one of the bloodiest wars in American history, seemingly out of an obsession with Southern pride rather than any specific issue. Although this makes him a piker compared to most global mass murderers, of course.

The various Spanish conquistadors are up there, too, especially Cortes.

[sportydude]

Masaji Kitano and Shirō Ishii.

While some people at least don't disregard the Soviet crimes during WWII, most people are totally unaware of the dreadful, hideous and direful crimes committed by the Japanese.
That's probably mainly because of the atrocious atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki bythe U.S., which stretched the truth of the Japanese history in the public perception.
In the awareness of most westerners, WWII took only place within Europe, between the USA and Europe, and between the USA and Japan. The inner Indochinese war is not well-known in the western world.

[President Johnson]

Che Guevara.  He's literally hailed as a hero by most young/liberal Americans, in spite of his status as a racist, sadistic, cold-blooded killer.  Bob Beckel even called him a "freedom fighter" on TV.

I agree. I also consider him a loser.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The Three Pashas are an excellent answer.

Also for non-government affiliated evil: John Brown.

...

[afleitch]

I'd agree with Che, on the basis of that fact he was needlessly idolised in the first instance.

[Sol]

Juan de Onate, Francisco Macias Nguema, Lavrentiy Beria, Suharto, James Henry Carleton, Zhang Xianzhong.

Also I don't know specific names but the French administration of their Central African colonies was as bad as the Congo Free State, but rarely gets as much attention.

[dax00]

I'm still waiting for a specific example. Mao's order to kill the sparrows was not borne from malice. Mao's insistence on steel manufacture was not borne out of malice.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Donald Trump?

[The Mikado]

Did history start in 1900? How about some variety here?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'm still waiting for a specific example. Mao's order to kill the sparrows was not borne from malice.

Yet it was extremely stupid and contributed to a large number of people dying from hunger. Evil results should count at least as much as evil intentions.

I suppose we can absolve Stalin from murderous slave labor, because his desire for industrialization was "not coming from malice per se"?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

... your argument is literally how nazi apologists defend Mr Hitler. "Oh he was interested in building nice buildings and motorways! He didn't know about the holocaust! WHATABOUT THR REDS!"

Mao was an intelligent man. He knew what he was doing. Fundamentally he believed human lives were expendable in the quest to build his poxy state. Fluck him and fluck people defending the PoS.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Nationalists are always poison. They crush their own people and bury their neighbours for at best worship of mystical lines on a map and at worst for political cynicism.

Another candidate for evil (and stupid) is Fernando lopez of Peru, who ended up sacrificing the majority of the population for his idiotic wars.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Did history start in 1900? How about some variety here?

Tbf in Classical and medieval times most records are basically propoganda, and the standard was pretty low.

Maybe Pope Urban the Crusader?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

How about Prince Rupert of the Rhine - who played an important role in the creation of the Transatlantic Slave Trade - as an earlier entry?

[RightBehind]

Did history start in 1900? How about some variety here?

Tbf in Classical and medieval times most records are basically propoganda, and the standard was pretty low.

Maybe Pope Urban the Crusader?

Lots of Popes were pretty bad. Alexander VI and Leo X come to mind.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Another candidate for evil (and stupid) is Fernando lopez of Peru, who ended up sacrificing the majority of the population for his idiotic wars.

Surely you mean Francisco Solano López of Paraguay?

Did history start in 1900? How about some variety here?

Tbf in Classical and medieval times most records are basically propoganda, and the standard was pretty low.

Maybe Pope Urban the Crusader?

Lots of Popes were pretty bad. Alexander VI and Leo X come to mind.

Leo X was an incompetent buffoon, not evil. Describing Urban II as 'evil' also strikes me as too simplistic a way of understanding the genesis of the Crusades, but admittedly Urban's foresight in his policy towards Campania and Sicily means that he probably does not have the excuse of not understanding the consequences of his actions. Alexander VI was absolutely vile, but not really 'underrated' for being so, since he's where most people's minds go when they think of disgusting Renaissance popes.

[RightBehind]

Another candidate for evil (and stupid) is Fernando lopez of Peru, who ended up sacrificing the majority of the population for his idiotic wars.

Surely you mean Francisco Solano López of Paraguay?

Did history start in 1900? How about some variety here?

Tbf in Classical and medieval times most records are basically propoganda, and the standard was pretty low.

Maybe Pope Urban the Crusader?

Lots of Popes were pretty bad. Alexander VI and Leo X come to mind.

Leo X was an incompetent buffoon, not evil. Describing Urban II as 'evil' also strikes me as too simplistic a way of understanding the genesis of the Crusades, but admittedly Urban's foresight in his policy towards Campania and Sicily means that he probably does not have the excuse of not understanding the consequences of his actions. Alexander VI was absolutely vile, but not really 'underrated' for being so, since he's where most people's minds go when they think of disgusting Renaissance popes.

For some reason I thought Leo X engaged in torture.

Urban VI was nasty. So was Innocent IV.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The Borgia Pope gets a bad rap tbh - he was no real worse (and perhaps better) than most of his contemporaries, including his successor. Also his son was a major up, and ended up being defined as some awesome force of nature which is ... pretty weird.

[Santander]

Enrico Dandolo and Franco come to mind.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Enrico Dandolo

Now there's a good answer.