Micah D. Halpern - Thugs: How Historys Most Notorious Despots Transformed the World Through Terror, Tyranny, and Mass Murder

2007 by Micah D. Halpern

All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, scanning, or otherexcept for brief quotations in critical reviews or articles, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Published in Nashville, Tennessee, by Thomas Nelson. Thomas Nelson is a trademark of Thomas Nelson, Inc.

Thomas Nelson, Inc., titles may be purchased in bulk for educational, business, fund-raising, or sales promotional use. For information, please e-mail SpecialMarkets@thomasnelson.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Halpern,Micah D.
Thugs: How historys most notorious despots transformed the world through terror, tyranny, and mass murder / Micah D. Halpern.
p. cm.
ISBN 10: 1-59555-073-9
ISBN 13: 978-1-59555-073-6
1.World politicsMiscellanea. 2. Despotism. 3. Totalitarianism. 4.Mass murder. I. Title.

D32.H36 2007
321.90922dc22

2007013037

07 08 09 10 11 QW 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Information about External Hyperlinks in this ebook

Please note that footnotes in this ebook may contain hyperlinks to external websites as part of bibliographic citations. These hyperlinks have not been activated by the publisher, who cannot verify the accuracy of these links beyond the date of publication.

There is one safeguard known generally to the wise,
which is an advantage and security to all, but
especially to democracies against despotssuspicion.

DEMOSTHENES

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

THOMAS JEFFERSON

When I despair, I remember that all through
history the ways of truth and love have always
won. There have been tyrants, and murderers,
and for a time they can seem invincible, but
in the end they always fall. Think of italways.

MAHATMA GANDHI

It is my hope that by reading this book, you will be entertained in addition to being informed. Thugs is a popular history. It is about legacy and continuity. It is about the horrors that shaped history and the perpetrators of those horrors. It is an accessible entre into the lives and careers of some of the worlds most powerful leaders.

So who made the cut? How did I decide who was in and who was out? Who was despotic enough, demonizing enough, ruthless, barbaric, merciless enough? And was that even my criteria?

My guiding principle was that many of these leaders cared not a whit about the values and ideals that I and my worldthe free and democratic worldhold dear. These are leaders who used their power for the purpose of furthering their own personal and political goals. Thugs is a peek into the private lives of the rich and infamous. It is a glimpse into the political aspirations of the biggest and most notorious of egos.

Unfortunately there are many despots, dead and alive, to choose from. I chose to write about leaders not because they were necessarily worse than others but because of the way they impacted history. I chose people for the roles they played, not merely for the barbaric acts they performed. Brutality alone was not enough to warrant a place in Thugs. I wanted characters about whom there was controversy. Controversy centering on their place in history. Controversy about the role they played during their own historical period and in their own country. They are people who arouse controversy in academic circles and are the subjects of popular debate.

I wanted characters that were a blight on society, and I wanted to know what made them tick.Were they aggressive and did what they thought necessary to advance and change their country, their culture, their people? Were they immature leaders who did not and could not really manage the mantle of leadership? Or were they simply possessed by their own superhuman egos?

Some of the characters are far worse than others. Some easily fit into what could almost be a universal model for a thug or a tyrant: Hitler,Mussolini, Stalin. Others could be considered great leaders, but they were also authoritarian rulers: Genghis Khan, Mao Tse-Tung. There are those who were undeniably great leaders, but who were also classic dictators: Alexander, Caesar. And then there are those who committed acts so heinous that their pristine reputations are tainted, altering their places in popular history. Thats how King David wound up on my list. The second king of Israel consorted with a married woman (Bathsheba), and then ordered the death of that womans husband (a warrior fighting in the kings own army).

The lives and proclivities of some of these otherwise ruthless people will make you laugh because theyre just plain funny. King Farouk was a collector. He had the largest collection of pornography in the world. He also had a rare coin collection that rivaled his porn collection. In order to feed his coin-collection habit, the king stole money. He was a master pickpocket.

Some were just pitiful. Bashar Assad wanted to live out his life far away from home as an English gentleman and an ophthalmologist. But then his playboy brotherthe son who was supposed to take over the reins from his fatherwent and got himself killed. So Bashar was plucked from his life in England and given a crash course in Syrian politics and the art of ruling. Call it despot training 101.His coursework was completed with the death of his father. The rest was on-the-job training.

And then there are those who were so absolutely self-absorbed that they had no idea history would show them in a bad light. Nicholas of Russia couldnt see that when he went to the front to fight alongside his men and bolster their spirits, he was essentially giving upno, throwing awaythe throne. He thought he was doing the right thing. He thought he was inspiring his troops. Instead he left the entire country and all the decision-making authority in the hands of his German-born wife so that he could go fight a war against his enemythe Germans.

Some thugs are actually larger than life. They are mythic characters with mythic proportions. They are the answers on Jeopardy and the questions on Millionaire. Their stories tell themselves, and our knowledge of their lives is intertwined with lore. Those rulers made it onto my list because I want them to be seen in their proper contextnot as masquerade party figures but as the despots and authoritarian leaders they really were. So you will read about Cleopatra. Not because she was so beautiful (though she probably wasnt) or because she was inherently evil. Cleopatra is on the list because she was considered by the Egyptians to be a god. As a god, Cleopatra had the power of life and death. And through her power and charm she manipulated her relationship with Julius Caesar and the entire empire of Rome.

The model of an authoritarian leader is predominately that of a man. This is not a sexist statement; it is a historical fact. Few women are deserving of the title thug, and there are several good reasons for that. Even if they had traits that would have defined them as despotic, dastardly, demonic, cruel, and brutal, most women kept that side of themselves to themselves. Their public persona was less severe to the public eye. Certainly women have occupied seats of power, but historically they are less brutal in the application of their power than are men.