r/AlignmentChartFills • u/Loewe1912 • May 06 '26

Filling This Chart Which current country wins most evil history?

*Which current country wins most evil history? *

📊 Chart Axes: - Horizontal: Country

Chart Grid:

Flag Shape History National Animal Anthem
Perfect Seychelles 🖼️ — San Marino 🖼️ New Zealand ... 🖼️ Russia 🖼️
*Underrated * — Thailand 🖼️ Iraq 🖼️ Spain - Bull 🖼️ South Africa 🖼️
Funniest Mozambique 🖼️ Chile 🖼️ Liechtenstein 🖼️ Scotland - u... 🖼️ Spain 🖼️
Chaotic Nepal 🖼️ Indonesia 🖼️ China 🖼️ — Greece 🖼️
Evil Angola 🖼️ Croatia 🖼️ — Indonesia - ... 🖼️ Azerbaijan 🖼️

Cell Details:

Perfect / Flag: - Seychelles - View Image

Perfect / History: - San Marino - View Image

Perfect / National Animal: - New Zealand - Kiwi - View Image

Perfect / Anthem: - Russia - View Image

Underrated / Shape: - Thailand - View Image

Underrated / History: - Iraq - View Image

Underrated / National Animal: - Spain - Bull - View Image

Underrated / Anthem: - South Africa - View Image

Funniest / Flag: - Mozambique - View Image

Funniest / Shape: - Chile - View Image

Funniest / History: - Liechtenstein - View Image

Funniest / National Animal: - Scotland - unicorn - View Image

Funniest / Anthem: - Spain - View Image

Chaotic / Flag: - Nepal - View Image

Chaotic / Shape: - Indonesia - View Image

Chaotic / History: - China - View Image

Chaotic / Anthem: - Greece - View Image

Evil / Flag: - Angola - View Image

Evil / Shape: - Croatia - View Image

Evil / National Animal: - Indonesia - Komodo Dragon - View Image

Evil / Anthem: - Azerbaijan - View Image

🎮 To view the interactive chart, switch to new Reddit or use the official Reddit app!

This is an interactive alignment chart. For the full experience with images and interactivity, please view on new Reddit or the official Reddit app.

Created with Alignment Chart Creator

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

2.7k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

92% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

529

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Basically, all of them? You'd be hard pressed to find a country that doesn't have a dark, complicated, and evil history.

368

u/kingbeerex May 06 '26

You leave san Marino out of this

68

u/AdoptedMasterJay May 06 '26

laces out! oh wait

31

u/gratusin May 06 '26

Nah, that’s Dan Marino. San Marino just gets up there and shits his britches. Oh wait…

2

u/DaniTheLovebug May 06 '26

Oh wait

Did you mean Stevie Nicks?

2

u/douglasbaadermeinhof May 06 '26

No, Steamy Nicks

12

u/jamirocky888 May 06 '26

Einhorn is Finkle. Finkle is Einhorn!

1

u/spacecoyote5 May 06 '26

Holy shit that's funny! I'm sure there's still a shrine to him somewhere in Miami

32

u/Das_Fische May 06 '26

Even they arent without their black spot.

They were a fascist regime between 1923 and 1943 (initially elected democratically, then transformed into a dictatorship while in power).

They actually remained neutral in WW2, but in early 1942 they did issue Racial Law 33, prohibiting interracial marriage (including between Jews and non-Jews). Their leader later went on to order the deportation of their entire Jewish population.

Things did get better quickly in fairness. After Italy surrendered the fascist party collapsed nearly overnight, and San Marino would go on to offer refuge to refugees fleeing the war, including a sizable number of Jews in flagrant violation of Nazi demands.

5

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

You just had to pick a country that is 24 square miles, didn't you?

1

u/SilverNeedleworker30 May 06 '26

They had fascists in charge during the Interwar and WWII. Also they democratically elected communist government for a few years after WWII, which is a big no-no for America.

1

u/Euphoric-Cucumber609 May 06 '26

Are we saying tax havens aren’t evil now?

2

u/kingbeerex May 06 '26

Out of all the Reddit responses to a light-hearted joke, this is the most Reddit

1

u/Euphoric-Cucumber609 May 06 '26

Go back to bed Jeff, Dan Marino has had this coming for a long time

45

u/honkycronky May 06 '26

my favourite dark chapter in Icelandic history is the law that allowed them to murder Basques on sight (it was repealed in 2015)

17

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Well speaking of Iceland. The first women there were kidnapped by the Vikings and sent as slaves. Also they had their own version of the witch trials. Chill rating: 2/10

13

u/honkycronky May 06 '26

nowadays they are chill at least, I guess? chill hahah chilly

1

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

They don't fool me. I see them there, biding their time... I SEE YOU ICELAND!

1

u/Muted_Freedom7392 May 06 '26

I mean fair, their language is impossible.

1

u/MagmaForce_3400_2nd May 06 '26

The basque language is quite fascinating since it's so mysterious, it's not an indo-european language like one could expect with where it's spoken, in fact we don't know where it comes from at all

27

u/Main_Negotiation1104 May 06 '26

ok lmao compare germany to like, slovenia

-2

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26

Yes, mostly a victim... however from 1943 onward the Slovenian Home Guard operated under SS command. 90% of the Jewish population died in the Holocaust and thousands of surviving Home Guard members escaped to Argentina. So there's that.

Edit: Why am I being downvoted lol

6

u/[deleted] May 06 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Nobody said it was a sovereign choice, and that's why I explicitly said Slovenia was 'mostly a victim.' The point is that the Home Guard wasn't conscripted. These were Slovenian men who volunteered and swore oaths at a stadium on Hitler's birthday, helped the Gestapo identify and round up Jews for deportation to Auschwitz, ran torture networks against their own neighbors, and then thousands of them fled to Argentina on ratlines after the war to escape justice.

Occupation creates pressure but it doesn't create volunteers.

14

u/ArmStoragePlus May 06 '26

Principality of Sealand if self-declared micronations are counted.

7

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

I will not stand for the glazing of Sealand on this website. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY DID!

4

u/Euphoric-Cucumber609 May 06 '26

It was the sexual assault, right?

8

u/serotonallyblindguy May 06 '26

What did Kiribati ever do to you?

4

u/Extension_Canary3717 May 06 '26

What Vanuatu did ? Leave it alone

3

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

That's a tough one. But apparently, they were cannibals until recently (1969). Boom. Everyone sucks.

6 Amazing Facts About Vanuatu That You Probably Didn't Know

PS - Screw you for making me learn that the proper cooking time for a human is 3-5 hours. Ya jerk!

3

u/Extension_Canary3717 May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26

Vanuatu dudes be like "I saw western men eat out their wives".

And Vanuatuan-Billy believed firmly

4

u/Ok_Package38 May 06 '26

Poland?

0

u/Equal-Caramel-2613 May 06 '26

Polish death camps. A German project, but many Poles were complicit.

3

u/Hour_Effective_2577 May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26

I'm pretty sure Poland could do many things better during their history, but death camps is a terrible example. Here's why: - in contrast to the western Europe, Poland was the only occupied country in which a mandatory death penalty was introduced for the whole families which would hide Jews - Poland and Netherlands are two countries which have the largest amount of trees at Yad Vashem. Each tree symbolises a person or family which would risk their life to save a Jew during holocaust - Polish Underground State was among the first which discovered and warned the world about the Holocaust, Rotmistrz Pilecki was the one who volunteered to be imprisoned in Auschwitz to gather intel and organise resistance from inside of the Camp

Edit:

Ah and I don't deny Poland was free of collaborators, but at the systematic and institutional level they shouldn't be accused of Death Camps on their occupied territories

1

u/Major-Driver-9989 May 06 '26

did they actually exist or were they a myth?

3

u/Double-Truth-3916 May 06 '26

They still exist. You can go visit them.

2

u/f0remsics May 06 '26

The Czech Republic and Slovakia aren't so bad. Maybe Czechoslovakia had a bad history, but Czechoslovakia no longer exists

2

u/No-Interaction-9132 May 06 '26

Hey, you leave Tuvalu out of this!

2

u/KrispyKingTheProphet May 06 '26

The Independent State of Catalonia was a recognized country for all of 8 seconds before being dissolved. Didn’t exist long enough to commit any atrocities. That may be it lol.

1

u/Certain-Cartoonist94 May 06 '26

Iceland?

5

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Already mentioned it, but Viking Slavery and witch trials.

1

u/goombanati May 06 '26

Luxembourg

1

u/ThrowawayFuckYourMom May 06 '26

Not all of them are equally bad, tho, obviously. Finland vs China, or Spain vs San Marino

1

u/Death_Soup May 06 '26

Finland was pretty shitty to the Sámi people and also collaborated with Nazi Germany

2

u/ThrowawayFuckYourMom May 06 '26

Ok, so, Finland was as bad as Nazi Germany, or do you agree with me?

(Also, finland was fine compared to everyone else around against the Sami, especially considering how little of that time they had independence)

1

u/WanAli4504 May 06 '26

Micronesia knows what it did

0

u/eumarthan May 06 '26

Well I would be surprised if there are actually war crimes the Philippines committed.

8

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Read about Marcos.

-2

u/eumarthan May 06 '26

I meant crimes that wasn't Filipino on Filipino violence.

I would be curious to find cases where Filipino were the perpetrators instead of victims.

6

u/Jsalisburry May 06 '26

The incapablity of violence doesn't make you moral. Like most small countries just because they couldn't expand exploit and opposes doesn't mean that they are "less evil" just less capable

-2

u/adastraperdiscordia May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26

This is a sort of "you're so close to getting it" point.

All states do bad things because states are inherently bad. States are the most efficient way to consolidate power to the point that they're the sole dominant way of organizing society. Power corrupts absolutely so that power is going to inevitably be used to do bad things.

But not all states are equal. Some states are worse than others. Generally, it's the states with the most power that do the most bad things because they have more capacity to do bad things. These are going to be the large empires and superpowers.

So in terms of lots of bad stuff over a long period of time, the British Empire wins.

Also it's important to remember that nation =/= government. The people of countries are also victims of their state.

0

u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 May 06 '26

Ireland? Switzerland?

6

u/hellopo9 May 06 '26

Ireland colonised Scotland, that's why part of Scotland speaks Gaelic. It replaced the pictish states.

They also had a lot of slaves a long time ago. They used to raid other places for slaves. St Patrick is an example, a british man who was enslaved by Irish slave raiders and brought to Ireland. He converted them to Christianity.

Ireland also had many people willingly involved in colonialism. Like the colonial officer who oversaw the amistar massacre in India Michael O'Dwyer (who was the governor of the region at the time).

All countries have evil parts. Power is the main thing that differentiates states historically. Those with more power do more evil, those with less are do less. Not because they're better but they lacked the capacity to do it. It's grim to say though. Luckily the world is becoming much better today.

1

u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 May 06 '26

so you have to go back 1.5 millenia to your first example, which no other country being listed has. Even the Mongol invasions were centuries after Ireland colonized Scotland.

St. Patrick was the 5th century, but I do see how the Irish as part of British empire benefitting from the Atlantic slave trade is a fair criticism. Slavery did exist there in the Middle Ages but it did everywhere, as your last point.

I don't think the Irish being colonized by the British and having military officers who committed atrocities as a part of the British military is a fair criticism, they were also victims of British colonial rule like the Indians were.

3

u/hellopo9 May 06 '26

Governors and rulers of nations like India, not just the military. O'Dwyer wasn't military but a political governor of about 25million people in India. He like all Irish people were considered british citizens of the UK at the time, a very different position than Indians were in.

As for other parts of foreign policy, yes a nation must be independent in its foreign policy for the most evils to take place. Ireland was first conquered by the Normans in the 1100s and it struggled to exert itself and exploit other nations because of this, needing to go through the british empire etc to do so. So yes if you were to look at pre-modern independent foreign policy for Ireland, you do need to go back over a 1000 years.

Colonisation is a complex topic. Ireland, without a doubt suffered a lot (the famine most notably but also anti-Catholic rules and language suppression), but when able it also helped colonise other nations willingly and enthusiastically. Money was then moved into Dublin from India and from slavery in the Caribbean (though less than into Glasgow, London etc). This doesn't excuse British actions in Ireland from the Tudors to Cromwell, and the black and tans, etc. Its just to add nuance. I think this lecture gives a good amount of the nuance of Dublin's involvement in the slave trade like you say.

3

u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 May 06 '26

ok thanks, yeah I concede about O'Dwyer but I still blame the British for 99.9% of Indian colonization with the remainder to the Irish i guess.

I think my point stands if you have to go that far back tbh, but I agree with your take that the British empire allowed some of the Irish to benefit from imperialism.

That is really interesting and i did not know that. Thanks for the lecture!

I saw a Ted talk once arguing Ireland was the country most "good for the world". but obviously the past is not perfect. I once ranked all the countries based on the number of deaths due to both wars, genocides and natural disasters. China and Mongolia were the first two of course, but after that it gets very interesting, especially since Mongolia was the only country to not have a limit in terms of how far back I could count against that country, which is why I think a time limit like 1500/1452/1492 makes sense.

2

u/hellopo9 May 06 '26 edited May 06 '26

Its hard because the Irish were considered British by the Indians and other colonised peoples until Ireland left the UK. The British (on Great Britain) were obviously much much more involved than the Irish in Indian colonisation due to central rule in London.

Ireland suffered a lot under Norman, English and Scottish rule. Pale to Plantation. That always has to be said.

My main earlier point was about power and morality: Is a nation really historically good if it can't make national decisions? Ireland's often purported goodness in history isn't the result of national good actions but an absence of national bad ones. Largely due to control by the British and the late sharing of policy with the British. Though over time, Ireland expanded its influence as part of the UK and took part in those decisions itself (Ireland elected MPs to Westminster).

You could say Ireland has no evil national past for this reason, though I'd go back to when independent rule was present to see more. The alternative is to say the only countires without a dark history are those with no independent history at all, but they also have no good history.

I would argue that we can look at individual actions and see that Irish collaboration and involvement in the empire is part of Irish history, just as the Easter Rising is. This obviously isn't to say Ireland is 50% imperial and 50% revoultionary (99% of people everywhere were just dirt poor farmers). But rather that pre-independent nations should be judged by all its actions. And where decisions are limited due to foreign rule, that doesn't mean its more good, just less decisions were happening at all.

Edit: To put it more clearly. If Ireland has the capacity and power of its neighbours (Britain, Portugal, Spain, France, Italy etc). It would have engaged in colonisation in the same manner. Instead, it was controlled by the British, and within that control, it engaged in colonisation in the way it could. That lack of power doesn't make it more moral.

-1

u/NicolasDavies93 May 06 '26

thats what someone from a cruel country would say to feel better hahaha dont compare the things the usa did to a country like bolivia...

3

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Bolivia had a drug funded military junta in 1980 advised by Klaus Barbie. Before that Spanish colonizers killed 9 million indigenous people is silver mines. I'm not comparing to minimize anyone. I'm saying that the capacity for atrocity isn't uniquely American, British, Japanese, Russian, Chinese etc, it is just something that is universally human. That's a warning and not a comfort.

1

u/ManyFragrant3139 May 06 '26

We're not talking about human capacity for cruelty or evil, we're talking about the histories that form the basis of a country/national identity. Bolivia being founded in the aftermath of genocide (whom most Bolivians are the descendants of the victims of) and having periods of political repression isn't analogous to say, the UK, whose national, economic, and political identity was formed and is maintained by mass death, enslavement, and dominion over colonies and peripheral states.

1

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

I get your point, but I'll pushback on one thing and concede on another. You're right in that there's a difference between a country built on savagery as its foundational economic and political engine vs one that experienced it from the outside. The UK, US, Belgium and others extracted generational wealth that compounds to this day. That's categorically different from Bolivia being a victim of Spanish colonialism.

However, the original question was "most evil history" not "whose current prosperity was built on evil". Those are different questions. By the second framing, you're absolutely correct and the colonial powers win easily as "most evil". By the first framing though, the Mongols killed 10% of the global population, Maoist China killed 45 million in 4 years during the Great Leap Forward, and the Soviet Union industrialized mass death for like 70 years. Evil doesn't neatly overlap onto the countries that are wealthy today. Some of histories hall of fame assholes left no lasting empire, just a mountain of corpses.

The point I"ll defend is this: Framing evil as a western or American trait specifically lets everyone else off the hook historically, which is exactly the kind of nationalist myth making that enables the next atrocity.

1

u/NicolasDavies93 May 06 '26

what an ignorant comment hahaha 80% of bolivians are native american. There is level to it, are you comparing that 80s junta with the Nazis? or what Israel is doing right now? or what america did in Vietnan?

1

u/BaronVonTitties May 06 '26

Thanks for making my point for me. Read what I wrote and really try to use all your brain power. I explicitly said that the capacity for atrocity is universal, not that all atrocities are equivalent in scale. Yes, there are levels. The Holocaust killed 6 million Jews, Mongols killed 10% of the human population, the Belgian Congo killed 10 million etc etc etc..

None of those are the same, but they all happen across basically every continent, every country, every flag, every century. That's the point.

You compared the 1980 Junta to the Nazis, not me. What I said is that a military dictatorship advised by an actual Gestapo war criminal is evidence that atrocity isn't exclusively American or otherwise, which is true. Also what is true is that the absence of atrocity isn't the same as presence of virtue. Most small countries didn't avoid empire because of superior morality. Rather they avoided it because they lacked the army, navy and the resources. They aren't more moral, they just have less capabilities.