10-27-2015, 07:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-27-2015, 08:50 PM by FireIceTalon.)
The only good thing Hitler accomplished during his tenure was putting a bullet in his own head - was the best thing he ever did. The only good thing Stalin did was winning the war to ensure this happened, though it also had the unfortunate and terrible consequence of the Red Army committing various atrocities against German citizens, including the brutalizing and raping of German women.
As for Stalin still being a hero to Russians, what evidence do you have to support this notion? Saying that the Germans are more ashamed of the Nazi regime than the Russians are of Stalin's rule is not enough and tells us very little. If anything, it is more likely Lenin who still resonates, to some extent, with some Russian citizens. But that is neither here or there. A more fundamental question is, who the hell cares? Either way, it is all just 'Great Man' theory rhetoric which is of little use; whether for advocating change or for a tool to explain history. The fact history vindicates one tyrant over another is not of importance, nor should it be.
Indeed, the world will not change on its own; all change (past, present and future) has and will require human agency. But specifically now, only the world proletariat - not an individual - is capable of achieving genuine, revolutionary change and emancipating all of humanity from barbaric social relations that now constitute our world. One individual trying to change the world to THEIR will never work (history has shown this), because no individual is or can be that powerful, ever. The old cliche (but true) still applies - "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past". Napoleon and Hitler learned this the hard way. All persons, regardless of how much power they hold, are constrained by the larger social and historical forces that drive history forward; the 'internal logic' of the present order of things so to say.
If history does have a sick sense of humor, it is because it almost always is written from the perspective of those who rule society (namely those who own private capital or manage its affairs) and sold to the rest society as truth or fact. Thankfully, some of us (though not nearly enough), have the wits not to buy it. Our public education system, which favors standardized testing over critical thinking, and teaches respect for authority over self-determination, is both a tool to perpetuate this way of thinking about history as well as a reflection of it. All so that the imperialist, capitalist war machine can churn out more wage slaves, as it must so the system can recycle its very own existence; again it is part of the systems 'internal logic'. But I digress.
As for Stalin still being a hero to Russians, what evidence do you have to support this notion? Saying that the Germans are more ashamed of the Nazi regime than the Russians are of Stalin's rule is not enough and tells us very little. If anything, it is more likely Lenin who still resonates, to some extent, with some Russian citizens. But that is neither here or there. A more fundamental question is, who the hell cares? Either way, it is all just 'Great Man' theory rhetoric which is of little use; whether for advocating change or for a tool to explain history. The fact history vindicates one tyrant over another is not of importance, nor should it be.
Indeed, the world will not change on its own; all change (past, present and future) has and will require human agency. But specifically now, only the world proletariat - not an individual - is capable of achieving genuine, revolutionary change and emancipating all of humanity from barbaric social relations that now constitute our world. One individual trying to change the world to THEIR will never work (history has shown this), because no individual is or can be that powerful, ever. The old cliche (but true) still applies - "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past". Napoleon and Hitler learned this the hard way. All persons, regardless of how much power they hold, are constrained by the larger social and historical forces that drive history forward; the 'internal logic' of the present order of things so to say.
If history does have a sick sense of humor, it is because it almost always is written from the perspective of those who rule society (namely those who own private capital or manage its affairs) and sold to the rest society as truth or fact. Thankfully, some of us (though not nearly enough), have the wits not to buy it. Our public education system, which favors standardized testing over critical thinking, and teaches respect for authority over self-determination, is both a tool to perpetuate this way of thinking about history as well as a reflection of it. All so that the imperialist, capitalist war machine can churn out more wage slaves, as it must so the system can recycle its very own existence; again it is part of the systems 'internal logic'. But I digress.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)