Were people in the Dark/Middle Ages dumber than other ages?

Mundane & Pointless Stuff I Must Share: The Off Topic Forum

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Hicks
Duke
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:36 pm
Location: On the road

Post by Hicks »

Crissa wrote:PS, followers of John didn't pay taxes and didn't follow the local laws.

Prosecution isn't persecution.
Matthew 22:18-22 wrote: 18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, 20and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"

21"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

22When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.


Oh, yeah. I compleatly agree with you that they refused to sacrifice to and worship the emporer and the roman pantheon, but where do you get that the followers of John didn't pay taxes?

You could (and did) say that prosecution isn't persecution, but I bet Rosa Parks would dissagree with you.
Last edited by Hicks on Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"Besides, my strong, cult like faith in the colon of the cards allows me to pull whatever I need out of my posterior!"
-Kid Radd
shadzar wrote:those training harder get more, and training less, don't get the more.
Lokathor wrote:Anything worth sniffing can't be sniffed
Stuff I've Made
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

I said followers of John.

You're an idiot if you don't know the differences between John and Jesus.

Fuck you again.

-Crissa
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9691
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

Still waiting on that more palatable contemporaneous alternative.
User avatar
tzor
Prince
Posts: 4266
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by tzor »

Hicks wrote:You know what also increases life expectancy? Not drinking from lead pipes. As I previously noted, Classical Rome and Midieval Britain have the same average upper life expectancy
The lead pipe theory is a very weak and flawed one. The fact that water doesn't dissolve enough lead to be that fatal is one of the major problems. Another fact was from historical records lead poisoning was probably more common among the nobility. (It’s hard to do real research here as the Roman’s cremated their dead.) One popular theory is that it wasn’t the lead in the pipes but the lead in the glaze and seals on a wine amphora; used exclusively by the wealthy (while the common Roman bought local wine from skins).
User avatar
Hicks
Duke
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:36 pm
Location: On the road

Post by Hicks »

...I concede the point of "lead pipes". Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Volume 86 gived an average life expectancy of 21.11 years for Classical Rome. Wikipedia puts Midieval Brittian and Classical Rome both between 20 and 30 years.
Image
"Besides, my strong, cult like faith in the colon of the cards allows me to pull whatever I need out of my posterior!"
-Kid Radd
shadzar wrote:those training harder get more, and training less, don't get the more.
Lokathor wrote:Anything worth sniffing can't be sniffed
Stuff I've Made
User avatar
Hicks
Duke
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:36 pm
Location: On the road

Post by Hicks »

angelfromanotherpin wrote:Still waiting on that more palatable contemporaneous alternative.
Empires that I would perefer to be in:
  • From 539 BC to 141 BC (around when rome was founded), The Persian Empire and later Achaemenid Empire, untill Rome captures it.

    From 141 BC through 184 AD, the Han Empire of China, untill civil war breaks out and you have the Three Kingdoms.

    Between 184 and 313 AD, the Kushan Empire of upper India. Untill Consantine the Great assumes his throne in Constantanople.

    From 330 onwards, the Byzantine Empire. Which is actually the half of the Roman Empire that didn't cave to barbarian incursions and which got kicked off with a decent Emperor who wasn't an asshat.
There are no western empires past 141 BC. There is only Zuul Rome, as it ate its final rival, the Achaemenid Empire. There are no options in all of europe or the middle east other than Rome past that period.
Image
"Besides, my strong, cult like faith in the colon of the cards allows me to pull whatever I need out of my posterior!"
-Kid Radd
shadzar wrote:those training harder get more, and training less, don't get the more.
Lokathor wrote:Anything worth sniffing can't be sniffed
Stuff I've Made
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9691
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

Hicks wrote:From 539 BC to 141 BC (around when rome was founded), The Persian Empire and later Achaemenid Empire, untill Rome captures it.
FYI, the Achaemenid empire was 'captured' in 330 BCE by Alexander of Macedon. So immediately I have difficulty taking your claims of historical literacy seriously.

It's successor state, the Seleucid Empire, wasn't so much captured by Rome as they gave Rome a lot of territory after losing a war. The rest of their territory fell apart during a century-long string of civil wars, and being conquered by Armenia. When Rome took control of the area, it was by conquering Armenia.

The general upshot of which is that I'm sure any number of places that you can imagine are nicer places to live than history.
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

tzor wrote:
Hicks wrote:You know what also increases life expectancy? Not drinking from lead pipes. As I previously noted, Classical Rome and Midieval Britain have the same average upper life expectancy
The lead pipe theory is a very weak and flawed one. The fact that water doesn't dissolve enough lead to be that fatal is one of the major problems. Another fact was from historical records lead poisoning was probably more common among the nobility. (It’s hard to do real research here as the Roman’s cremated their dead.) One popular theory is that it wasn’t the lead in the pipes but the lead in the glaze and seals on a wine amphora; used exclusively by the wealthy (while the common Roman bought local wine from skins).
Did the romans use Lead Acetate as a sweetener for wine during the bad years, or was that later? I heard that at one point, it was done because lead acetate tastes sweet. You could see a correlation in historical records between bad years for wine and actue lead poisoning deaths.
Last edited by Count Arioch the 28th on Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Starmaker
Duke
Posts: 2402
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Redmonton
Contact:

Post by Starmaker »

Minorities were treated better. Positions of power in the government, industry, the party, scholarships. On a small scale, it was in a sense unfair and inefficient, but Stalin was looking at the big picture. No colonies: ethnic minorities should be led by ethnic minority leaders, administrators and functionaries. The only ethnic minority that did not get recognized enough were the Jews.

The Russian Empire did not do that. During WWI, Crimean Tatars tried to sell out to Turkey, Germany, Britain, France and Poland, received amnesties and positions of power, openly talked about abusing their preferential treatment by the Soviets and encouraged others to and used state funds to support un-amnestied bandits in hiding. The results? In 1928, two high-ups were sentenced to death and shot after an unsuccessful appeal, nine to imprisonment, one to probation and three were acquitted. 12 people - zOMG purge.

During World War II, more than 90% of the conscripted Tatars deserted the Red Army after the Nazis entered Crimea and proceeded to collaborate with the Nazis, attack the retreating RA forces, rob RA supply trains and guerrilla supply caches. Of course, those who weren't conscripted also volunteered. The 1942 German report gives us the figure 20000 Tatar volunteers out of 200,000 Crimean Tatar population (10,000 were drafted into the RA) and concludes that the recruiting campaign has ended successfully. For comparison: 700,000 Slavs (Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians) served the Nazis, i.e. less than 3% of Slavs who served in the army and less than a percent of the population.
Erich von Manstein, [i wrote:Lost Victories[/i]] A Tatar delegation arrived today, with gifts of fruit and beautiful handmade fabrics for "Adolf-Effendi, he who has brought freedom to Tatars."
The "Muslim committees" that were formed answered directly to the SS. They dressed in WWI German uniform, prayed for Hitler at communal religious services and tortured people who might point out Jews. They conducted mass shootings and burnings until their Nazi commanders told them to fucking stop murdering children. A total purge of all non-Tatars in Crimea was in their 1943 program, sent to Hitler for approval (they also wanted independence so Hitler said fuck you).

Crimean Bulgars, Greeks and Armenians couldn't match that because of their significantly smaller numbers, not that they didn't try.

Thus, it was decided that the collaborator ethnicities should be forcibly moved to less strategically importanty locations and allowed to live as usual, a significant improvement over the death penalty most of them (excluding children) should have got. Note that those who actually fought for the Soviets, either in the RA or as guerrillas, were allowed to stay (with their families of course). It wasn't "slave labor" - everyone had to work in the Soviet Union.

Now, some argue that a quarter of the deported died due to inhuman conditions and treatment. Actually, a total of 191 people died on the way, which makes the "annual" death rate 2.3% (compare to the average 2.03% in 1926 and 1.74% in 1939). So yeah, the conditions were inconvenient but not hellish. The idiots say the NKVD officers just dropped the bodies from trains - need I point out the obvious bullshit? It seems I need, yeah. The officers were held directly accountable for every person, so if someone had disappeared, the more likely reason was that the person had escaped, perhaps by bribing the guards.

From 1944 to 1948, 20% of those deported died. As indicated above, the peace-time mortality accounted for 7% (1.75% x 4). As for the other 13%, note that I specifically said peace-time mortality. 25% of those who served in the Red Army (the able-bodied, no children or elderly people among them) during the war were killed.

Workday's over, will update later.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

I'll just leave these here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Holodomor

http://www.etext.org/Politics/Staljin/S ... R/AHR.html
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-Scale_Repression.pdf
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-Repres ... istics.pdf

Ugh. Honestly? We're extolling the virtues of Stalin? At least it's nice to see that there's nothing unique about American crazies and that Russia has their stock as well.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Starmaker, if you want me to respond to you then you're going to have to make a separate thread altogether.

I want your stupid Stalin apologetics out in the open where everyone can see them; I'm not interested in having this discussion buried in this thread. I want this preserved for posterity.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

Look, Stalin did lots of things.

One of them was to make more people live longer, despite supposedly killing off millions of people in countries which only had millions of people. Apparently he's at fault for not only bad political choices, but bad weather as well.

I don't really care one way or another, but geez, making people work instead of taking money from the poor? How horrible! 9-9

-Crissa
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

I'm really quite surprised that you would say something that blithely ignorant, Crissa.

You don't get a pass for saving five peoples' lives in the process you shot a baby in the head on the way to the burning building. You also don't get a pass if you go 'sure, I shot a baby in the head but some other rescuer might have saved only THREE people and shot TWO babies in the head!'.

Stalin was dealt several bad hands, but he significantly aggravated the problems due to his paranoia and cowardice.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

'blithely ignorant'?

What President in our last century didn't preside over our troops killing babies?

-Crissa
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14491
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Hicks wrote:What evidence? All you have shown me and those watching at home is that you can say "Is not" three times. I sleep on a library of over a thousand books of classical/midieval/church history, and have gone out of my way to use references that are easily accessable and readable through the internet.
And I gave you a motherfucking link to a google search because this shit is not exactly hiding.

I'm sorry you are too fucking stupid to click on a link, then click on a second link, so I'll just give you some fucking links to things that come up on the first page of a google search:

1
2
3
4

What the fuck do you want? A bunch of Scholars think it's fake. A Bunch of other Scholars think it's real. It's a highly questionable passage, and I suggested you should use something else for your evidence of nailing.

I don't have access to online scholarly journals, or if I do, I don't know or care that I do. And I can't hand you a freaking book over the internet. So I gave you hundreds of thousands of threads or arguments about whether or not it is real. Obviously there is some fucking question.
Hicks wrote:I call you a God-hating heathen, because you hate the notion of a single supreme, triune creator and master of all creation. This is an observation.
I'm going to juxtapose this with:
Hicks wrote:I don't care if you worship Jehovah, Vishnu, Allah, the Horned God, Odin, Osirus, Zeus, your Ancestors, the Sun, the Moon, Gaia, Yourself, or that chair in AA meetings.
Because it's hilarious that you think Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, and worshipers of four other gods are 'God-Hating heathens' because they 'hate' the idea of your specific god.

It's even funnier because this is apparently your defense against the assertion that you are incapable of thinking from the point of view of people with different beliefs about reality.

So let's try this again. What in all the flying fucking universe could possibly have counted as evidence for the assertion that I hate the idea of a god (or even of the specific god you think is real)?

Don't believe, I'm sure you can find plenty of evidence for that. Surprisingly, I also don't believe in Unicorns, but anyone who has seen my screen saver knows that I think unicorns are fucking hilarious.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Crissa wrote:'blithely ignorant'?

What President in our last century didn't preside over our troops killing babies?

-Crissa
Any kind of moral calculus needs to be weighed by what the person could have done and what they actually did.

Stalin's regime did make Russia objectively better. But he could've done a much better job than he actually did. Even accounting for that, the unnecessary evils that he engaged in wrecks what accomplishments he does have.

So yes, even though the USA ended up in a worse shape from point A to point B after Hoover got through with it than when George W. Bush got through with it, Hoover's presidency is less 'wrong' because with the limits of his understanding and ability of people who could've had the position at the time not a whole lot of people would have done better. Similarly, we had a lot of alternatives to both Bush and what he could've done, so I judge his presidency more harshly.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9691
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Any kind of moral calculus needs to be weighed by what the person could have done and what they actually did.
I don't think there is any way to know what a person could have done, or what the consequences of that alternate road would be. If you can think of one, let me know.
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

Lago PARANOIA wrote: You don't get a pass for saving five peoples' lives in the process you shot a baby in the head on the way to the burning building. You also don't get a pass if you go 'sure, I shot a baby in the head but some other rescuer might have saved only THREE people and shot TWO babies in the head!'.
I would give them a pass for both options.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Hicks wrote:Roy, I honestly have no idead what you are talking about. Did you post this while drunk, or are you seriously a fire and brimstone satanist (like "black mass", not the LaVey variety)?
Contrast. Even the worst mortals have to offer doesn't compare to what religions call good. Also, this thread needed help dying, and Hitler is the go to guy for that. Despite all that I wasn't posting to troll, I fully meant all of that.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
User avatar
Absentminded_Wizard
Duke
Posts: 1122
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Post by Absentminded_Wizard »

It seems like the defense of Stalin is kind of selective. Under these criteria, does Mussolini get a pass because he made the trains run on time? Or Hitler, because he brought Germany out of the Great Depression?
Doom314's satirical 4e power wrote:Complete AnnihilationWar-metawarrior 1

An awesome bolt of multicolored light fires from your eyes and strikes your foe, disintegrating him into a fine dust in a nonmagical way.

At-will: Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee Weapon ("sword", range 10/20)
Target: One Creature
Attack: Con vs AC
Hit: [W] + Con, and the target is slowed.
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

Mussolini isn't any worse than any other dictator. Nor was he particularly competent.

The defense of Stalin is more that most of the crimes they hang him for in public aren't real, and there are far worse things to be mad at him for.

But farming efficiency isn't one of them; he and Lenin brought an area that was basically at political and technological level more than a hundred years behind, and filled with racial and secular strife up to the same level as western Europe, and toward the stars.

In other worse, for every person they say he killed, it's more likely they wouldn't have lived at all had the Soviets not taken power. Yeah, he killed alot of people. But so did many western leaders at the time. The number of people killed under just W Bush's watch is huge. Not Stalin huge, but certainly towering like, and maybe over those killed under Khrushchev and those who followed.

So yeah, the twisting of turning him into some sort of 'feed the ovens' monster just because he was of a different economic (not political, mind, it's that he didn't embrace Capitalism that he is demonized) system.

-Crissa
Last edited by Crissa on Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

angelfromanotherpin wrote: I don't think there is any way to know what a person could have done, or what the consequences of that alternate road would be. If you can think of one, let me know.
You're really overthinking this. First, you think of all of the good the person has done. Then you think of all of the evil that they did. Then you determine how much of the evil was necessary and/or unavoidable (due to ignorance or political reality or whatever) and judge them from there.

For example, while it's totally James Madison's fault for getting the United States into a war that caused the motherfucking capital to get burned to the ground, I hold it less against him than I do for Lyndon B. Johnson getting us embroiled into Vietnam and even less than I do George W. Bush for getting us into the Iraq War.

Or if that's a little too abstract, let me put it this way. I think both the war and occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq were in their own ways equally reprehensible, wasteful, and all-around wrong. However, I hold the Afghanistan thing against Bush less than the Iraq thing--if Bush had a change of heart and decided to take a much less 'America, Fuck Yeah!' approach the war probably would've happened anyway in some form because America was just That Upset. The Iraq war is totally evil and wrong. It was completely unnecessary and entirely avoidable.

Crissa wrote: In other worse, for every person they say he killed, it's more likely they wouldn't have lived at all had the Soviets not taken power. Yeah, he killed alot of people. But so did many western leaders at the time. The number of people killed under just W Bush's watch is huge. Not Stalin huge, but certainly towering like, and maybe over those killed under Khrushchev and those who followed.
Again, I don't hold the Russian Revolution nor the White vs. Red conflict against him. I also don't really hold his murdering and scheming his way to a position of power against him, either, since it's likely he just ended up being the crook that won rather than a serial killer out of nowhere. I hold his failure to spread a Communist revolution, corrupting the core essence of Communism such that it became a totalitarian dictatorship rather than a worker-owned state, the excesses of the Great Purge, his cowardice in responding to operation Barbarossa, and of course the Holodomor against him.

Stalin is evil because his regime did bring a lot of good things to Russia but a lot of his bullshit was unnecessary. Russia could've been even more prosperous and happy if they were led by someone less insane. If you have Khrushchev looking reasonable next to you you know you done fucked up.

Again, if you save five people from a burning building but had to shoot a baby in order to save their lives, that makes you a tragic hero. If you save five people from a burning building but on the way home shoot a baby in the head, that makes you a fucking douchebag. If you save only three people from a burning building when you could have easily saved five, that also makes you a fucking douchebag.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Zherog
Knight-Baron
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Zherog »

Absentminded_Wizard wrote:Under these criteria, does Mussolini get a pass because he made the trains run on time?
He did what now?
You can't fix stupid.

"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives." ~ Jackie Robinson
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

Zherog wrote:
Absentminded_Wizard wrote:Under these criteria, does Mussolini get a pass because he made the trains run on time?
He did what now?
Good to know.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

Neeeek
Knight-Baron
Posts: 900
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:45 am

Post by Neeeek »

Lago PARANOIA wrote: Stalin is evil because his regime did bring a lot of good things to Russia but a lot of his bullshit was unnecessary. Russia could've been even more prosperous and happy if they were led by someone less insane. If you have Khrushchev looking reasonable next to you you know you done fucked up.
I think you miss the entire point of the Stalin argument.

See, the starting point is Stalin is incredibly evil and killed a lot of people for absolutely no reason.

Despite this, his country went from a horse-and-buggy tech level to orbiting the Earth in about a generation, and their average lifespan, even when you count the people who died for no reason because Stalin was a monstrous dictator, doubled.

Therefore, the system his government ran under might not suck as bad as people like to claim. Especially once you stop killing people for no reason under it.
Last edited by Neeeek on Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply