History Repeating

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Actually Hitler was being an opportunistic power hungry person.

And Putin isn't?

Putin isn't handing a resignation in and cornering a committee to put him as the head so they won't be disbanded. He's just considering making a new system of government in which he plays a vast role.

You say tomayto, I say tomahto. Its the same damn thing, IMO.

And why wouldn't he? After all it is his idea.

National socialism was Hitler's idea too, that didn't make his power grab the right thing to do.

Who would think up a new government system in which they play no role at all?

He has played his role. The problem is that he doesn't want to retire from power when he said he would. There are plenty of leaders who formed new governments and then let go once their time had passed. Most people wanted George Washington to run for a third term, and he refused. Its called intergrity.

You need to keep a part, and have it be major to show you have confidence in your own idea. If you say "Well, I have this new plan. But you guys go ahead and run it" people will be weary from the start because the mind behind it doesn't appear to back it with the vision he may have had.

No, if he confidence in "his idea", he would let go of power because he'd actually believe that his idea would work without his influence. Thats how a democracy/republic works. And what makes this "his idea"? If removing democratic power form the people was his idea, then he is succeeding, but democracy was in Russia LONG before Putin came to power.

But at this point everything is heresy. Nobody knows what his intentions actually are. Maybe he just wants a truly United Russia? Comparing him to Hitler seems unfair, even considering who he is.

I even said its to be seen what could happen from this, but if history is any indicator, a leader removing the rights of his people has never really led up to a good thing. I even emphasized that Putin is not Hitler, but the run up and abuse of the democratic system to maintain power is reminiscent of those historical events.

History is bound to repeat itself.

Particularly when we ignore it or equivocate.

To think every single event that will ever happen is new is just plain silly. Comparing the present day to pre-world war times is odd, because the world isn't nearly the same place it was 60, or 90 years ago.

Thats a matter of opinion. I think they are starkly similar right now.

If Putin starts genocide, segregation, and breaks all ties with the modern world, I'll buy you a coke.

Once again, I never said that Putin was Hitler. In fact I went out of my way to emphasize it. My comparison was the slow switch from democracy to fascism that is obviously taking place in that country. It is VERY pre-WW2 Germany. The people and events are different, but the mode of operation is very similar.

Like I said, we have to wait and see. But these continuous acts on his part to maintain power and remove it from his people are not a good sign.

[Typhoid]

I stand by what I said.
It's heresy at this point - even what I'm saying, to an extent.
You call it National Socialism, others may call it a good idea to bring Russia together after years of breaking apart and division.

Even - say if Russia becomes a "super bad" communism, or socialist country, that doesn't mean it will be a bad thing. Communism is only bad by Western standards, and culture. War does not always directly corrolate with socialism. Maybe he can pull it off.

[Seth]

cuba would've made it if it wasn't for all the sanctions.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Seth

cuba would've made it if it wasn't for all the sanctions.

Communism in its true form wouldn't be hurt by sanctions, as by definition the the communist state is self-sufficient (according to Marx and Lenin). So if Cuba didn't make it because of sanctions, then it wasn't and isn't a communist nation.

Castro's Cuba is a totalitarian dictatorship; fascism with better public relations. That is what all "communist" nations are in practice because for the concept to work people must willingly devalue themselves to the point of being cogs in a massive machine, so in short order the concept fails because for people to care about the state (or anything else) they must care about themselves first before they can care about anything else. This is basic Psychology 101.

So the people stop buying in to the concept, and for the state to exist the government must enforce the ideal through fear instead of the original idea of nationalistic fundamentalism. And so the state degrades from the "fatherland" to the "fearland", where the people risk death to flee the state that will not recognize them as individuals and constantly beats all individuality out of them.

This is what happens when communism is attempted. Marx's great idea, while pure in intention, has lead to the uneeded deaths of tens of millions in Soviet gulags and at the bad end of machine gun towers. Communism hasn't worked yet, not because it hasn't been attempted true to Marxist ideals, but because the concept is fatally flawed from the outset.

If you want to see an excellent satire of Cuba's fall to "communism", watch Woody Allen's movie "Bananas". He nails it on the head.