To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Stalin did like his cult of personality though
he enjoyed being feared and adored and he certainly was happy to be presented as a great hero. Because of the propaganda benefits which it entailed or because of personal ego, or both, is up for questioning.
It was more that in the late 60's (I believe) there were some attempts to rehabilitate Stalin and Medvedev didn't like that one bit, unsurprisingly. He supported De-Stalinisation heavily.
0
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Which can be attributed to Khruschev not wanting to get shot and dumped in a ditch, I think.
...he didn't want to be shot and dumped in a ditch, so he routinely did the opposite of what Joseph Stalin wanted?
that's uh
hm
He didn't want to be shot and dumped in a ditch so he kept trying to suck stalin's dick is, I think, the point Pharezon was making
Kwoaru on
0
PharezonStruggle is an illusion.Victory is in the Qun.Registered Userregular
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Which can be attributed to Khruschev not wanting to get shot and dumped in a ditch, I think.
...he didn't want to be shot and dumped in a ditch, so he routinely did the opposite of what Joseph Stalin wanted?
that's uh
hm
The initial lionization, I mean.
+1
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Stalin did like his cult of personality though
he enjoyed being feared and adored and he certainly was happy to be presented as a great hero. Because of the propaganda benefits which it entailed or because of personal ego, or both, is up for questioning.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
Kana on
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Which can be attributed to Khruschev not wanting to get shot and dumped in a ditch, I think.
...he didn't want to be shot and dumped in a ditch, so he routinely did the opposite of what Joseph Stalin wanted?
that's uh
hm
imagine being in his position
nobody was safe from Stalin's wishes
and it was probably more safe to suck up too much than to appear unsupportive
Miss me? Find me on:
Twitch (I stream most days of the week) Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Stalin did like his cult of personality though
he enjoyed being feared and adored and he certainly was happy to be presented as a great hero. Because of the propaganda benefits which it entailed or because of personal ego, or both, is up for questioning.
Commissioned a lieutenant colonel in 1754, he fought the first skirmishes of what grew into the French and Indian War. The next year, as an aide to Gen. Edward Braddock, he escaped injury although four bullets ripped his coat and two horses were shot from under him.
Captain Patrick Ferguson, a 33-year-old Scotsman reputed to be the finest shot in the British army, commanded the British marksmen, who were equipped with fast-firing, breech-loading rifles of Ferguson's own design. He whispered to three of his best riflemen to creep forward and pick off the unsuspecting officers. But before the men were in place, he felt disgust at the idea of such an ambush, and ordered them not to fire. He shouted to the American officer, who was riding a bay horse. The American looked his way for a moment, and turned to ride on. Ferguson called again, this time leveling his rifle toward the officer. The American glanced back before slowly cantering away.
A day later, after he had been seriously wounded himself, Ferguson learned that the American officer he let ride off was most likely General George Washington. "I could have lodged half a dozen balls in or about him, before he was out of my reach," Ferguson recalled, "but it was not pleasant to fire at the back of an unoffending individual, who was acquitting himself very coolly of his duty—so I let him alone."
The guy who made this film was so paranoid of offending Stalin that during the entire premier he sweated and fidgeted and in the end, after this scene, he looked over at Stalin and Stalin was crying and he knew in that instant that Stalin had liked the movie and he knew he was not going to die.
I remember, I think it was his daughter, who spoke about that. On some history show I watched like a decade ago. I dunno.
Here I am, in the historical facts thread, getting heresay as fuck.
I stumbled across this picture yesterday and it's incredibly cool. It's interesting that the British and American soldiers are significantly taller than the continental European soldiers.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
Yeah, if that wasn't a staged event, I will eat my hat. Caesar knew exactly what he was doing. But I would not put Caesar and Stalin in the same category -- Caesar really did care about his people and his soldiers and Rome, and recognized that the Senate was no longer serving those people. He just wanted to enact reforms. The senate saw him as a threat to their power, and struck. Too bad they turned him into a martyr and got stuck with Augustus after that. Augustus was by FAR the greater evil, imho.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
Yeah, if that wasn't a staged event, I will eat my hat. Caesar knew exactly what he was doing. But I would not put Caesar and Stalin in the same category -- Caesar really did care about his people and his soldiers and Rome, and recognized that the Senate was no longer serving those people. He just wanted to enact reforms. The senate saw him as a threat to their power, and struck. Too bad they turned him into a martyr and got stuck with Augustus after that. Augustus was by FAR the greater evil, imho.
michael parenti gives a great talk on this
basically that Caesar was a problem because he wanted to enact reforms, not because he was a sonofabitch
Been reading a couple different books on WW1 lately.
The British were the first to put a tank into combat. They were dubbed "tanks" to confuse their true nature to the enemy and because without their guns they appeared to be something for hauling water.
They were prone to breakdowns and were easily destroyed by German artillery. But they made up for this with the shock factor of a giant metal beast bristling with machine guns lumbering toward and over enemy entrenchments.
There were a Male and Female version. The Male version had two cut down navy 6 pound guns and 3 machine guns. The Female version had 5 machine guns and no cannon. The reason for the Female version was because of the worry that the two artillery pieces would allow infantry to close and mob the tank.
Even more interesting, given the development of armored tactics and deployment by Germany in WW2, is that at first they did not feel the tank a weapon worth developing. Of course, this attitude changed.
but he was a damn good political operator, that's for sure
between him and Caesar, Augustus would have eaten him alive
I don't know. Caesar was pretty smooth, himself, and he had years of experience on Augustus. I think the Roman Empire would have turned out a lot differently if Caesar hadn't been murdered.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
Yeah, if that wasn't a staged event, I will eat my hat. Caesar knew exactly what he was doing. But I would not put Caesar and Stalin in the same category -- Caesar really did care about his people and his soldiers and Rome, and recognized that the Senate was no longer serving those people. He just wanted to enact reforms. The senate saw him as a threat to their power, and struck. Too bad they turned him into a martyr and got stuck with Augustus after that. Augustus was by FAR the greater evil, imho.
michael parenti gives a great talk on this
basically that Caesar was a problem because he wanted to enact reforms, not because he was a sonofabitch
The History of Rome podcast points out that his family was one of those families that're long on honors and short on money, and unlike most of the rest of his class he basically grew up in the ghetto and raised himself up through bribes that he paid on credit. Caesar as a young man was basically running a massive pyramid scheme to fund his political ambitions that was always one step away from total collapse. And then he in turn pissed off the senate for being a class traitor so badly that he didn't really have a lot of choice in eventually taking over, because otherwise the senate would get him. Not that he was opposed to the idea, but he was definitely true to a set of principles.
Whereas Octavian was sort of a vicious prick with mommy issues. Not that he didn't pass a ton of needed reforms and was generally amazing, but those reforms weren't why he was trying to get power in the first place.
Roman history is so much fun because Roman historians are a bunch of gossiping old hens. You get such a great feel for the personalities involved
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
but he was a damn good political operator, that's for sure
between him and Caesar, Augustus would have eaten him alive
I don't know. Caesar was pretty smooth, himself, and he had years of experience on Augustus. I think the Roman Empire would have turned out a lot differently if Caesar hadn't been murdered.
The sheer number of "what-ifs" in Roman history that would have a giant impact on our world if they went the other way is pretty staggering. Even small stuff like "what if this Emperor had treated this Bishop differently" basically set the course for the next 1000 years of history after the West fell. Or "if the Romans had effective tax collection in the 4th/5th Centuries, the Feudal system probably wouldn't have happened". Crazy stuff.
To be fair to Roy Medvedev, he did speak out against the attempts by the Soviet government to pretend Stalin was a great hero and he wasn't afraid to take some shit from the authorities when it came to defending democracy and so on
but he also supports the current regime and let's be honest, Vladimir Putin is a rather awful man. The murder of journalists hardly endears his regime to me, shall we say.
so did Stalin, oddly enough
there's lots of primary source evidence (meeting minutes and the like) that shows Stalin telling Khruschev to shut the hell up when he started lionizing Stalin
yes, Khruschev
I know
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
Yeah, if that wasn't a staged event, I will eat my hat. Caesar knew exactly what he was doing. But I would not put Caesar and Stalin in the same category -- Caesar really did care about his people and his soldiers and Rome, and recognized that the Senate was no longer serving those people. He just wanted to enact reforms. The senate saw him as a threat to their power, and struck. Too bad they turned him into a martyr and got stuck with Augustus after that. Augustus was by FAR the greater evil, imho.
michael parenti gives a great talk on this
basically that Caesar was a problem because he wanted to enact reforms, not because he was a sonofabitch
The History of Rome podcast points out that his family was one of those families that're long on honors and short on money, and unlike most of the rest of his class he basically grew up in the ghetto and raised himself up through bribes that he paid on credit. Caesar as a young man was basically running a massive pyramid scheme to fund his political ambitions that was always one step away from total collapse. And then he in turn pissed off the senate for being a class traitor so badly that he didn't really have a lot of choice in eventually taking over, because otherwise the senate would get him. Not that he was opposed to the idea, but he was definitely true to a set of principles.
Whereas Octavian was sort of a vicious prick with mommy issues. Not that he didn't pass a ton of needed reforms and was generally amazing, but those reforms weren't why he was trying to get power in the first place.
Roman history is so much fun because Roman historians are a bunch of gossiping old hens. You get such a great feel for the personalities involved
There is a tendency to show Rome as either this fascist, awful state feeding people to lions, or this utopian Republic where everything was swell. The Romans weren't always "good", but there was a reason all the cool kids wanted to join the Roman Empire as allies for a while.
Posts
Stalin did like his cult of personality though
he enjoyed being feared and adored and he certainly was happy to be presented as a great hero. Because of the propaganda benefits which it entailed or because of personal ego, or both, is up for questioning.
It was more that in the late 60's (I believe) there were some attempts to rehabilitate Stalin and Medvedev didn't like that one bit, unsurprisingly. He supported De-Stalinisation heavily.
He didn't want to be shot and dumped in a ditch so he kept trying to suck stalin's dick is, I think, the point Pharezon was making
The initial lionization, I mean.
cite
Meh
Julius Caesar loved objecting to his lionization too
Doesn't mean he wanted them to stop happening. Just that he wanted to be seen declaring what an ordinary citizen he was.
Actually, so did Augustus and Napoleon as well, for that matter.
EDIT: Well, early Napoleon. Later Napoleon pretty much walked around slapping everyone in the face with the Imperial Cock
imagine being in his position
nobody was safe from Stalin's wishes
and it was probably more safe to suck up too much than to appear unsupportive
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
eff dat
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/07/george-washingtons-medical-chart.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-57548126-10391709/washingtons-daring-escape-from-brooklyn/
The George Washington song doesn't exaggerate very much. Cool guys don't look at guys who are about to shoot them.
more Russian than Russians
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
But one of the reasons the guy didn't fire was because... Washington was just too cool to shoot.
Superman
not even Doomsday could do it man!
The Mongols.
This is why Georgians are the worst.
The guy who made this film was so paranoid of offending Stalin that during the entire premier he sweated and fidgeted and in the end, after this scene, he looked over at Stalin and Stalin was crying and he knew in that instant that Stalin had liked the movie and he knew he was not going to die.
I remember, I think it was his daughter, who spoke about that. On some history show I watched like a decade ago. I dunno.
Here I am, in the historical facts thread, getting heresay as fuck.
(fun fact: this was directed by Michael Bay)
In an interesting episode, Julius Caesar was offered the crown and Roman kingship "in the name of the people" by Mark Antony and turned it down. I don't think Mark Antony really expected that Caesar would accept the offer or that he would have made the offer without consulting with Caesar.
Yeah, if that wasn't a staged event, I will eat my hat. Caesar knew exactly what he was doing. But I would not put Caesar and Stalin in the same category -- Caesar really did care about his people and his soldiers and Rome, and recognized that the Senate was no longer serving those people. He just wanted to enact reforms. The senate saw him as a threat to their power, and struck. Too bad they turned him into a martyr and got stuck with Augustus after that. Augustus was by FAR the greater evil, imho.
Give the Gift of Thor! Or maybe you'd be interested in that Orc Book I wrote.
but he was a damn good political operator, that's for sure
between him and Caesar, Augustus would have eaten him alive
But it's only a minute long and there isn't a single explosion.
michael parenti gives a great talk on this
basically that Caesar was a problem because he wanted to enact reforms, not because he was a sonofabitch
The British were the first to put a tank into combat. They were dubbed "tanks" to confuse their true nature to the enemy and because without their guns they appeared to be something for hauling water.
They were prone to breakdowns and were easily destroyed by German artillery. But they made up for this with the shock factor of a giant metal beast bristling with machine guns lumbering toward and over enemy entrenchments.
There were a Male and Female version. The Male version had two cut down navy 6 pound guns and 3 machine guns. The Female version had 5 machine guns and no cannon. The reason for the Female version was because of the worry that the two artillery pieces would allow infantry to close and mob the tank.
A video
Even more interesting, given the development of armored tactics and deployment by Germany in WW2, is that at first they did not feel the tank a weapon worth developing. Of course, this attitude changed.
For more detailed and accurate reading regarding the Mark 1 and its successors:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_I_tank
I'll take my dick for 2000, alex
i thought your dick was like boo
rach...
like that would be a category in round 2
I don't know. Caesar was pretty smooth, himself, and he had years of experience on Augustus. I think the Roman Empire would have turned out a lot differently if Caesar hadn't been murdered.
Give the Gift of Thor! Or maybe you'd be interested in that Orc Book I wrote.
The History of Rome podcast points out that his family was one of those families that're long on honors and short on money, and unlike most of the rest of his class he basically grew up in the ghetto and raised himself up through bribes that he paid on credit. Caesar as a young man was basically running a massive pyramid scheme to fund his political ambitions that was always one step away from total collapse. And then he in turn pissed off the senate for being a class traitor so badly that he didn't really have a lot of choice in eventually taking over, because otherwise the senate would get him. Not that he was opposed to the idea, but he was definitely true to a set of principles.
Whereas Octavian was sort of a vicious prick with mommy issues. Not that he didn't pass a ton of needed reforms and was generally amazing, but those reforms weren't why he was trying to get power in the first place.
Roman history is so much fun because Roman historians are a bunch of gossiping old hens. You get such a great feel for the personalities involved
The sheer number of "what-ifs" in Roman history that would have a giant impact on our world if they went the other way is pretty staggering. Even small stuff like "what if this Emperor had treated this Bishop differently" basically set the course for the next 1000 years of history after the West fell. Or "if the Romans had effective tax collection in the 4th/5th Centuries, the Feudal system probably wouldn't have happened". Crazy stuff.
I have loved this ad from the first day I saw it
There is a tendency to show Rome as either this fascist, awful state feeding people to lions, or this utopian Republic where everything was swell. The Romans weren't always "good", but there was a reason all the cool kids wanted to join the Roman Empire as allies for a while.
I know I Claudius probably has a bunch of inaccuracies, but damn Derek Jacobi is a good actor.
I hate that he subscribes to the Oxfordian theory of Shakespearean authorship though
you could only whisper it
anything more than a whisper and it would vanish
Marcus Aurelius was kind of a dick, but a good Emperor. Joaquin Phoenix His son was a really, really bad Emperor, which was a shame.