Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 12:34 PM   #71
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,953

Quote:
Originally Posted by HBT View Post
I think you've got a very fair point there if we accept that economic in this case encompasses several other reasons.

Indeed, the only conflict that I can think of off-hand that occurred with no basis other than that of a political ideology was the Killing Fields of Cambodia and the genocidal campaign of the Khmer Rouge.

It does however raise the spectre of the root of all evil being economic. Ah, as I was typing that I realised that it sounds very close to for the love of money is the root of all evil.

Good point well raised.
And even that conflict started out as a class war to restructure the economy of Cambodia...though it did degenerate into almost mindless slaughter.
constantine is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2012, 12:36 PM   #72

Rasta's Avatar
Spiritual Ronin
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Minnesnowta
Posts: 21,071

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naomasa298 View Post
Hitler was a vegetarian* and therefore evil.

*Yes, I know he enjoyed the occasional sausage or two. But that's just the wurst kind of hypocrisy.
Banger example. Frankly, I can't blame him for that.
Rasta is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 01:03 PM   #73

Naomasa298's Avatar
Bog of the Year
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 21,380

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasta View Post
Banger example. Frankly, I can't blame him for that.
As others have said though, perhaps our views would be different if the war had gone the other way. After all, history is written by the weiners.

OK, I'll stop now before a mod yells at me. Sorry for derailing.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 01:23 PM   #74

Rasta's Avatar
Spiritual Ronin
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Minnesnowta
Posts: 21,071

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naomasa298 View Post
As others have said though, perhaps our views would be different if the war had gone the other way. After all, history is written by the weiners.

OK, I'll stop now before a mod yells at me. Sorry for derailing.
We also have to take into account that weiners are perceived differently in different countries. German weiners are not the same as American weiners. Though we can haggis back and forth over who is boss, but what happens if we kill boss, ah?

Ok, I'm done now too.
Rasta is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 01:47 PM   #75
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasta View Post
It is indeed rational, though I am hard pressed to see how it is not evil.



I agree that Hitler's ideas were ultimately futile, but is this the measure of evil? Bad ideas that don't work out?
The Mongol carnage (or any other carefully planned colonial or imperial terror, for that matter) was not evil from the standpoint of the winner conqueror side.

Yup, that is ethical utilitarianism at its best, the only ethical principle that might make any objective sense in politics (as opposed to any subjective sense)

More explicitly, had Herr Hitler won, in all likelihood there would currently be some nations and societies that would have in some relevant way directly or indirectly profited from such success and which would therefore be defending his actions, as a necessary evil at worst.

Theory aside, the empirical evidence on the widespread application of such principles couldn't be any more compelling; just check out any colonialism-related thread all along Historum.
sylla1 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 01:52 PM   #76

Rasta's Avatar
Spiritual Ronin
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Minnesnowta
Posts: 21,071

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
The Mongol carnage (or any other carefully planned colonial or imperial terror, for that matter) was not evil from the standpoint of the winner conqueror side.

Yup, that is ethical utilitarianism at its best, the only ethical principle that might make any objective sense in politics (as opposed to any subjective sense)

More explicitly, had Herr Hitler won, in all likelihood there would currently be some nations and societies that would have in some relevant way directly or indirectly profited from such success and which would therefore be defending his actions, as a necessary evil at worst.

Theory aside, the empirical evidence on the widespread application of such principles couldn't be any more compelling; just check out any colonialism-related thread all along Historum.
I was talking about subjective evil because I believe objective morality is an oxymoron. It's all good though. I understand what you mean.

Might is right.
Rasta is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:00 PM   #77
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasta View Post
I was talking about subjective evil because I believe objective morality is an oxymoron. It's all good though. I understand what you mean.

Might is right.
We are ultimately talking about subjective evil too, again as attested by the minimal review of any colonialism-related thread all along Historum
sylla1 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:50 PM   #78

Panthera tigris altaica's Avatar
In latrine Rex
 
Joined: Aug 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 5,874
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Nope, the primary difference is that Herr Hitler and Temüjin dis extremely different things.
I agree their ambitions are not mirror opposites. But i gather, aside from oral and written history, our view of him may be entirely different if his rule had left behind a mountain of photographic evidence such as Herr Hitler's did? Speculatively speaking, of course.

Quote:
That said, and as previously noted, a major relevant difference between both genocidal rulers is that Temüjin actually won, and he did indeed win in the greatest conceivable historical scale, while the absolute failure of Herr Hitler under absolutely any standard couldn't have been any more absolute.
I think, a difference in time. Spectacular, yes! But he faced few empires and mostly tribal opponents that were far less organized than the current nation state populating today's world.
Panthera tigris altaica is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:00 PM   #79
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Panthera tigris altaica View Post
I agree their ambitions are not mirror opposites. But i gather, aside from oral and written history, our view of him may be entirely different if his rule had left behind a mountain of photographic evidence such as Herr Hitler's did? Speculatively speaking, of course.



I think, a difference in time. Spectacular, yes! But he faced few empires and mostly tribal opponents that were far less organized than the current nation state populating today's world.
Why? Nobody has ever denied that the Mongols slaughtered hundreds of thousands, not the proud Mongols themselves to begin with.

Couldn't imagine which your sources on the Mongol expansion of the early XIII century may be; the Mongol Khanate faced several objectively powerful empires, most of which were as far from "tribal" as it could possibly be.
sylla1 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:18 PM   #80

Panthera tigris altaica's Avatar
In latrine Rex
 
Joined: Aug 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 5,874
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Why? Nobody has ever denied that the Mongols slaughtered hundreds of thousands, not the proud Mongols themselves to begin with.
Of course, and maybe in several hundred years time people will feel the same about Hitler and the Nazi's: More positive, some mixed and a lot less of a negative, regardless of photographic evidence. Which is all they had left to hold onto when Valhalla came knocking in the spring of 45'.

Quote:
Couldn't imagine which your sources on the Mongol expansion of the early XIII century may be; the Mongol Khanate faced several objectively powerful empires, most of which were as far from "tribal" as it could possibly be.
No source, just an assessed opinion for the overall geo-strategic picture. I didn't say the empires they faced weren't powerful. They just weren't able to unify in a common goal at stopping the Mongols like the alliance system of world war 2 did too stop Hitler and his allies.
Panthera tigris altaica is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
evil, hitler


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evil Salah Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 57 May 11th, 2012 03:54 PM
When did Germans realize Hitler was the evil one? Stephan European History 112 June 14th, 2011 06:37 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.