Here's a good idea for a thread - List the common mistaken assumptions people have about history!
As an example - "The Soviet Union/ China/ Cuba is or was communist"
This is incorrect. There has never been a communist nation in history, as communism was an ideal written by Karl Marx which involved the non-existence of government.
The "communist" nations were and are actually socialist - a form of government that was meant to be a transition period as a nation moved from a capitalist model to a communist one.
What caused this inaccuracy? The Americans. To create a fear in the American population that would fuel the cold war, Senator McCarthy turned communism (which is actually a noble ideal) into a dirty word, and used it to ruin the lives of, basically, anyone who didn't agree with him (I'm paraphrasing history here, but it's the basic truth). Like all propaganda, it had little basis in truth, but this one stuck.
I didn't even know people said Cuba was communist country. I thought it had a dictatorship.
Well, technically it is a socialist dictatorship - but in this little corner of the world (probably more ignorant of Cuba than America, as a whole), it's often referred to as a communist nation.
Darwin coined the phrase, "Survival of the fittest." It was some economist dude that I can't remember the name of. Also, it's not just propaganda that "communism is the devil", but also common sense in that the leaders would actually never give up their roles. Which they didn't. Communism gave people a false hope (although in some countries, it was the only hope). Basically, communism is an ideal that will never happen (read: greed). There are more types of government than can be named, but socialism is close enough. It's like a totalitarian state, it doesn't mean it won't work, there have been many leaders that were better than any democratic state. We all know the down sides to democracy unfortunately And now ends my rant...I really have to stop doing this...
Sean Aaron ~ "The secret is out: I'm really an American cat-girl." Q: How many physicists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Two, one to hold the light bulb, the other to rotate the universe.
Darwin coined the phrase, "Survival of the fittest." It was some economist dude that I can't remember the name of. Also, it's not just propaganda that "communism is the devil", but also common sense in that the leaders would actually never give up their roles. Which they didn't. Communism gave people a false hope (although in some countries, it was the only hope). Basically, communism is an ideal that will never happen (read: greed). There are more types of government than can be named, but socialism is close enough. It's like a totalitarian state, it doesn't mean it won't work, there have been many leaders that were better than any democratic state. We all know the down sides to democracy unfortunately And now ends my rant...I really have to stop doing this...
The way McCarthy treated communism was propaganda. Fact. It was propaganda in response to the communist propaganda that was coming out of the east, yes, but it was nonetheless a surgical strike to create fear into Americans and keep McCarthy's personal power levels high.
Of course communism was little more than an idealistic paradise in the mind of a socially-awkward social economist, but that doesn't change the fact that every single person who has said "communist nation" in reference to any existing nation is blatantly incorrect.
Generalizations like this do little good. Not just trying to be picky, because you almost immediately correct this by blaming McCarthy specifically, but someone is bound to misinterpret this as it is a tad misleading. I agree with every other word though. This country's history can be more than a bit embarrassing at times, to say the least. But it had nothing to do with me, fortunately.
Generalizations like this do little good. Not just trying to be picky, because you almost immediately correct this by blaming McCarthy specifically, but someone is bound to misinterpret this as it is a tad misleading. I agree with every other word though. This country's history can be more than a bit embarrassing at times, to say the least. But it had nothing to do with me, fortunately.
Sorry - contextually, I did make the assumption that it would be understood I was talking specifically McCarthy and his drones - badly word. My bad.
This country's history can be more than a bit embarrassing at times, to say the least. But it had nothing to do with me, fortunately.
Yeah, like when Canada beat the US in the Battle of 1812. Then again, we used to have a military... I don't think we have any ships other than that used one we bought from Britain that sunk. Somebody probably thought it was a good idea to ebay from someone named "Britain's Queen".
Also, a lot of people don't realize that the capital of Florida is not Orlando.
Sean Aaron ~ "The secret is out: I'm really an American cat-girl." Q: How many physicists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Two, one to hold the light bulb, the other to rotate the universe.
Also, it's not just propaganda that "communism is the devil", but also common sense in that the leaders would actually never give up their roles. Which they didn't.
You aren't saying communism is the devil, then; you're saying that falsely promising communism is the devil, no? That's a key difference.
And "didn't" isn't the same as "wouldn't." Marx envisioned communism as the end of a clear progression of history, and yet the major examples of supposedly communist nations (none of which were truly communist anyway) ignored this, attempting to skip entire phases of history. The closest to real communism that we've gotten was actually in Spain, probably (not that I'm really all that well read on world history). Catalonia was doing pretty well for itself until Franco came along. They even abolished currency in some areas!
Also, it's not just propaganda that "communism is the devil", but also common sense in that the leaders would actually never give up their roles. Which they didn't.
You aren't saying communism is the devil, then; you're saying that falsely promising communism is the devil, no? That's a key difference.
And "didn't" isn't the same as "wouldn't." Marx envisioned communism as the end of a clear progression of history, and yet the major examples of supposedly communist nations (none of which were truly communist anyway) ignored this, attempting to skip entire phases of history. The closest to real communism that we've gotten was actually in Spain, probably (not that I'm really all that well read on world history). Catalonia was doing pretty well for itself until Franco came along. They even abolished currency in some areas!
Badly worded, just trying to get across that there is good and bad... That was horrible wording actually...
And you are right, there has never been an example of the progress toward communism as outlined by Karl-Marx (I can't remember if Karl was a 'c' or 'k'). I personally don't believe it would work either way, but I it can easily be argued. Also, something else that some may not realize is that Karl-Marx is two people.
Sean Aaron ~ "The secret is out: I'm really an American cat-girl." Q: How many physicists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Two, one to hold the light bulb, the other to rotate the universe.
Also, it's not just propaganda that "communism is the devil", but also common sense in that the leaders would actually never give up their roles. Which they didn't.
You aren't saying communism is the devil, then; you're saying that falsely promising communism is the devil, no? That's a key difference.
And "didn't" isn't the same as "wouldn't." Marx envisioned communism as the end of a clear progression of history, and yet the major examples of supposedly communist nations (none of which were truly communist anyway) ignored this, attempting to skip entire phases of history. The closest to real communism that we've gotten was actually in Spain, probably (not that I'm really all that well read on world history). Catalonia was doing pretty well for itself until Franco came along. They even abolished currency in some areas!
Badly worded, just trying to get across that there is good and bad... That was horrible wording actually...
And you are right, there has never been an example of the progress toward communism as outlined by Karl-Marx (I can't remember if Karl was a 'c' or 'k'). I personally don't believe it would work either way, but I it can easily be argued. Also, something else that some may not realize is that Karl-Marx is two people.
It depends. If you read Marx's writing, and understand his thinking behind it, it does make a lot of sense from an economic, social and academic perspective.
It's only when you start looking at how the revolutionaries, such as Lenin and Stalin, interpreted it that you get reminded that what makes sense doesn't necessarily happen in reality.
Another inaccuracy - Bram Stoker based the character of "Dracula" on Vlad the Impaler or Elizabeth Bathory (or both)
Incorrect. Psychological theory has that Bram was using Dracula as a release for his homoerotic urges for an actor that he greatly admired when he worked for a theatre group in London. From memory, he never even wanted the book published.
@WaltElf I'm not sure about the release of his urges, but you are correct about the actual name Dracula. He originally had the name set as Count Wampyr and it wasn't unti reading a book on the political history of Wallachia and Moldavia that he discovered the name Dracul.
I also believe (if memory serves, it's been years since I read the 1000+ page annotated Dracula) that the actor you are referring to was Henry Irving (who was the actor/manager of the theater Stoker worked for), many of the Counts mannerisims and dress were based on him.
If anyone is interested in the subject, I recommend getting any of the Annotated Dracula editions that have been written. It's fascinating to see what inspired what and parralels from Stokers life in the book.
I am the one you despise. I am he who says what you really deep down know but are affraid to admit. I am the Anti-Fanboy, the crusader of truth in a world built on your lies.
Shall I change the thread title to "Inaccurate inaccuracies about teh Communistz" for you gentlemen?
I think the Bram Stoker stuff means the topic is broadening. I'm glad to see this isn't turning into a USA bash-fest, which it looked like was possible -- not that I don't have very negative feelings about the country were I was born and raised, but it's nice not to have to lock a thread within a couple hours of posting.
As with many things history is based upon perception as well as recorded information. Because many primary sources are memoirs or writings of inviduals and therefore subject to interpretation, with few exceptions there's not much even in history that can be described as "indisputable fact." There are events, but the meaning of those events and their implications can differ from person to person. In case it's not apparent my university degree was in History, major focus in Meiji era Japan (1868-WWII), minor focus in Islamic Spain (the "Moorish" period, if you like).
I could share some views on history, but they might prompt strident disagreements and get the thread locked, so I'll leave the above as my contribution for now.
Forums
Topic: Historical Inaccuracies
Posts 1 to 20 of 71
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.