On January 22 2014 07:16 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2014 05:39 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On January 22 2014 04:57 sam!zdat wrote:On January 22 2014 04:48 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On January 22 2014 04:35 sam!zdat wrote:
on the contrary, reality is that which, when you stop believing it, doesn't go away.
you can't be a postmodern sophist AND a fairy-tale nostalgist, sorry. they should have been a little less proud of being whatever made-up ethnos and joined the revolution, instead they slaughtered each other pointlessly for their capitalist overlords. oh well Capitalist overlords? Join the revolution? What kool-aid have you been drinking? I mean, I can see something like that being said nowadays for the Iraq war, but World War I? I'm not one to blow the McCarthy trumpet and point fingers at people, but what you're saying is really reminiscent of that "global workers' revolution" bullshit that communists prattle on about. that was the idea, you know. where do you think the "global workers' revolution bullshit" COMES from? it comes from the anti-militarist internationalism of the WWI period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_InternationalIf you're surprised about this I think you just don't know very much about early 20th century... what does the Iraq war have to do with it? A neocolonial police action fought by our professionalized and mechanized standing army? now THAT's a nonsequitur... there's no communist overlords. if there's overlords, it's not communism. communism is freedom. and yes yes, I know, it's the end of history and we are all capitalists now, there is no escape... fortunately for me there ain't nothin a southern man likes better than fightin a lost cause I'm sorry, you drank the kool-aid. There's nothing I can do for you anymore. On January 22 2014 05:08 IgnE wrote:On January 22 2014 04:48 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On January 22 2014 04:35 sam!zdat wrote:
on the contrary, reality is that which, when you stop believing it, doesn't go away.
you can't be a postmodern sophist AND a fairy-tale nostalgist, sorry. they should have been a little less proud of being whatever made-up ethnos and joined the revolution, instead they slaughtered each other pointlessly for their capitalist overlords. oh well Capitalist overlords? Join the revolution? What kool-aid have you been drinking? I mean, I can see something like that being said nowadays for the Iraq war, but World War I? I'm not one to blow the McCarthy trumpet and point fingers at people, but what you're saying is really reminiscent of that "global workers' revolution" bullshit that communists prattle on about. Why do you think WWI was fought? To stop the evil huns from taking over Europe? If you are interested in WWI and like podcasts, I recommend this one. It's even free from talk about a world revolution. http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive/Show-50---Blueprint-for-Armageddon-I/First World War-World War One-Great War Sure, there may have been secondary fiendish capitalistic motives for WWI, but they would have been just that, secondary. I'm not going to bother with the podcast until I know that you, at least, aren't as insane as Sam. People with strongly held (but completely insane) beliefs will pass off unverified or poorly verified beliefs as fact, meaning I would have to dissect every single tiny thing to come out of the podcaster's mouth, which is a pain and something I don't feel like bothering with at all if he is one of those nauseatingly stupid communists. This simplistic understanding of the logic of capital is why you think sam is insane, all the while secretly fearing the topics he brings up because it might upset your comfortable worldview.The serious contention is not that there is a cabal of capitalists who secretly plotted together to bring about a European war at the beginning of the 20th century. There were actually quite a few economists who thought that wars simply couldn't be fought anymore, because everyone recognized that they were too great a cost at the expense of business and trade. The serious contention is that the logic of capital drove the very forces that ended up creating the powderkeg of Europe.
My "comfortable worldview." Hahahaha.
I believe the human race is largely short-sighted, hedonistic, idiotic and downright disgraceful. Even nauseating at times. I believe that we will fail completely and utterly at stopping global warming because we are such a comedic failure of an intelligent species. I believe that that will result in utter devastation to human society within the next century. I believe that the majority of problems western society faces can be traced directly to the idiocy and incompetence of the masses.
I also believe that many great acts are driven by selfishness. By far the most important thing we consider, consciously or not, when deciding to help another African nation with their civil war or put pressure on a nation to stop their nuclear program is, "How does all that crap affect me?" Me, me, me, me, me, me, me. That's the mantra. It just so happens that economic factors often have a lot to do with me, both because of the interconnected and delicate nature of economy and because money gets you almost everything in this world.
Talking about capitalistic factors as if they are the root of all evil or the primary cause for something is missing the point. Money is only the middle-man for material wealth; we'd obsess over what we have even if we had to barter for it. No, what we really love is me.
Me, me, me, me, me, me, me.
|
To Daswollvieh and teddyoojo, who replied with "we" - I say "we" because that's what others do too: identify as a Romanian. I just happen to be born there and that makes me a Romanian, but I'm not a nationalist. I understand you might not identify with the people in your country, that's fine, but it's easier to say "we" even though I wasn't born when these events happened.
On January 22 2014 08:07 MoltkeWarding wrote:
Your summary of Romania's participation in the war is very nice. Yet I feel you left something out, you know, concerning Romania's entry into the war.
There is an impish trick here, because "Germany invades" has somehow become a way to set the context to every narrative without requiring a context itself!
Gypsies steal, Jews commit usury, Germans invade.
Right, I left out a lot the back story. The main reason we joined the war was because we wanted Transylvania back.
From wikipedia:
When the Entente Powers promised Romania large territories of eastern Hungary (Transylvania and Banat), which had a large Romanian population, in exchange for Romania's declaring war on the Central Powers, the Romanian government renounced its neutrality and, on 27 August 1916, the Romanian Army launched an attack against Austria-Hungary, with limited Russian support.
Transylvania is a touchy subject between Romania and Hungary. Again, I'm not a nationalist, but what they teach us in school is Transylvania is originally Romanian territory that was under Austro-Hungarian occupation. Sadly, territorial disputes are still cause of war today ("We were there first" - Palestine/Israel for example) but I agree with the person who said we are just peasants encouraged to be nationalist in order to fight for the upper class. We're just human after all. Except the Hungarians (just kidding, you guys are cool).
I'm surprised my blog written on my phone stirred this debate. People are even getting banned, wow. It started when I saw the centenary anniversary on BBC and remembered that WW1 is viewed as a success in Romania.
|
EPT
