Who is your favourite revolutionary? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Svetonio

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213

Posted: September 18 2015 at 06:31

Guldb, you are not at my level when it comes to politics; you can only turn out funny.

First, Churchill was in Moscow in 1943, Churchill meet Stalin at Yalta, etc., and Stalin never was welcomed in London, especially not with that ceremonial Guard (if you even know what that ceremonial Guard meant in UK at that time).

Second, don't tell me that Queen Elizabeth II also meet Stalin.

Edited by Svetonio - September 18 2015 at 06:34

Guldbamsen View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104

Posted: September 18 2015 at 06:16

All that means is that you have to be prepared to mingle with some pretty disgusting people, if you're ever going to make it in politics.

Here's one with Churchill and Stalin:

“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams

Svetonio

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213

Posted: September 18 2015 at 05:50

For those who think, and expressed such opinion at this thread, that Tito was a mass murderer (only because he was a communist) the question is: would you ever thought that Winston Churchill would hosted the festive welcome for a "mass murderer"?

Prime Minister of the Great Britain Sir Winston Churchill and Foreign Secretary Sir Anthony Eden welcomed Marshal Tito in London.

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: September 18 2015 at 05:41

Svetonio's "compadres" can always answer my posts on his behalf, and they frequently do. Wink

What?

Guldbamsen View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104

Posted: September 18 2015 at 05:31

Svetonio wrote:

I'd like just to inform the readers of this thread that i ignore what Dean is posting here since long time ago, actually since he started to insult me at this forums, for example here. I'm just avoid to chat with such characters.

p.s. Dean knows it very well, but I'm always being quoted by him, because he wants to use my non-answer and silence that he tries to create an illusion that his tragicomic "arguments" (adressed to me) are compelling; he adressed so many post to me (although he knows that will be no reply from my side) at so many threads just in favor that you think that I'm flattered by his posts.

I can't possibly speak for Dean, but when you engage in discussions over a forum such as this, you're bound to get the odd duck who disagrees with you................................but when the odd duck turns out to be almost every guy that responds you, then there might just be something about their critique.

You can call me old fashioned too, but posting pictures and quotes by some of the most reviled and hated persons from the 20th century is not going to help you garner any sympathy either.

Oh and Dean is right. He may be blunt and outspoken but he is, at least, looking at history from a realistic and critical point of view (unlike some).

“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: September 18 2015 at 03:31

Ah, I see the broken logic here, by ignoring me you think you can continue your immature behaviour unchallenged. Sorry sunshine, that ain't ever going to happen.

For your information, my post was not an insult, it was a request.

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=being+a+dick

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stop+Being+A+Dick

Edited by Dean - September 18 2015 at 03:35

What?

Svetonio

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213

Posted: September 18 2015 at 03:18

I'd like just to inform the readers of this thread that i ignore what Dean is posting here since long time ago, actually since he started to insult me at this forums, for example here. I'm just avoid to chat with such characters.

Edited by Svetonio - September 18 2015 at 05:18

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: September 18 2015 at 03:06

Svetonio wrote:

Gavrilo Princip couldn't be a terrorist in 1914 because such a "profession" wasn't existed at the time.

The word "terrorisme" was used during the French Revolution (1793-94) in regard to government intimidation, the use of the word "terrorist" was first used in English in 1798 in reference to the Irish Rebellion. To presume that terrorists and terrorism is a later invention (League of Nations, 1930) would be incorrect. Acts of terrorism existed before it had a name, just as dinosaurs existed long before we gave them names.

Svetonio wrote:

And about exactly how The Great War started, without a hint of revisionism created by fascists, I do shamelessly quoted my opening post from an earlier thread:

What you wrote was a chronology that no one disputes, not even revisionist fascists (whoever the hell that scum are they can fu*k right off) or apparent gore-loving, glory-hunting, war-worshippers such as yourself. It does not tell how and why the stupid war started.

...from the same tread:

Originally posted by Dean, in post dated 28th July 2014

Dean, in post dated 28th July 2014 wrote:

It was another stupid war in a succession of stupid wars, there is no honour or glory in warfare, it is pointless and barbaric and above all else, stupid. There is no better word to describe war than stupid, it is a measure of the stupidity of mankind, the stupidity of nations and stupidity of those that govern them. The first world war was a stupid loss of life for stupid reasons. The assassination of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo was the stupid excuse for the stupid war but it wasn't the cause; the causes were far more stupid and the stupid reasons why it escalated to a world-war were the most stupid of all.

We must remember the 18 million dead and morn them but in the same voice denounce all those that started it, all those that escalated it and perpetuated it and all those who would glorify it.

Edited by Dean - September 18 2015 at 03:07

What?

Svetonio

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213

Posted: September 18 2015 at 02:45

Triceratopsoil wrote:

ISIL is not a state, Princip was a terrorist, and there's absolutely no need to copy and paste that massive post

Not an internationaly recognized state, of course, but they call themselfs a state (same as Albanian terrorists from KLA, who were at an official and published CIA's terrorist groups list untill 1997, in 2008 just proclaimed that they are the state of Kosovo and USA, UK, Germany and other powerful NATO countries recognized them as a state) and kill the people for the religion believes same as Austro-Hungarian officers were killing Ortodox Christian peasants if they didn't accepted to turn themself into Roman-Catholics, after annexation of Bosnia. So Autro-Hungaria, as per your pretzel logic, was terrorist state as ISIL now as well, or at least the state who officially, as per documents and photos, was supported the terrorism on civilans only due to their different religion believes. And therefore, Gavrilo was a hero who just killed Archduke of an terrorist state.

Edited by Svetonio - September 18 2015 at 03:06

Saperlipopette! View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Offline
Points: 11621

Posted: September 18 2015 at 02:38

The best thing about this discussion&poll is the top two:

Other	15	[51.72%]
I hate revolutionaries	4	[13.79%]

Triceratopsoil View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016

Posted: September 18 2015 at 02:14

ISIL is not a state, Princip was a terrorist, and there's absolutely no need to copy and paste that massive post

Svetonio

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213

Posted: September 18 2015 at 02:01

emigre80 wrote:

dr wu23 wrote:

Svetonio wrote:

dr wu23 wrote:

Politics is not one of my strong suits but it seems to me that half of the ones listed in the poll aren't even true revolutionaries by definition (primarily associated with politics..?)....at least based on what I read and the list at Wiki.....but then maybe I just don't know who they are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary

So since we are using loose definitions here I vote for Louis Pasteur because I love what he did for milk and other dairy products...as well as his medical discoveries.

Thank you for posting the link but at that wiki page, although it's not a bad article, the list is not really valid because Gavrilo Princip is not on that list.

As I said I'm no expert in politics but I looked him up and he's an assassin not a 'revolutionary' by anyone's standard. By your criteria John Wilkes Booth would also be a revolutionary since he also assassinated an important leader.

But if you need a better explanation , I'm sure someone here will provide it.

Princip is, in fact, a terrorist and assassin and your explanation is spot on.

Gavrilo Princip couldn't be a terrorist in 1914 because such a "profession" wasn't existed at the time. Or, if Gavrilo was a terrorist, then whole Austro-Hungarian Empire was a terrorist state something like ISIL now; because there high in the Bosnian mountains, after annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austro-Hungaria, the Austro-Hungarian officers had have the orders (luckily, those pedantic Autro-Hungarians officers were saved all the orders same as the photos of killings what I posted here but it's ereased now) from official Vienna to terrorize and to kill as much as they can of Bosnian Orthodox Slavs, i.e. Serbs, very poor and un-armed peasant men and woman just because they weren't in mood to be baptised at all as the Roman-Catholic as they were keeping to be Orthodox Christians over the centuries ( Ottoman Empire let them over 400 years to be just what they wanted to be).

Gavrilo Princip was a member of a revolutionary pan-Slavic group Young Bosnia (the members were Serbs, Croats and Muslims) who was leading by an idea of an united state of South Slavs i.e. Yugoslavia. So he was the revolutionist and assasin - what was coming from his revolutionary work and idea. "Terrorist" is something else, and I repeat, that what we call "terrorism" and "terrorist"now, simply doesn't extisted back in the day. Terror always existed, but "terrorism" and "terrorist" as a, say, "proffesion", simply wasn't.

And about exactly how The Great War started, without a hint of revisionism created by fascists, I do shamelessly quoted my opening post from an earlier thread:

Post Options

Thanks(0)

Quote

Topic: 100 years since The Great War
Posted: July 28 2014 at 04:11

On this day a century ago started the First World War, a month after the assassination in Sarajevo, which killed throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife.

Austria-Hungary was the 28th of July 2014, declared war to Serbia, and thus, as it turned out, they started the First World War. A declaration of war was sent to Belgrade in the morning, an ordinary telegraph post. The telegram contained three sentences.

The first stated that the Serbian government is not "satisfactorily responded to the letter" in Vienna, submitted on 23 July, that the ultimatum. Then followed the view that hence the Austro-Hungarian Empire "forced to rely on the forceof arms," and the third, the last sentence was: "Austria-Hungary believe that as of this moment is at war with Serbia."

The next day, Franz Joseph, Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary, released a declaration of war "people" of his country, in which he stated that he was forced "to tackle the sword in defense of honor", and that "the imperial-royal government attempted to calm way to resolve the dispute, "but without success, and to someone else's guilty".The goverment officials in Vienna were assassinated in Sarajevo used them as an excuse to go to the showdown with Serbia, convinced that Serbia would be quickly defeated, and it would be a "small war "that will very soon to be completed successfully.

Therefore the text note or ultimatum Baron Giesl delivered the Serbian government on July 23, was worded so that meant it is almost impossible that any sovereign country to accept what it is required. The goal, certainly, was it to be rejected, as evidenced by the fact that Baron Giesl, when he was on July 25, Nikola Pasić, gave a very conciliatory response serbian government immediately responded that he was "not satisfactory".

This was followed by an official letter to the Austrian Minister Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs of identical content, and embassy staff and Baron Giesl soon after that night left the territory of the Kingdom of Serbia. As to this act took the severance of diplomatic relations, the government of the Kingdom of Serbia announced, also in a veryconciliatory tone, a manifesto in which he stated:
"Trusting in the help of God, in his justice and friendship in the great country that we are convinced they want also to keep the peace, we hope that it will end the conflict peacefully, but as the Austro-Hungarian Minister said tonight on behalf of his government was not satisfied with our response, and finally breaks off diplomatic relations, the government of the Serbian forced to, just in case, just take the most necessary military measures to defend the country. considered a duty to invite the people to defend the homeland, believing that our patriotic call each happy tooblige. If we were attacked, the military will do my duty ... ".

The following day, on July 26, followed by the mobilization, on the same day it announced the mobilization. Actaully decree on the mobilization of the entire army was issued on July 25 to 22 hours, and for the first day of mobilization was determined after 26 jul. Promptly formed the Supreme Command of the serbian army led by general found Stepa Stepanović, as agent currently absent Duke Radomir Putnik; team immediately moved into the interior of the country, in Kragujevac, as Belgrade was located right on the border line.

At the same time came the order is that the court, the government, state government offices, the vaults of the National Bank, State Archives and Press office, operating inside of country. A decision of the government in Viennato go to war was preceded by the support of Germany, such as the 7 July at the ministerial meeting Vienna decided to send a note with Serbia would be unacceptable content, which is then worked out at a meeting. It was supposed that Berlin and Vienna was that they be able to instantly make the mobilization and concentration of power, beforethe French, especially the Russians.

It was intended to be a lightning thrust through Belgium, broke France. The German goverment believed to be repeat scenario of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870/71. when France defeated tremendously. Only then they were going to get all the power to direct Russia. A day after the declaration of war, on July 29, regent Aleksandar Karadjordjević issued a proclamation to the people:

"Our Serbia is assaulted under the great evil. Austrougarska has declared war (...) I am compelled to call all my dear andbrave Serbs under the Serbian flag ..." That on July 29, the Russian Tsar Nicholas II issued a partial mobilization. The next day, 30 July, Germany has introduced a general mobilization on 1 August declared war to Russia. Already on August 2, Germany invaded Luxembourg, andon August 3, declared war to France. Because Belgium rejected the German request for transit through its territory, Germany declared war on August 4 and Belgium, then immediately United Kingdom, due to non-compliance withthe German neutrality of Belgium, on August 4, 1914. declared war to Germany. The Great War begins, later known as the First World War.

Edited by Svetonio - September 18 2015 at 03:00

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: September 17 2015 at 21:32

emigre80 wrote:

Is there a reason that engineers and historians can't be simultaneously right?

I would imagine that depends on the topic. Though I would never discount the possibility that a historian could talk about some aspect of my particular engineering discipline (and GKR got that wrong btw).

What?

emigre80

Forum Senior Member

Joined: January 25 2015
Location: kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 2223

Posted: September 17 2015 at 20:41

Triceratopsoil wrote:

Germany wanting a war is recent revisionist history. Bankers wanted a war.

"Bankers wanted a war" is 1960s Marxist-influenced historiography. Sorry, but no one has believed that for decades.

Triceratopsoil View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016

Posted: September 17 2015 at 14:49

Germany wanting a war is recent revisionist history. Bankers wanted a war.

emigre80

Forum Senior Member

Joined: January 25 2015
Location: kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 2223

Posted: September 17 2015 at 14:14

GKR wrote:

emigre80 wrote:

Dean wrote:

GKR wrote:

Dean wrote:

One bullet = 17 million dead + 20 million casualties.

Do you REALLY think that the whole WWI was based in only the first bullet? As a historian I must say: nope, its not that simple.

No I REALLY didn't think that and I know full well it's not that simple but the equation is still valid. As an Engineer, I couldn't give a crap what historians think.

As Adam Gopnik noted, the Archduke and his wife “were notably unmourned: Ferdinand, a difficult and unpopular figure, was no J.F.K. The only important personage who seemed really offended was Kaiser Wilhelm, of Germany, who had a class interest in protecting Germanic royalty from Slavic terrorists.”

My argument is that the assassination provided the Austro-Hungarian empire (egged on by the Germans) the excuse they needed to take on the Serbs. In which case Princip's action totally backfired.

Is there a reason that engineers and historians can't be simultaneously right?

Yes, but my point is that you cant blame a bullet for the whole thing. Europe was boiling back there. We can even argue that if not one thign, another would trigger the whole thing. Look at the growing economic rivalries. There was plenty reasons for wars.

We cant see history with scape goats, thats my point.

I get your point. I just wrote a book discussing why the simplistic view of WWI is wrong. Germany wanted a war, Princip obliged by giving them an excuse to back Austro-Hungary's claims against Serbia. The dominoes fell from there. As Gopnik further put it, "The Germans thought that, more or less, it would be like 1870; the French thought that, with the help of the English, it wouldn’t be like 1870; the English thought that it would be like a modernized 1814, a continental war with decisive interference by Britain’s professional military; and the Russians thought that it couldn’t be worse than just sitting there.”

Everyone had their reasons for getting involved in WWI, but nobody actually got the war - or result - they wanted.

Edited by emigre80 - September 17 2015 at 14:15

timothy leary View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319

Posted: September 17 2015 at 14:10

Are there scapegoats in life? Then there will be scapegoats in history. That is my point.

GKR

Forum Senior Member

Joined: January 22 2013
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 1376

Posted: September 17 2015 at 14:07

emigre80 wrote:

Dean wrote:

GKR wrote:

Dean wrote:

One bullet = 17 million dead + 20 million casualties.

Do you REALLY think that the whole WWI was based in only the first bullet? As a historian I must say: nope, its not that simple.

No I REALLY didn't think that and I know full well it's not that simple but the equation is still valid. As an Engineer, I couldn't give a crap what historians think.

My argument is that the assassination provided the Austro-Hungarian empire (egged on by the Germans) the excuse they needed to take on the Serbs. In which case Princip's action totally backfired.

Is there a reason that engineers and historians can't be simultaneously right?

- From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

GKR

Forum Senior Member

Joined: January 22 2013
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 1376

Posted: September 17 2015 at 14:05

Triceratopsoil wrote:

durrrrrrrr only historians know anything about history

No, I did not said that. Not even said anything close to that.

- From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Triceratopsoil View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016

Posted: September 17 2015 at 13:56

GKR wrote:

Dean wrote:

GKR wrote:

Dean wrote:

One bullet = 17 million dead + 20 million casualties.

Do you REALLY think that the whole WWI was based in only the first bullet? As a historian I must say: nope, its not that simple.

No I REALLY didn't think that and I know full well it's not that simple but the equation is still valid. As an Engineer, I couldn't give a crap what historians think.

So you shouldnt talk about history at all. Go back to your machines.

durrrrrrrr only historians know anything about history

Poll Question: Who is your favourite revolutionary?
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Marx	3	[8.33%]
Engels	0	[0.00%]
Trotsky	2	[5.56%]
Lenin	3	[8.33%]
Liebknecht	0	[0.00%]
Luxumberg	1	[2.78%]
Gramsci	0	[0.00%]
Ted Grant	0	[0.00%]
Lal Khan	0	[0.00%]
Alan Woods	0	[0.00%]
Canon	0	[0.00%]
Che Guevara	2	[5.56%]
Castro	1	[2.78%]
Ho Chi Minh	1	[2.78%]
James Connelly	0	[0.00%]
Other	17	[47.22%]
I hate revolutionaries	6	[16.67%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted