NationStates

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Most of human history has been under authoritarian rule.

War Gears wrote:Not really. It wasn't democratic, but I'm not sure "authoritarianism" applies to premodern societies.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:So, absolute monarchy and feudalism aren't authoritarian systems?

Conserative Morality wrote:Absolute monarchy is a comparatively recent development, feudalism restricted to narrow regions and eras.

Aillyria wrote:1.) Most of those were shortlived, saved for the USSR.....and even then the Soviets made great strides in physics and astronomy. But I was referring to much older empires like Rome and China's various dynasties, the Russian Empire under Peter the Great, Prussia under Fredrick the Great, France under Napoléon I.....etc.

I don't think any prominent political scientist would describe the pre-modern regimes as authoritarian. It'd be stretching the use of the term beyond its breaking point, making it apply to two widely different periods; different regimes and methods of rule. Svolik, who literally wrote the book on authoritarian rule, uses the term for post-WW2 states, and only goes further back for illustrative purposes. Likewise Caramani in Comparative Politics. Fukuyama, in Origins of Political Order, mentions authoritarianism a few times, and always either in post-WW2 times, current authoritarianism as a legacy of earlier political institutions or in passing.
Authoritarianism is decidedly a modern concept that applies to modern states.

The Parkus Empire wrote:I know you ain't, new left does not care about wiping out religion

Really? Then why do they oppose religious values on just about everything?

The Parkus Empire wrote:Peter the Great was a wicked tyrant. Alexander II was the actual good Czar, but he will never be recognized in the west because he did not try to abolish Slavic culture

Peter the Great and Catherine the Great were the best Russian rulers.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Crysuko wrote:An alliance between socialists and conservatives is like an alliance between oil and water

She might like Bismarck, whose response to socialism was to beat them at their own game.

Is that why rome was a bloated, beauracratic dictatorship,

I blame Christianity.

the russian empire was a despotic luddite state

Peter the Great opposed such backwardness. He was a reformer and a westernizer.

and Napolean went on a conqering spree across Europe?

He spread the Revolution by cannon and bayonet. =^)

As someone of German ancestry, I adore Bismarck and the Second Reich, the height of German civilization and statehood, imho.

Indeed, Napoléon was a master of violent revolutionary power....greatest French ruler.

Bienenhalde wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:I know you ain't, new left does not care about wiping out religion

Really? Then why do they oppose religious values on just about everything?

Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or churches.

Aillyria wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Peter the Great was a wicked tyrant. Alexander II was the actual good Czar, but he will never be recognized in the west because he did not try to abolish Slavic culture

Peter the Great and Catherine the Great were the best Russian rulers.

Conserative Morality wrote:She might like Bismarck, whose response to socialism was to beat them at their own game.

I blame Christianity.

Peter the Great opposed such backwardness. He was a reformer and a westernizer.

He spread the Revolution by cannon and bayonet. =^)

As someone of German ancestry, I adore Bismarck and the Second Reich, the height of German civilization and statehood, imho.

Indeed, Napoléon was a master of violent revolutionary power....greatest French ruler.

If you love serfdom they are certainly the best, as both expanded serfdom tremendously.

The Parkus Empire wrote:Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or churches.

What is the goal of the New Left, if not attacking religion? They do not seem to care so much about actually implementing a socialist economic system.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:
Really? Then why do they oppose religious values on just about everything?

Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or churches.

The current "left" would love to destroy all faiths.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Aillyria wrote:Peter the Great and Catherine the Great were the best Russian rulers.


As someone of German ancestry, I adore Bismarck and the Second Reich, the height of German civilization and statehood, imho.

Indeed, Napoléon was a master of violent revolutionary power....greatest French ruler.

If you love serfdom they are certainly the best, as both expanded serfdom tremendously.

I'm aware. That is a regrettable thing for two otherwise reformist rulers to not only fail to reverse, but actually made it worse. However, the other Tsars were complete and utter failures and allowed Russian power and culture to rot.

Aillyria wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or churches.

The current "left" would love to destroy all faiths.

The Parkus Empire wrote:If you love serfdom they are certainly the best, as both expanded serfdom tremendously.

I'm aware. That is a regrettable thing for two otherwise reformist rulers to not only fail to reverse, but actually made it worse. However, the other Tsars were complete and utter failures and allowed Russian power and culture to rot.

What about Nicholas I, Alexander II, and Alexander III? I would argue that their reigns were the golden age of the Russian Empire, despite the defeat in Crimea.

Aillyria wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or chuprches.

The current "left" would love to destroy all faiths.

The Parkus Empire wrote:If you love serfdom they are certainly the best, as both expanded serfdom tremendously.

I'm aware. That is a regrettable thing for two otherwise reformist rulers to not only fail to reverse, but actually made it worse. However, the other Tsars were complete and utter failures and allowed Russian power and culture to rot.

Pete and Cate did not reform jack unless by "reform" you simply mean pGermanize and eradicate Russian tradition and shit on the Church. Alexander II actually reformed things

Northern Davincia wrote:

War Gears wrote:Pinochet's Chile

Heh, very funny.

It's not funny. More sad.

Bienenhalde wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Just because they are ideological adversaries of religion, does not mean they care about liquidating the religious or churches.

What is the goal of the New Left, if not attacking religion? They do not seem to care so much about actually implementing a socialist economic system.

Masturbation

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:
What is the goal of the New Left, if not attacking religion? They do not seem to care so much about actually implementing a socialist economic system.

Masturbation

Honestly I care more about organising and direct action than getting mired in squabbles over personal beliefs

Crysuko wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Masturbation

Honestly I care more about organising and direct action than getting mired in squabbles over personal beliefs

Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Crysuko wrote:Honestly I care more about organising and direct action than getting mired in squabbles over personal beliefs

Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

Hey, have you ever tried going mad without power? It's boring, no one listens to you.

Crysuko wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

Hey, have you ever tried going mad without power? It's boring, no one listens to you.

Isn't that what Tumblr is for?

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Crysuko wrote:Hey, have you ever tried going mad without power? It's boring, no one listens to you.

Isn't that what Tumblr is for?

And is anyone listening to them outside their circlejerk?

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Crysuko wrote:Honestly I care more about organising and direct action than getting mired in squabbles over personal beliefs

Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

> not organizing warrior monks to defend yourselves.

Pretty weak.

War Gears wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

> not organizing warrior monks to defend yourselves.

Pretty weak.

Too Catholic.

War Gears wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Yeah, you can kill us afterward.

> not organizing warrior monks to defend yourselves.

Pretty weak.

thou shalt not kill
Plus, organising a monk-litia wouldn't go unnoticed

War Gears wrote:

Northern Davincia wrote:Heh, very funny.

It's not funny. More sad.

Say what you will about Chile, but it's one of the most economically free nations in South America.

Crysuko wrote:thou shalt not kill

"Jinadatta SOri (twelfth century). writing at a time when Muslim destruction of temples and interference with pilgrimage was causing the Jain community great trouble. stated bluntly. in a manner more reminiscent of Islam itself. that anybody engaged in a religious activity who was forced to fight and kill somebody would not lose any spiritual merit but instead attain deliverance "

Crysuko wrote:Plus, organising a monk-litia wouldn't go unnoticed

Once you started trying to eradicate religion, there's not really anything to lose.

Bienenhalde wrote:What is the goal of the New Left, if not attacking religion? They do not seem to care so much about actually implementing a socialist economic system.

As someone who was actually a part of the American New Left (beginning in 1968), I can tell you, based upon direct experience, that we had no interest in attacking religion. In fact, at least among my comrades, we never discussed religion at all. Our focus was on problems like American imperialism in Indo-China.

Edit: Had the issue of religion come up, I would have been personally pleased. I began to study religion, as a serious hobby, when I was 11. As an Autistic guy (relatively low functioning at the time), once I get started on a subject, it takes a lot to shut me up.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Aillyria wrote:The current "left" would love to destroy all faiths.


I'm aware. That is a regrettable thing for two otherwise reformist rulers to not only fail to reverse, but actually made it worse. However, the other Tsars were complete and utter failures and allowed Russian power and culture to rot.

What about Nicholas I, Alexander II, and Alexander III? I would argue that their reigns were the golden age of the Russian Empire, despite the defeat in Crimea.

Nicolas was ok....I guess.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Aillyria wrote:The current "left" would love to destroy all faiths.


I'm aware. That is a regrettable thing for two otherwise reformist rulers to not only fail to reverse, but actually made it worse. However, the other Tsars were complete and utter failures and allowed Russian power and culture to rot.

Pete and Cate did not reform jack unless by "reform" you simply mean pGermanize and eradicate Russian tradition and shit on the Church. Alexander II actually reformed things

German culture during that time was more progressive and superior to that of Russia, before Peter and Katherine, Russia was a backwater.

Aillyria wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:What about Nicholas I, Alexander II, and Alexander III? I would argue that their reigns were the golden age of the Russian Empire, despite the defeat in Crimea.

Nicolas was ok....I guess.

The Parkus Empire wrote:Pete and Cate did not reform jack unless by "reform" you simply mean pGermanize and eradicate Russian tradition and shit on the Church. Alexander II actually reformed things

German culture during that time was more progressive and superior to that of Russia, before Peter and Katherine, Russia was a backwater.

Catherine the Great's emancipation of the nobility led directly to peasant revolts and the growth of nihilism in Russia.

Aillyria wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:What about Nicholas I, Alexander II, and Alexander III? I would argue that their reigns were the golden age of the Russian Empire, despite the defeat in Crimea.

Nicolas was ok....I guess.

The Parkus Empire wrote:Pete and Cate did not reform jack unless by "reform" you simply mean pGermanize and eradicate Russian tradition and shit on the Church. Alexander II actually reformed things

German culture during that time was more progressive and superior to that of Russia, before Peter and Katherine, Russia was a backwater.

Could you define "progressive", here?