Historical "facts" and popular representations of histrical figures that are wrong

[C. Cain]

Then please think before posting. Many of the things which you've posted on here, especially you're early comments about Hitler, are extremely inflammatory.

Also, how can one not assume someone is a troll when they first claim to admire and support strong leader of the type like Adolf Hitler and then turn around and claim that they're a Communist, a political ideology that is strictly anti-hierarchical in nature?

Oh, just give up. There's no use in prolonging this.
She's arguing just for the sake of arguing; her switching from one extreme to another happened at least twice in this very thread.

 

[beastro]

Look im not sure EXACTLY about the definitions of communism and facism but isnt it pretty contradictory to say that Hitler, probably the most famous fasict who ever lived) could have been communist but for a few small differences?

He basically wanted communism without the men doing the work getting the credit. It was a warped nationalism.

Honestly I think trying to "pin it down" like that is a mistake. Hitler, like just about every dictator that has ever existed, wanted power and didnt want to share it with anyone. Trying to exact his political motives from history and rumour is essentially impossible.

In the end communism and facism and most other dictatorships fail for the exact same reason. They are dictatorships. Every dictatorship ends. And the more the dictator wants to continue their rule the bloodier and nastier the war that comes after. Thats why democracy was invented so that there could be a smooth transistion of power from one dictatorship to the other. And it also gives the great masses the misguided impression that they have a genuine choice.

I'm fervently communist and believe it to be the great form of government one could have. Sadly, people treat it as a dictatorship (often at least a borderline military dictatorship, to boot) and its message is muddied.

There's never been true communism because people keep fucking it up lol. A girl can dream, though.

I completely agree on that. Communism would be the good way to run a society but it requires those who govern to be utterly selfless and make judgements based on the greater good of the people rather than on ANY of their own personal beliefs. Bad people for the job are already corrupt and most good people dont get there. The good people who DO get to the top of the greasy pole end up not being good people anymore.

Perhaps im too cynical but I genuinely dont think that ANY political regime can be good because its always run by a man or woman. Apart from the fact that the people who want power the most are the least appropriate ones to handle it. Men and women are human. The only things that seperates you and me from the position of US preseident of Galatic overload is ambition and oppurtunity.

Ambitious people want power and will sacrifice most things (or everything) to get it. That makes them more likely to get it. And then when they get there? MAYBE 1 in a thousand is a good decent kind of person. The rest are in it because theyre greedy (for money or power or whatever) and so make choices based on what THEY want.

No human society can be governed well and no human society can be GREAT (in my eyes) when you always get those kinds of people making the biggest descions.

It's about progress though, right? We've come a long way as a species over the last two thousand years--a long way. I believe we will achieve something like perfection eventually, and maybe not as far into the future as you'd think. Assuming we survive that long lol.

No, we haven't come a long way.

We are still the same creatures we were then and tens of thousands of years ago. The only thing that divides us from them is our collection and recorded knowledge and that is an extremely fragile thing. You lose that and it won't take many generations for state of civilization to irreparably degrade.

Um, "tens of thousands of years ago" we were barely human. Hell, not much longer than ten thousands years ago we only just began farming. You want to go back "tens" of thousands? Yeah, okay, you go Google what humans were like a good thirty thousand years ago and see if there's much of a difference between them and your average American lol.

You really have to learn that subtlety is a key facet of good trolling.

Just a quick heads up: calling someone a troll or accusing someone of trolling is against the rules. You've done it a few times already. Informing you so you can stop. I don't know if mods warn each instance or what, but yeah.

Then please think before posting. Many of the things which you've posted on here, especially you're early comments about Hitler, are extremely inflammatory.

Also, how can one not assume someone is a troll when they first claim to admire and support strong leader of the type like Adolf Hitler and then turn around and claim that they're a Communist, a political ideology that is strictly anti-hierarchical in nature?

Fascism is communism with a slightly warped idea of politics. Also, you want to try and say you can't admire someone and disagree with one of their beliefs? Well, I'm sure everyone you've ever thought was nice was perfect

Fascism was an ideology which espoused a melding of what ever one thought were the "good" qualities of the Free Market and Communism without including the the "bad" parts.

Nazism is distinct from Fascism.

There are no redeeming qualities about Hitler which are not distorted by his massively flawed ones.

Case in point: He loved his mother very deeply.... except he was a giant misogynist.

Anything one might admire about his character a political figure are things one might admire from a cult leader or sociopath.

 

[Stu35]

The movie 300 is a thorn in my side. As someone who had looked into the battle of Thermopylae, it got a little bit frustrating with the poor representation of the phalanx, giving the persians elephants, gunpowder, that massive guy, the last stand only containing 300 Spartans (when in reality, there was around two thousand people in the last stand), no mention of Admiral Themistocles, the reasoning for Spartans not sending the full force and the representation of Spartan training as being solely about strength, when in fact they were trained to win at all costs (the right of passage was to murder a slave without being caught, requiring stealth over brute force).

Annoyingly, there are people I know who believe that film was accurate.

Ever heard of tangential learning? 300 is commonly used as an example of tangential learning done right. Of course it's not accurate, but the movie is definitely entertaining in its own way and did inspire me (and hundreds of thousands of other people) to go look up the Battle of Thermopylae myself and learn about it.

This.

I hate people who criticise 300 for it's lack of accuracy - I happen to think it was an awesome film, yes it appeals to my male red blooded love of violence. However I also appreciate that it was a bloody fantastic work from an artistic point of view - Remember that the whole story is being told from the point of view of the character Dillios - He's recounting the story to his lads at Plataea, and of course he's going to embellish, he's going to tell tales of monsters and magic, and all that comes with it.

Yes, it was heavily CGI'd, yes it lacked depth, but it wasn't meant to be a deep film, it was meant to appeal to those of us who love that kind of base entertainment, and it succeeded - and whilst it was at it, it got a whole lot of 17-30 year old men interested in Greek history.

Is that a bad thing?

 

[TheOneBearded]

In Genghis Khan's empire, it was a council of women that held the highest power and decision making along side him. This was before women were though of to be something more than dinner-makers and baby-raisers.

Also, the Nazis were the first to put a smoking ban. This is more of a fact that most people just don't know and not a misrepresentation, but I thought of putting it out.

 

[beastro]

Then please think before posting. Many of the things which you've posted on here, especially you're early comments about Hitler, are extremely inflammatory.

Also, how can one not assume someone is a troll when they first claim to admire and support strong leader of the type like Adolf Hitler and then turn around and claim that they're a Communist, a political ideology that is strictly anti-hierarchical in nature?

Oh, just give up. There's no use in prolonging this.
She's arguing just for the sake of arguing; her switching from one extreme to another happened at least twice in this very thread.

And why would she do such a thing?

What do certain people who go by a name beginning with T do on the internet?

 

[cerebus23]

Look im not sure EXACTLY about the definitions of communism and facism but isnt it pretty contradictory to say that Hitler, probably the most famous fasict who ever lived) could have been communist but for a few small differences?

He basically wanted communism without the men doing the work getting the credit. It was a warped nationalism.

Honestly I think trying to "pin it down" like that is a mistake. Hitler, like just about every dictator that has ever existed, wanted power and didnt want to share it with anyone. Trying to exact his political motives from history and rumour is essentially impossible.

In the end communism and facism and most other dictatorships fail for the exact same reason. They are dictatorships. Every dictatorship ends. And the more the dictator wants to continue their rule the bloodier and nastier the war that comes after. Thats why democracy was invented so that there could be a smooth transistion of power from one dictatorship to the other. And it also gives the great masses the misguided impression that they have a genuine choice.

I'm fervently communist and believe it to be the greatest form of government one could have. Sadly, people treat it as a dictatorship (often at least a borderline military dictatorship, to boot) and its message is muddied.

There's never been true communism because people keep fucking it up lol. A girl can dream, though.

ants can be communistic people can't period. because people are not the same, a dog cather is not the same as a police officer, then we got that whole pesky human nature thing, where humans love to see themselves as better than someone else, we spend most of our teen years trying to be different.

communism is so beyond stupid it is laughable in any real world sense, any one that thinks it is viable political ideal is an idiot pure and simple. and if you are a die hard communist then i invite you to be a commoner in china or russia see how much you love your communism then. starve to death, freeze to death, while your leaders drink the best booze and eat the best food and line their bank accounts.

 

[A3sir]

The movie 300 is a thorn in my side. As someone who had looked into the battle of Thermopylae, it got a little bit frustrating with the poor representation of the phalanx, giving the persians elephants, gunpowder, that massive guy, the last stand only containing 300 Spartans (when in reality, there was around two thousand people in the last stand), no mention of Admiral Themistocles, the reasoning for Spartans not sending the full force and the representation of Spartan training as being solely about strength, when in fact they were trained to win at all costs (the right of passage was to murder a slave without being caught, requiring stealth over brute force).

Annoyingly, there are people I know who believe that film was accurate.

Uhh, you do realise that the entire movie is David Wenham's character telling a story to get the rest of the army's adrenaline pumping, right? It was never meant to be an accurate retelling, simply propaganda about how awesome those 300 Spartans were. It just really annoys me when people don't understand this and complain about the historical inaccuracies.

 

[Ryotknife]

The first one I could think of was that Napoleon was short. He wasn't, 5'7" was average for his time and he was seen in public with his guards who were well above average.

It was due to confusion in French units, as he was 5'2" in French measure... Nelson was the short one: 5'4".

Very well put, though Normandy was, IIRC, a joint British-American attack, with little in the way of Russian assistance. I could be wrong, though.

I think the point was that by the time of Overlord, Germany had effectively lost the war as the Soviets were pushing them back very far and fast in the east, so it was more a case of liberating France and racing to Berlin for a piece of the pie...

The germans were fighting a war on 3 (?) fronts though. Without the americans/british opening up those two fronts, I doubt Russia could take on the entire german army and win. A standstill I could see.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Various myths about the samurai always burn me up.

1: Bushido was followed, but only after Nippon settled down and the warrior class found it'self without a war to fight.

2: Samurai could, and showed quite often, they could run like little bitches when a battle wasn't going their way. During the siege of Osaka, in one notorious incident, a Tokugawa side general named Ia Naotaka actually started shooting at his own samurai to encourage them into the breach when they faltered.

3: While some samurai were no doubt quite badass with their blades, they valued slews of other weapon proficiencies on an equal scale with the sword. Firearms especially were a big trend to prove one's badassery with once they got introduced.

*nodnod*

I'd also mention that Edward Zwick's extremely romantic view of the samurai is so much bullshit. Most lords were pithy little dictators who enforced the Daimyo's laws with an iron fist.

On the subject of American politics, I'll take the thread's topic in reverse with William Howard Taft.

The guy busted more trusts than Roosevelt and left a rather considerable track record behind as Chief Justice. Incidentally, what do people remember him for?

<youtube=pENWP8r1-7M>

I think it's a pretty funny thing. What's the first thing anyone remembers about State leaders? Their appearance or personal habits. Lincoln was a lanky bastage who supposedly fought like a badass, people remmeber Nixon's speech delivery almost more than the man himself, and what are kids taught about one of their presidents?

That he was a fat dude who fell asleep everywhere. Priceless.

To be fair, though, Canada and Quebec aren't much better. I remember being taught to remember René Levesque's appearance as a kid because he resembled Count Orlok, from "Nosferatu"...

 

[beastro]

The movie 300 is a thorn in my side. As someone who had looked into the battle of Thermopylae, it got a little bit frustrating with the poor representation of the phalanx, giving the persians elephants, gunpowder, that massive guy, the last stand only containing 300 Spartans (when in reality, there was around two thousand people in the last stand), no mention of Admiral Themistocles, the reasoning for Spartans not sending the full force and the representation of Spartan training as being solely about strength, when in fact they were trained to win at all costs (the right of passage was to murder a slave without being caught, requiring stealth over brute force).

Annoyingly, there are people I know who believe that film was accurate.

Uhh, you do realise that the entire movie is David Wenham's character telling a story to get the rest of the army's adrenaline pumping, right? It was never meant to be an accurate retelling, simply propaganda about how awesome those 300 Spartans were. It just really annoys me when people don't understand this and complain about the historical inaccuracies.

This ignores the slant of the comic and the movie which leans in a direct Frank Miller is quite well known for.

For starters, being one of the archetypical conservative Hellenes, a Spartan would never spin such a blasphemous tale to rouse the hearts of all of Greece - he'd most likely get beaten to death.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Genghis Khan wasn't a mindless Barbarian who raped and pillaged his way across Asia.

He was VERY happy to let you think that, however, since it made you and your city that much more likely to surrender without a fight. The Mongols were actually using some of the best tactics devised by man up to that time, much better than the European knights they would go on to face, which tactics were, "charge straight in for honor and hope for the best."

He wasn't mindless but certainly he was capable of rape, pillage and senseless massacre.

A lot of the advanced thinking they had later was due to them adopting and using Chinese expertise after brutally conquering China.

 

[beastro]

Look im not sure EXACTLY about the definitions of communism and facism but isnt it pretty contradictory to say that Hitler, probably the most famous fasict who ever lived) could have been communist but for a few small differences?

He basically wanted communism without the men doing the work getting the credit. It was a warped nationalism.

Honestly I think trying to "pin it down" like that is a mistake. Hitler, like just about every dictator that has ever existed, wanted power and didnt want to share it with anyone. Trying to exact his political motives from history and rumour is essentially impossible.

In the end communism and facism and most other dictatorships fail for the exact same reason. They are dictatorships. Every dictatorship ends. And the more the dictator wants to continue their rule the bloodier and nastier the war that comes after. Thats why democracy was invented so that there could be a smooth transistion of power from one dictatorship to the other. And it also gives the great masses the misguided impression that they have a genuine choice.

I'm fervently communist and believe it to be the great form of government one could have. Sadly, people treat it as a dictatorship (often at least a borderline military dictatorship, to boot) and its message is muddied.

There's never been true communism because people keep fucking it up lol. A girl can dream, though.

I completely agree on that. Communism would be the good way to run a society but it requires those who govern to be utterly selfless and make judgements based on the greater good of the people rather than on ANY of their own personal beliefs. Bad people for the job are already corrupt and most good people dont get there. The good people who DO get to the top of the greasy pole end up not being good people anymore.

Perhaps im too cynical but I genuinely dont think that ANY political regime can be good because its always run by a man or woman. Apart from the fact that the people who want power the most are the least appropriate ones to handle it. Men and women are human. The only things that seperates you and me from the position of US preseident of Galatic overload is ambition and oppurtunity.

Ambitious people want power and will sacrifice most things (or everything) to get it. That makes them more likely to get it. And then when they get there? MAYBE 1 in a thousand is a good decent kind of person. The rest are in it because theyre greedy (for money or power or whatever) and so make choices based on what THEY want.

No human society can be governed well and no human society can be GREAT (in my eyes) when you always get those kinds of people making the biggest descions.

It's about progress though, right? We've come a long way as a species over the last two thousand years--a long way. I believe we will achieve something like perfection eventually, and maybe not as far into the future as you'd think. Assuming we survive that long lol.

No, we haven't come a long way.

We are still the same creatures we were then and tens of thousands of years ago. The only thing that divides us from them is our collection and recorded knowledge and that is an extremely fragile thing. You lose that and it won't take many generations for state of civilization to irreparably degrade.

Um, "tens of thousands of years ago" we were barely human. Hell, not much longer than ten thousands years ago we only just began farming. You want to go back "tens" of thousands? Yeah, okay, you go Google what humans were like a good thirty thousand years ago and see if there's much of a difference between them and your average American lol.

You really have to learn that subtlety is a key facet of good trolling.

Just a quick heads up: calling someone a troll or accusing someone of trolling is against the rules. You've done it a few times already. Informing you so you can stop. I don't know if mods warn each instance or what, but yeah.

Then please think before posting. Many of the things which you've posted on here, especially you're early comments about Hitler, are extremely inflammatory.

Also, how can one not assume someone is a troll when they first claim to admire and support strong leader of the type like Adolf Hitler and then turn around and claim that they're a Communist, a political ideology that is strictly anti-hierarchical in nature?

Fascism is communism with a slightly warped idea of politics. Also, you want to try and say you can't admire someone and disagree with one of their beliefs? Well, I'm sure everyone you've ever thought was nice was perfect

Fascism was an ideology which espoused a melding of what ever one thought were the "good" qualities of the Free Market and Communism without including the the "bad" parts.

Nazism is distinct from Fascism.

There are no redeeming qualities about Hitler which are not distorted by his massively flawed ones.

Case in point: He loved his mother very deeply.... except he was a giant misogynist.

Anything one might admire about his character a political figure are things one might admire from a cult leader or sociopath.

Distinct in that Nazism was a form of Fascism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

Anywho: again, unless you want to claim you must like the entirety of a person and their every belief to say that you like them without being branded a liar, I think I've dismissed your point.

I think the only person who'd take your position towards Hitler would be one who did it solely to get others backs up.

They are either of that category or fully support everything he did ideology included.

I get what you're doing. When I was a little kid I loved to get my mom shot dirty looks by strangers for saying to her jokingly "The Nazi's are the good guys, right mom?".

 

[C. Cain]

And why would she do such a thing?

What do certain people who go by a name beginning with T do on the internet?

Does it matter? The motives behind this are irrelevant.
All that matters is that there's a distinctive pattern. You can see it and I can see it. And there's a simple way to stop it. You even acknowledged it yourself. So whatever the intentions are, I suggest you just leave it be.

 

[A3sir]

As for WWII, it never ended.

The European theatre didn't end until 1990. In 1945, Germany was fractured and didn't exist as a country, only East Germany and West Germany, none of which were official combatants in the war. The peace treaty was only signed in 1990 after the Berlin wall came down and the country of Germany was reunited.

The pacific theatre never ended, Japan and Russia never signed peace agreements with each other and there is still and island in the pacific that both countries have troops stationed and neither are willing to give up, meaning WWII is still a currently active war.

 

[beastro]

And why would she do such a thing?

What do certain people who go by a name beginning with T do on the internet?

Does it matter? The motives behind this are irrelevant.
All that matters is that there's a distinctive pattern. You can see it and I can see it. And there's a simple way to stop it. You even acknowledged it yourself. So whatever the intentions are, I suggest you just leave it be.

It's a slow day and I enjoy toying with them.

 

[TheOneBearded]

Depending on what you see as "history", Jesus Christ wasn't a handsome, white, long-haired, bearded man. He was middle-eastern and would have had darker skin. Not sure about the hair and handsomeness though.

 

[beastro]

Look im not sure EXACTLY about the definitions of communism and facism but isnt it pretty contradictory to say that Hitler, probably the most famous fasict who ever lived) could have been communist but for a few small differences?

He basically wanted communism without the men doing the work getting the credit. It was a warped nationalism.

Honestly I think trying to "pin it down" like that is a mistake. Hitler, like just about every dictator that has ever existed, wanted power and didnt want to share it with anyone. Trying to exact his political motives from history and rumour is essentially impossible.

In the end communism and facism and most other dictatorships fail for the exact same reason. They are dictatorships. Every dictatorship ends. And the more the dictator wants to continue their rule the bloodier and nastier the war that comes after. Thats why democracy was invented so that there could be a smooth transistion of power from one dictatorship to the other. And it also gives the great masses the misguided impression that they have a genuine choice.

I'm fervently communist and believe it to be the great form of government one could have. Sadly, people treat it as a dictatorship (often at least a borderline military dictatorship, to boot) and its message is muddied.

There's never been true communism because people keep fucking it up lol. A girl can dream, though.

I completely agree on that. Communism would be the good way to run a society but it requires those who govern to be utterly selfless and make judgements based on the greater good of the people rather than on ANY of their own personal beliefs. Bad people for the job are already corrupt and most good people dont get there. The good people who DO get to the top of the greasy pole end up not being good people anymore.

Perhaps im too cynical but I genuinely dont think that ANY political regime can be good because its always run by a man or woman. Apart from the fact that the people who want power the most are the least appropriate ones to handle it. Men and women are human. The only things that seperates you and me from the position of US preseident of Galatic overload is ambition and oppurtunity.

Ambitious people want power and will sacrifice most things (or everything) to get it. That makes them more likely to get it. And then when they get there? MAYBE 1 in a thousand is a good decent kind of person. The rest are in it because theyre greedy (for money or power or whatever) and so make choices based on what THEY want.

No human society can be governed well and no human society can be GREAT (in my eyes) when you always get those kinds of people making the biggest descions.

It's about progress though, right? We've come a long way as a species over the last two thousand years--a long way. I believe we will achieve something like perfection eventually, and maybe not as far into the future as you'd think. Assuming we survive that long lol.

No, we haven't come a long way.

We are still the same creatures we were then and tens of thousands of years ago. The only thing that divides us from them is our collection and recorded knowledge and that is an extremely fragile thing. You lose that and it won't take many generations for state of civilization to irreparably degrade.

Um, "tens of thousands of years ago" we were barely human. Hell, not much longer than ten thousands years ago we only just began farming. You want to go back "tens" of thousands? Yeah, okay, you go Google what humans were like a good thirty thousand years ago and see if there's much of a difference between them and your average American lol.

You really have to learn that subtlety is a key facet of good trolling.

Just a quick heads up: calling someone a troll or accusing someone of trolling is against the rules. You've done it a few times already. Informing you so you can stop. I don't know if mods warn each instance or what, but yeah.

Then please think before posting. Many of the things which you've posted on here, especially you're early comments about Hitler, are extremely inflammatory.

Also, how can one not assume someone is a troll when they first claim to admire and support strong leader of the type like Adolf Hitler and then turn around and claim that they're a Communist, a political ideology that is strictly anti-hierarchical in nature?

Fascism is communism with a slightly warped idea of politics. Also, you want to try and say you can't admire someone and disagree with one of their beliefs? Well, I'm sure everyone you've ever thought was nice was perfect

Fascism was an ideology which espoused a melding of what ever one thought were the "good" qualities of the Free Market and Communism without including the the "bad" parts.

Nazism is distinct from Fascism.

There are no redeeming qualities about Hitler which are not distorted by his massively flawed ones.

Case in point: He loved his mother very deeply.... except he was a giant misogynist.

Anything one might admire about his character a political figure are things one might admire from a cult leader or sociopath.

Distinct in that Nazism was a form of Fascism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

Anywho: again, unless you want to claim you must like the entirety of a person and their every belief to say that you like them without being branded a liar, I think I've dismissed your point.

I think the only person who'd take your position towards Hitler would be one who did it solely to get others backs up.

They are either of that category or fully support everything he did ideology included.

Sorry, are you going to go ahead and tell us that one cannot like someone without "fully supporting everything they did/do, ideology included"? Because I'd like to see you try.

Course not.

However not too many try and pick and choose what qualities they like and don't like from such a historical figure, especially when the ones you've stated that you admire are deplorable.

 

[Dalisclock]

The movie 300 is a thorn in my side. As someone who had looked into the battle of Thermopylae, it got a little bit frustrating with the poor representation of the phalanx, giving the persians elephants, gunpowder, that massive guy, the last stand only containing 300 Spartans (when in reality, there was around two thousand people in the last stand), no mention of Admiral Themistocles, the reasoning for Spartans not sending the full force and the representation of Spartan training as being solely about strength, when in fact they were trained to win at all costs (the right of passage was to murder a slave without being caught, requiring stealth over brute force).

Annoyingly, there are people I know who believe that film was accurate.

Not to mention two other facts:

1. The Athenians weren't the only ones who practiced homosexuality with young men. The spartans were quite into this trend as well, IIRC.

2. The reason every Spartan was a soldier is because they had many slaves(offscreen, back in Sparta) actually doing all the farming and such, that allowed them to have such a large dedicated soldier class. On the flip side, they couldn't send their entire army to battle because then the slaves would revolt.


I look at the movie as "If the Spartans had Propaganda films, this is exactly what it would have looked like"