Philosophical rant
What does war mean? What did Stalin want? People say Stalin is crazy, is evil, is a bastard. And I agree. But what most people neglect to think about, or perhaps they do think about it but have never put it into words, is that Stalin was probably a "nice guy." Even if he was a man of steel, as Lenin has said about him, he only someone who truly believes he is doing the right thing has to willpower to even believe that he has the power to rule the world. Stalin must have been useful, clever, charismatic. The truly crazy people never leave the asylum. Stalin may even have liked puppies, and handed out some change to a poor man begging on the street. After all, the ultimate goal of Communism is to care for everyone and let everyone become equal. The same with Hitler. He started the war not because he loved to see people suffer, but because he thought he could change the world for the better. And even under his rule of terror, he was loved by many Germans. If you had met Hitler in a pub, he might even be a nice, amiable drinking partner. It is only because the scale of his evil was so big it was invisible, even to himself. Looking back, from the outside, it seems simple. Why fight? You are killing millions of people for a reason that in the end was wrong. At least, that is what society has told us. That is the impression we form when we overhear our parents talking about it, in bitter tones and indignated outrage. I did not know what Communism meant until eigth grade. I had never thought to ask of it before then. As far as I knew, it was evil and stupid, because that was the way may parents and my sister had always talked about it. That was all I needed to know. But finally, after thirteen years, I wondered, "If it is so evil, why do people believe in Communism in the first place?" Then I learned that it meant equality for everyone. Shocked, I thought, "Well what's so bad about that? I thought that's what everyone always wanted."
"It's more complicated than that."
"Oh, ok. How?"
After awhile, when they outlined Communist government for me, I thought, "Well, it's different. But why is it evil?"
"It's not a bad concept, but it doesn't work in real life. If you get the same salary no matter how good the work you do is, then would you even bother trying to do it well in the first place?"
After that, I dropped the matter. But now I think, "Doesn't it just mean that they were wrong? People are wrong all the time, and they aren't evil." Now I know that it is just because people who claimed to be Communists abused their power. But there is nothing inherently wrong with Communism, it is only human nature that has made it evil. Just like there is something inherently wrong with capitalism, and it is only human nature that has made it workable. The whole point of capitalism is that the people who can't keep up get left behind. But because human nature is not that cruel, we have found ways to make a niche for every person in society.
WWI. Does it just prove that human nature is intrinsically destructive? Or perhaps it just proves that while most of society is "good", like sheep, we still seek a strong leader, who may in later years be called "bad". And it is when the "bad" rise to the top that stupid things happen, like WWI. In the end, if you truly want to be remembered, be the most destructive and stupid that you can be, because looking at the history books, the power of human nature to hate and sulk lasts much stronger than the power of human nature to love and cherish. Perhaps I am being too harsh. We look at the mistakes made in history so we do not make them again, and so we understand why we should not do this again. But frankly, a judge of whether or not you have been a good leader is not in the compliments and the awards and the praises, it can probably be most accurately measured by complaints and condemnations.
"It's more complicated than that."
"Oh, ok. How?"
After awhile, when they outlined Communist government for me, I thought, "Well, it's different. But why is it evil?"
"It's not a bad concept, but it doesn't work in real life. If you get the same salary no matter how good the work you do is, then would you even bother trying to do it well in the first place?"
After that, I dropped the matter. But now I think, "Doesn't it just mean that they were wrong? People are wrong all the time, and they aren't evil." Now I know that it is just because people who claimed to be Communists abused their power. But there is nothing inherently wrong with Communism, it is only human nature that has made it evil. Just like there is something inherently wrong with capitalism, and it is only human nature that has made it workable. The whole point of capitalism is that the people who can't keep up get left behind. But because human nature is not that cruel, we have found ways to make a niche for every person in society.
WWI. Does it just prove that human nature is intrinsically destructive? Or perhaps it just proves that while most of society is "good", like sheep, we still seek a strong leader, who may in later years be called "bad". And it is when the "bad" rise to the top that stupid things happen, like WWI. In the end, if you truly want to be remembered, be the most destructive and stupid that you can be, because looking at the history books, the power of human nature to hate and sulk lasts much stronger than the power of human nature to love and cherish. Perhaps I am being too harsh. We look at the mistakes made in history so we do not make them again, and so we understand why we should not do this again. But frankly, a judge of whether or not you have been a good leader is not in the compliments and the awards and the praises, it can probably be most accurately measured by complaints and condemnations.