(11-26-2019, 08:57 AM)Hintergrund Wrote:(11-20-2019, 03:45 AM)Teejay Wrote:(11-20-2019, 03:14 AM)Hintergrund Wrote: It makes sense re: the Crises, but I still think it's odd that Stalin, his purges and the Holodomor constitute a High. And even if it's true, how is the first half of Stalin's rule a High, but the second one an Awakening? What happened?
Also, many Russians joke that their history can be concluded in one sentence: "Things got worse." Does their cycle only have two seasons (of different length), Crisis and everything else?
Well China was in a High from 1949-1967, that featured both the Thousands Flowers Campaign and the Great Leap Forward. Also, Cambodia might have been in a High during the rule of Pol Pot.
Some of the things you say make sense, but now I wonder whether you're still sane. You sound as idiotic as those lefty "intellecktuals" who defended mass murderers like him.
I certainly do not defend Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot who were murderous tyrants.
However, I see patterns to all of these three tyrant’s behavior, in that they are Old Nomads who imposed mind numbing totalitarianism, during a High when as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn remarked of Stalinst Russia, when the people had forgotten god.
Nomads have a tendency to Imposing mind numbing authoritarianism, build police states, in response to a Crisis. There are plenty of examples of this phenomenon at work throughout history, from Queen Elizabeth I, James II of England, Louis XIV of France, Francisco Franco, António de Oliveira Salazar, Juan Perón, Vladimir Lenin, Josip Broz Tito, Vladmir Putin, Ali Khamenei, along possibly Suharto and Lee Kuan Yew. However Nomad leaders can be great for stabilizing their societies, along with getting things done and often are considered by historians as among the greatest leaders of a particular society.