U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What Do You Believe Are the World's Most Negative Events?
The Russian Revolution of 1917 and in Particular the October Revolution 15 39.47%
The French Revolution 3 7.89%
Hitler's Accession to Power in 1933 19 50.00%
The American Revolution 1 2.63%
England's Glorious Revolution of 1689 0 0%
September 11, 2001 6 15.79%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-07-2019, 02:03 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
You are not understanding this. He is a phony, his books are not factually correct. This is a view held by all literary critics and historians.

And no, I do not read incorrect facts masquerading as facts, so I have not read his books and do not care to as they are BS.
Except that most of the events covered in the book of his I have read are discussed in reviews of the book cited by someone with whom you agree, 2x3x29x41, Stephen Kotkin's Stalin, Volume One: 1878-1928. While I am not going to read two books about Stalin back to back, from reading reviews there are similarities. A lot of the academic world does not appreciate anti-Soviet literature, any more than they appreciate strongly pro-American views on any subject. These are the same people that advocate painting over murals of George Washington. See San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2019, 05:03 PM
 
15,826 posts, read 13,715,107 times
Reputation: 21821
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Except that most of the events covered in the book of his I have read are discussed in reviews of the book cited by someone with whom you agree, 2x3x29x41, Stephen Kotkin's Stalin, Volume One: 1878-1928. While I am not going to read two books about Stalin back to back, from reading reviews there are similarities. A lot of the academic world does not appreciate anti-Soviet literature, any more than they appreciate strongly pro-American views on any subject. These are the same people that advocate painting over murals of George Washington. See San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural.
Go read it then and quit referencing a discredited writer, then maybe you will be taken seriously.

Instead, you keep trying to defend this guy for some reason even though about everyone with knowledge in this area knows this guy is BS.

The rest of your post has nothing to do with your thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 05:34 PM
 
914 posts, read 208,328 times
Reputation: 3153
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Essad Bey had sources in Azerbaijan and Georgia, as well as in Berlin. I don't know your authority that he is "discredited." Other than that Essad Bey a/k/a Lev Nussenbaum roundly disliked him for his cruel policies. If the world had known of and acted on his cruelty the world would be an infinitely better place. Despite his faux identity change Essad Bey was hardly an Islamopohile. Have you read either The Orientalist or any of his books? I doubt seriously that you have.
Bey was able to produce a comprehensive scholarly work on Stalin at a time when none existed because he had 'sources in Azerbaijan and Georgia, as well as in Berlin'? I'd ask if that's meant to be a joke but, alas, I know it's sadly serious.

What I've bolded is the sole reason you're so enraptured with Bey. You're entirely uninterested in a dispassionate examination of Stalin. You crave the emotional high of someone who doesn't examine Stalin but rails against him. Bey does that. Thus, you've uncritically accepted whatever Bey asserts and will brook no suggestions to the contrary.

And, yes, Bey was most certainly an Islamophile. He converted to Islam. He founded the student group Islamia, for Muslims. He was contemporarily described in press accounts as a Muslim. He is presently described by both Jewish and Muslim sources as a Muslim. Along with the approving biography of Czar Nicholas, the monarchist Bey also wrote an approving biography of Shah Reza of Iran. And one of Mohammed. Bey himself waxes:
“I saw the broad expanse of the sandy Arabian desert, I saw the horsemen, their snow-white burnooses billowing in the wind, I saw the flocks of prophets praying towards Mecca and I wanted to be one with this wall, one with this desert, one with this incomprehensible, intricate script, one with the entire Islamic Orient.”

How you can know anything at all about Bey and deny that he was an Islamophile is amusing. I suppose it's a conundrum for you. You so love his anti-Stalin stance that you simply cannot bear to admit that he's a Muslim. So, you just say 'Nuh-uh!'. It's always the same old thing with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 06:16 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
Bey was able to produce a comprehensive scholarly work on Stalin at a time when none existed because he had 'sources in Azerbaijan and Georgia, as well as in Berlin'? I'd ask if that's meant to be a joke but, alas, I know it's sadly serious.

What I've bolded is the sole reason you're so enraptured with Bey. You're entirely uninterested in a dispassionate examination of Stalin. You crave the emotional high of someone who doesn't examine Stalin but rails against him. Bey does that. Thus, you've uncritically accepted whatever Bey asserts and will brook no suggestions to the contrary.

And, yes, Bey was most certainly an Islamophile. He converted to Islam. He founded the student group Islamia, for Muslims. He was contemporarily described in press accounts as a Muslim. He is presently described by both Jewish and Muslim sources as a Muslim. Along with the approving biography of Czar Nicholas, the monarchist Bey also wrote an approving biography of Shah Reza of Iran. And one of Mohammed. Bey himself waxes:
“I saw the broad expanse of the sandy Arabian desert, I saw the horsemen, their snow-white burnooses billowing in the wind, I saw the flocks of prophets praying towards Mecca and I wanted to be one with this wall, one with this desert, one with this incomprehensible, intricate script, one with the entire Islamic Orient.”

How you can know anything at all about Bey and deny that he was an Islamophile is amusing. I suppose it's a conundrum for you. You so love his anti-Stalin stance that you simply cannot bear to admit that he's a Muslim. So, you just say 'Nuh-uh!'. It's always the same old thing with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
Go read it then and quit referencing a discredited writer, then maybe you will be taken seriously.

Instead, you keep trying to defend this guy for some reason even though about everyone with knowledge in this area knows this guy is BS.

The rest of your post has nothing to do with your thread.
Modern writer Thomas Reiss would beg to differ. See The Orientalist: Solving the Mystery of a Strange and Dangerous Life. Reiss is a Harvard graduate (1987) and a Pulitzer Prize winner. His opinions carry more weight with me than Buxus or 2x3x29x41. As far as 2x3x29x41 can you explain what you admire about Stalin?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 08:24 PM
 
15,826 posts, read 13,715,107 times
Reputation: 21821
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Modern writer Thomas Reiss would beg to differ. See The Orientalist: Solving the Mystery of a Strange and Dangerous Life. Reiss is a Harvard graduate (1987) and a Pulitzer Prize winner. His opinions carry more weight with me than Buxus or 2x3x29x41. As far as 2x3x29x41 can you explain what you admire about Stalin?
You see, we are not talking about Reiss, we are talking about Bey. Bey is a discredited writer and his works are essentially fiction. nothing you will say will ever, ever change this.

Please use more reputable sources for the basis of your arguments. Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 04:40 AM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
You see, we are not talking about Reiss, we are talking about Bey. Bey is a discredited writer and his works are essentially fiction. nothing you will say will ever, ever change this.

Please use more reputable sources for the basis of your arguments. Thanks.
Reiss is a major endorser of Bey. I do respect Boxus' opinion but respect Reiss more. Unless you send me a book you've written and let me compare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 12:07 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
You see, we are not talking about Reiss, we are talking about Bey. Bey is a discredited writer and his works are essentially fiction. nothing you will say will ever, ever change this.

Please use more reputable sources for the basis of your arguments. Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Reiss is a major endorser of Bey. I do respect Boxus' opinion but respect Reiss more. Unless you send me a book you've written and let me compare.
In my prior response (quoted above) I gave Boxus's post shorter shrift than I should have. In fact, this goes to the very heart of how writers and thinkers are credited or discredited in mass media and the academic world.

Marxism was in many ways a utopian vision of a perfect world. "From each according to the ability, to each according to his needs" sounds like a great idea, and the way the world should be. The problem is that it doesn't represent human psychology. When implementing that was attempted, in Russia of the 1920s and early 1930s and in Cambodia a/k/a Democratic Kampuchea in the late 1970's, the results were beyond tragic. Ditto China's "Great Leap Forward" in the 1960s. In all cases starvation, accompanied by massacres to cajole the unwilling people to do with they are not willing to do, i.e. produce for no reward occurred.

Writers, thinkers and speakers who try to buck this trend are ridiculed at best. This is also true of "climate deniers"; anyone opposing any redistributionist scheme is pilloried as being ignorant, stupid, mean or in today's parlance "not woke." Essad Bey is, posthumously, a victim of this discreditation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2019, 06:57 PM
 
15,137 posts, read 13,765,393 times
Reputation: 6975
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
In my prior response (quoted above) I gave Boxus's post shorter shrift than I should have. In fact, this goes to the very heart of how writers and thinkers are credited or discredited in mass media and the academic world.

Marxism was in many ways a utopian vision of a perfect world. "From each according to the ability, to each according to his needs" sounds like a great idea, and the way the world should be.

"The world" the way we know it?
No, not really)))
SOME people have great material needs; there will be never enough for them ( if to distribute goods according to their "needs.")
Other people are rather modest in their material needs; they don't feel comfortable/happy if the society around them is full of injustice/poverty.

You can't combine these two different types of people under one formula of "from each according to the ability, to each according to his needs" - not with these kind of differences in people.



Quote:
The problem is that it doesn't represent human psychology.
It doesn't represent AMERICAN psychology, ( or rather the very core of it,) as for the rest of humanity - it's a different story.


Quote:
When implementing that was attempted, in Russia of the 1920s and early 1930s and in Cambodia a/k/a Democratic Kampuchea in the late 1970's, the results were beyond tragic.
"Cambodia results" are tragic no matter what - communism or not.

It's a third world country to begin with, and the practice shows us, plenty of these countries are suffering in absense of any "communism," because of the shortages of food, diseases, natural disasters, and the last but not least - colonization.

Russia is a whole different story, so it doesn't make sense to create a hotchpotch here under a slogan of "communism."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2019, 07:16 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
An infinitely better source for actual information about Stalin and his career up through his first few years in power would be Stephen Kotkin's Stalin, Volume One: 1878-1928.
As I suspected, as a Princeton professor, solidly of the academic establishment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2019, 07:21 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,237 posts, read 6,404,180 times
Reputation: 12542
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
It doesn't represent AMERICAN psychology, ( or rather the very core of it,) as for the rest of humanity - it's a different story.
In what country or countries is this utopia where "it's a different story"? Utopia Parkway in Queens, New York perhaps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
"Cambodia results" are tragic no matter what - communism or not.

It's a third world country to begin with, and the practice shows us, plenty of these countries are suffering in absense of any "communism," because of the shortages of food, diseases, natural disasters, and the last but not least - colonization.

Russia is a whole different story, so it doesn't make sense to create a hotchpotch here under a slogan of "communism."
The results of the same agrarian policy were identical, however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top