Page 1 of 1


PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 6:34 pm
by bdnakathelakaflammab
I just read through this article, and it got me thinking... How does one prove to others that history repeats itself? In politics, in ethics, most of the time all it just takes a refutation before the thrust of the "It happened before" argument to fall. Like when people compared Vietnam to Iraq, yet they have both become long, misguided, contracted wars with a fading lack of public interest. Of course, nothing is exactly the same, but how close do circumstances have to be for someone to believe that the past has just happened again? ... history_1/

Just my food for thought for the day, figured I'd pass it on as well. I don't know how much debate my rhetoric could inspire, but its a good read anyway.

Re: History

PostPosted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 9:18 pm
by Qaenyin The Angelblade
I think people in general are usually too self righteous to admit any semblance between their goals and those of someone they've admitted(and is publicly considered) in short, a bad person.

That and, in addition, if you think about it, if someone was, for this example, compared to nazis, and went "Oh my god, I'm like a Nazi!" in realization, then apologized and tried to change their ways, they would then have alienated their original opposition(because people don't forgive easily when at all), and their previous supporters(who would be too stubborn to admit what this person just did, and instead would consider them a traitor), meaning they'd just have shot themselves in the foot both ways.

Makes you feel sorry for em sort of since it's one of those "If you admit your mistake you're fucked, and if you don't you're an asshole".