this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
142 points (88.6% liked)

Asklemmy

49258 readers
815 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Julius Ceasar, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan and many more...

These people had beliefs and worldviews that were so horribly, by today's standards, that calling them fascist would be huge understatement. And they followed through by committing a lot of evil.

Aren't we basically glorifying the Hitlers of centuries past?

I know, historians always say that one should not judge historical figures by contemporary moral standards. But there's a difference between objectively studying history and actually glorifying these figures.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Because the powers that be and the systems they have in place (capitalism, Christian white supremacy, patriarchy, cis-heteronormativity) benefit in one way or another.

If they teach us that Julius Caesar was a bad guy and that it's good he was defeated, then we might learn that our current leaders are often bad guys too, and that maybe we should do the same to them.

In the same way that if they teach us that Hitler took his inspiration for the holocaust from already firmly established American racism, we might learn that our own history is just as bad and should be fought against at all cost (which is also what we're taught instead of the reality - the allies fought the Nazis because they threatened their own power, not because of an ideological disagreement).

That's why we're not taught (or only given a palatable token example) about working people fighting the owning class for basic rights, Black brown and Indigenous people fighting the Christian white supremacist establishment and winning, and other oppressed groups standing up to their oppressors (E: nor most of the atrocities they have and continue to commit).

Whitewashing history is always a deliberate act, and is always done in defence of the ruling class.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] don@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

I think the question really is, why do we glorify people at all? I know that the type of people you mention exist, but I hold them in no high regard. What causes people to admire and even worship others? Why don’t we as a species realize that we all meet the same end, and what causes people to believe that we somehow transcend the inevitable extinction of our species?

Answer these questions, and perhaps you answer your own.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But Alexander the Great literally has the Great in his name.

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

Not in every culture/language. It's like knighthood, people are going to call a knight "sir" even if they are at odds with the British.

[–] Blursty@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Julius Ceasar wasn't so bad. Parenti's book The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People's History of Ancient Rome is an interesting read, looking at his assassination as a reaction from the ruling class who felt threatened by his reformist policies that benefited the lower classes.

In general though we do seem to value the lives and experiences of people in even recent history as lesser. I don't know why, it's a good question.

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 3 points 10 months ago

I think you have to ignore large parts of his legacy to consider a genocidal warlord like Caesar "not so bad".

Pursuing the agenda of the populares may have made him less domestically odious than some of his fellow patricians from the optimates, but he was still a member of the ruling class monopolizing power in his person. On top of the whole brutal genocidal warlord thing.

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 10 months ago

George 'W'...

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί