• science_pope [any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Yep. People are born good or bad, and the things good people do are good (or a forgivable mistake at worst) because good people did them, and the things bad people do are bad (or incidental at best) because bad people did them. Doesn't really matter what the thing is, it can even literally be genocide (Ender's Game).

    • stummVonBordwehr [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Which is also why killing Hitler as a child is the correct way to prevent the Holocaust if you have a time machine. There's no way to make baby Hitler non-EVIL or keep him from acquiring power, but with EVIL Hitler gone, none of the bad things can happen!

      • VILenin [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        Material Conditions? What's that? Just kill baby Hitler lol and we'll all live happily ever after.

          • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Eh, a common feature of the "would you kill baby Hitler?" discussion is that maybe if you did, someone else would just take his place because (although this term is rarely used in this conversation) the material conditions demand it.

            Libs can intuit the right answer sometimes even if they can't accurately describe it. This is why theory is important -- it connects those dots.

    • kilternkafuffle [any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Not just evil - but also badass. Stalin born under the Russian Tsar? Joins a revolutionary movement, helps it win, claws his way to the top. Stalin born in a liberal democracy with no revolutionary party? Takes over the whole shebang anyway.

      I want a "Justin Ferro" prequel novel, where Stalin is born of an Iberian slave, takes over the fucking Roman Empire, industrializes, and fights off the Huns and Goths.

    • Teja [she/her]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I also like the implications of US presidents actually being good? Unlike the bad genetically evil Stalin.