History questions not worth their own thread IV

[Traitorfish]

Some Chinese leftists have attempted to claim Mo Zi and the Mohist school as proto-socialist, although it usually involves a few generous leaps of the imagination.

Depending on how far back you're drawing the line for "pre-modern", you could also throw in Gerrard Winstanley and the Diggers (or "True Levellers"), and Thomas Müntzer and the Mühlhausen commune. The latter, in particular, was a favourite of the old DDR.

 

[Lord Baal]

In the Jesus vein, I've heard other religious figures referred to as proto-socialists as well. Notably John the Baptist.

 

[sydhe]

Some Chinese leftists have attempted to claim Mo Zi and the Mohist school as proto-socialist, although it usually involves a few generous leaps of the imagination.

Wang Mang (emperor of China 9 - 23 AD) is another.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I've heard Lao Tze is pretty big with Chinese Anarchists.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I've heard Lao Tze is pretty big with Chinese Anarchists.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Who are some pre-modern figures that leftists typically retroactively idealize as being protosocialists? Such as Savonarola, the Christian apostles, the Gracchi brothers and Spartacus.

I'm surprised Plotinus didn't mention them, but St. Ambrose and St. Basil of Caesarea both come to mind; I know I've cited them in religious arguments about the morality of socialism (something that actually happens quite often in arguments about socialism in the United States, it's one of the reasons why I think Marxism does so poorly here, since its proponents are very often atheists).

You hoard your wealth, and do not bother to look upon those who are worn and oppressed by necessity! You will say to me: “How am I doing wrong if I hoard what belongs to me?” And I ask you: “What are the things that you think belong to you? From whom did you receive them? You act like someone who goes to a theatre, and having sat in the seats that others might have taken, tries to stop everyone else from coming in, taking for himself what should have been used by everyone.” And so it is with the rich, who having been the first to gain what should be common to all, keep it for themselves and hold onto it. If everyone took only what he needed, and gave the rest to those in need, there would be neither rich nor poor.

The world has been created for everyone's use, but you few rich are trying to keep it for yourselves. For not merely the possession of the earth, but the very sky, the air, and the sea are claimed for the use of the rich few. …The earth belongs to all, not just to the rich.

 

[Lord Baal]

Is there a source on the web where I can find really accurate maps from different periods of time? For example, accurate maps of Bulgaria across the entirety of its existence, instead of ridiculous hypernationalist maps that give every country ten times its actual territory.

 

[Plotinus]

I'm surprised Plotinus didn't mention them, but St. Ambrose and St. Basil of Caesarea both come to mind; I know I've cited them in religious arguments about the morality of socialism (something that actually happens quite often in arguments about socialism in the United States, it's one of the reasons why I think Marxism does so poorly here, since its proponents are very often atheists).

Yes, those are good examples, and I often think of St Basil when I hear people trying to make out that Christianity is a capitalist religion. Of course it's anachronistic to try to fit ancient figures into modern political categories, but all the same, if Basil were around today I don't think he'd exactly be a Thatcherite (despite rather resembling her in personality).

 

[Traitorfish]

Did European-introduced diseases have a significant demographic impact on indigenous Australians? It just occurred to me that I have no idea how that played out, so as far as I know it could have been minimal, or as catastrophic as it was in the Americas.

 

[Masada]

Yes. The classic example is the Eora, the original inhabitants of Sydney who all but died out due to disease within the first 20 to 30 years of settlement.

 

[Radio Noer]

Does anybody know the types of tactics or weapons used by the Seminoles in the Seminole Wars?

 

[Lord Baal]

Did European-introduced diseases have a significant demographic impact on indigenous Australians? It just occurred to me that I have no idea how that played out, so as far as I know it could have been minimal, or as catastrophic as it was in the Americas.

Yeah, diseases had a pretty major impact, particularly on the coastal areas. Australia was not as badly affected as the Americas though, probably because colonial settlements were confined to the coastal regions for a lot longer due to the climatic and geographic difficulties inland expansion presented. It's no accident that the places that were most difficult for Europeans to settle, like far northern Queensland, Arnhem Land and central Australia are the places with the most people of Aboriginal descent these days (excepting cities, of course). Disease had a positively catastrophic effect on the Tasmanian Aborigines.

 

[Masada]

Eh, all Indigenous populations got knocked down. The difference being that gap between the disease 'wave' and colonial settlement tended to be larger the more remote one got. So there was at least time to rebuild. (I tried to articulate that last night, but gave up).

 

[Tee Kay]

Disease waves also destroy the underlying political/cultural/economic foundations of a society, so sometimes there's not a lot left to rebuild with.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I'm surprised Plotinus didn't mention them, but St. Ambrose and St. Basil of Caesarea both come to mind; I know I've cited them in religious arguments about the morality of socialism (something that actually happens quite often in arguments about socialism in the United States, it's one of the reasons why I think Marxism does so poorly here, since its proponents are very often atheists).

It seems awfully hard to reconcile such sentiments (and indeed much of the bible) with those of the most ardent Capitalists, but I really don't see how one can argue that these are in favor of Marxism either. They are much more in line with Georgism.

 

[LightSpectra]

Or distributism.

 

[Traitorfish]

It seems possible that one can draw on somebody's ethical logic without necessarily coming to the same practical conclusions, especially when that person lived over sixteen hundred years ago.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Or distributism.

Or Anarcho-Pacifism. Fun game we got here.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Anarcho-Pacifism, Distributism, and Georgism can all coexist.


The quotes seem particularly Georgist though, due to the focus on Land (which as an economic term refers to all natural resources). It is not about capital in general, which includes much which is the product of human labor. They focus on attacking those whose wealth derives not from labor but from monopolizing God's handiwork instead of treating it as the common inheritance of all mankind. Such notions fit far better with biblical concepts like Gleaner's Rights than with a Socialistic State.


There is plenty in the bible (and presumably early church writings) that can be used to argue against socialism too. It seems hard to find much that could argue against Geoism though.

 

[LightSpectra]

Industry in Western civilization didn't exist in any significant scale before the 19th century (aside from small examples like the Flemish wool trade); before factory economies, everything was based on land and livestock. So no modern ideology is really comparable, which was basically my point.