Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Pangur Bán, Dec 18, 2011.
AFAIK, Obama did
Thanks I will be looking towards it. I dont know how much lies is in there and although there are some good points its clear that the article is ridiculously biased.
Today morning I have heard acknowledgement from Milan Uhde, Havel´s fellow college as a disident, writer and politician: Althoug I disagree with him(Havel) often we needed him very much...
Thats a lot in line with the way I think about V.Havel. He was instrumental in bringing up the necessery changes and his honesty, integrity and vision were unique by the world standards, especialy in politics.
Which South Korea did today
Besides, according to the official Russian/Chinese government line, there is no oppression of dissent in these countries. By not sending their condolences, they'Re just showing their true colours.
Aw, bro, don't be mad: here, have some popular reaction.
You gotta remember, that for some circles in Russia he is an evil treacherous Western sell-out, who ruined the workers paradise in Czechia and contributed to the dissiolution of the only force of light in this world, the Warsaw pact. Besides he sure musta been critical to Tin Pu at some time, and that's a no-no
If he really was what he is praised to be, a man whose honesty and firm principles built a prosperous counrty with freedom and justice for all, then he has my sympathies.
Otherwise - meh.
But in any case, rest in peace pan Havel, prominent Slavic figure.
I am talking strictly about the regimes, not the people. I know there have been a strong reaction in the concerned circles in Russia and even in China, to some extent.
Who cares about regimes? They are a bunch of crooks anywhere in the world, including Czechland. This is diplomacy language, where everything is based on realpolitik. It's people that matter.
On a side note, bro, I just thought: do you still have any places in your country named after Russian places or people? We have a Yaroslav Hashek street and Prazhskaya metro station in Moscow. Prolly something more.
Sure. The tram I take to the city goes through Minská street, for example. There is also Malinovské náměstí here in Brno, and probably other places named after something related to Russia.
(My great-aunt used to live on Leninova street, but they renamed it )
Stuff named after Lenin is mostly renamed here too
Wait a moment...ohh you are just exaggerating... no ones honesty and principles can do such a thing, you know Jesus or Buddha, they all tried...
What you can notice all over the czech TV and press is how people are talking about human rights, freedom etc. all becouse of Havels death. Thats something one has to admire. He was serving his country and the world till he breathed last and even now in his death he is still serving.
By the way how is Gorby doing I personaly put him higher then Havel.
Seeing Richard Cribb's post makes me wonder about him. Perhaps I was too quick to praise Havel; it is not uncommon for the fathers of nations to be deified.
Him endorsing capitalism at the expense of democracy would, after all, not be surprising to me; it was par the course in the Cold War era and still is today.
He nonetheless did a good deed by deposing Stalinist tyrants, and it sounds like he overall made the average Czech's life better in the long term.
But of course, he's not a saint.
...then again, how many politicians are? Nearly every revolutionary has at least one bloody massacre on his hands, even the likes of Trotsky, and I imagine other heroes such as Washington.
It sounds though like the alternative was worse...
Eh, if any of you think that Havel would ever support capitalism over democracy, it just proves you know nothing about him (and I am not directing this at anybody in particular).
He was actually very pro-environmentalist (he repeatedly criticized the Communist regime for the widespread environmental destruction it caused, and you can read some of that in the speech I posted) and more of a social-democrat at heart.
He was disliked by both those on the very right (free marketeers, laissez-faire ideologues) and those on the very left (Commies), which in itself proves he was a great man with strong moral principles he *never* compromised.
"Presenting himself as a man of peace and stating that he would never sell arms to oppressive regimes, he sold weapons to the Philippines and the fascist regime in Thailand."
"In 1992, while president of Czechoslovakia, Havel, the great democrat, demanded that parliament be suspended and he be allowed to rule by edict, the better to ram through free-market "reforms." That same year, he signed a law that made the advocacy of communism a felony with a penalty of up to eight years imprisonment. He claimed the Czech constitution required him to sign it. In fact, as he knew, the law violated the Charter of Human Rights which is incorporated into the Czech constitution. In any case, it did not require his signature to become law. in 1995, he supported and signed another undemocratic law barring communists and former communists from employment in public agencies."
Quoted for reference...
It is not anything revolutionary to compromise democracy for capitalism.
Never mind, every national father tends to have a mystique around them. Czechs and Slovaks are likely more endeared to him, just as an American would be to Washington, a Russian to Lenin, a Colombian to Bolivar, etc. People who overthrow oppressive regimes often get an aura of saintlihood around them. Democracies and dictatorships alike have their heroes.
He was likely better than his Communist predecessors, but painting him as a man of uncompromising moral fortitude doesn't seem possible.
Power corrupts even the purest of souls, because to stay in power, you inherently must compromise your principles. Democracy is all well and good... provided it supports your plans. Otherwise, it's expendable.
I am going to patiently ignore any quote from that horrible piece of filth that was pasted here by Richard Cribb. You could do better if you quoted official DPRK press releases, because even that would be less biased. I don't understand how you could take it seriously after reading the first sentence. It's disgusting and offensive.
It may be biased, but you are obviously, too.
I am still hoping for that promised rebuttal Because as others, I am also startled by Richard Cribb's post. Not that I dig the hero-worship to begin with. In my experience the worship of heroes is like any worship not anything substantial. Just people falling prey to instinctive needs. Which doesn't have to be bad, but I am not a big fan of it.
And as a additional note - assuming what Cribb posted is substantial, it doesn't have to mean that Havel was less moral. It would only mean his idea of the realization of those values conflicts which certain assumptions and that his stated moral believes are not totally consistent. Well whose are... In practice absolute consistency of morals can probably only be realized when one aims for consistency for the sake of consistency alone. Which is stupid. Because in a way it means turning your back on reality
Oh please don't sweat it for my sake. I have read enough drivel about this sanctimonious pillock and my dirty work here is done.
You are entitled to your opinion, but drop that silly "Stalinist" "tyrants". Otherwise somebody might write a "some rebuttal" Thursday or Friday...
In a more sober environment I would also gladly debated with you if life is so much better in Czechia now. Here I live (Poland), quite a few had or would have an easier time back in the "tyranny" age. But nevermind that.
And there are only certain topics we are allowed to be disgusting and offensive about, like the Palestinins for instance, I suppose.
Quality of live and tyranny are two different topics. One means pleasure approached by different supposedly objective indicators, the other political rights (and the sanctions for overstepping those). And it is of course hilariously naive to suggest that humans need political rights to have a good life. Political rights are only a tool, not a means to itself (but yeah, I realize that one is supposed to believe otherwise, good old propaganda).
Political rights definitely were more tyrannical in their nature in Communist Czech than now.
I? Biased? Concerning Havel? Not at all. I *respected* him greatly, even though I disagreed with him on some issues (being a cynic, it was sometimes hard for me to swallow his idealism, which sometimes seemed to me a bit misguided). However, I won't stand for baseless slander written by someone who probably cries himself to sleep every night just thinking about the lost Communist utopia.
In my experience, what some Westerners consider a "bias" is just a healthy deep held hatred towards Communism and other forms of totalitarianism, born of a very painful experience.
Now you must understand how Russians feel when they read Western media.
Talk is usually cheap, how it's manifested is what important. If current Czech political system does serve the people well, then well done, Mr. former President. Otherwise, it's meh still.
He isn't very popular here, to put it mildly, though
Bro, if you talk about father of the Russian nation, try Vladimir I, Sviatoslav I, Ivan III, Peter I or even Catherine II. Lenin isn't, you know, trendy nowadays.
Very well. So I - and I think I am not alone here - would be delighted if you found the time to exemplary demonstrate how it is "baseless slander".
I support your hatred towards totalitarianism, as any excuse seems to epically fail its shortcomings. But I regret that this has brought Communistic ideals in such discredit.
Separate names with a comma.