3 ms·

In terms of his analysis he was downright brilliant. Having said that, I’d be very leery of the action plans born from that analysis.

• tomcam 8y ago
  Or maybe adherence to his philosophy led to tens of millions of deaths of the 20th century…
  • thisiszilff 8y ago
    His philosophy was a prediction that groups in the 19th/20th century coopted because the rhetoric was useful. The first communist nation's were supposed to be Western Europe and the US: capitalist to industrialize and then revolution. Eastern Europe and china were not industrialized when they had revolutions. It's not surprising it didn't work out too well.
  • GW150914 8y ago
    Having said that, I’d be very leery of the action plans born from that analysis. Already covered that, in anticipation of being dragged pointlessly down the “evil communism” HN rabbit hole. His analysis was good, the way people chose to use it to justify their political systems was not. Of course the same can be said of many things, from politics to religion. I can admire the tenants of Christianity while acknowledging how it’s been abused for millennia. Both can be true.
• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]