3 ms·

I mean does perspective not matter if we're talking about history? The Qing conquest killed 30 million, so did the Taiping Rebellion. 40 million died during the

I mean does perspective not matter if we're talking about history? The Qing conquest killed 30 million, so did the Taiping Rebellion. 40 million died during the Three Kingdom wars, in 200 AD! About half the population at the time. Dynastic historical change in China was always that violent. It's not that unlikely that people in a hundred years, if China continues to develop, look at that period as the foundation for it. No different than our perspective on Napoleon. Incredibly brutal, brought war to Europe, but also implemented the civic code, arguably the most influential legal document in history.

refurb 4y ago
I see a difference between millions of deaths due to war and millions of deaths due to government incompetence/policy/brutality? By your logic the 6 million killed in the Holocaust shouldn't be such a big deal either.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  Of course it's a big deal, but certainly we're more mature than descending into Godwin's law two posts into the conversation? Mao despite his failures is the foundational figure of modern China. He's not Hitler, who brought ruin not just to the Jewish population but to Germany as well. Mao still matters in China, Hitler doesn't in Germany. It's historically impoverished to grasp for Hitler analogies and having a reflexive panic attack every time Mao is up for discussion. Same with Stalin. Both still have significant influence in Russia and China, among the people as well as leaders and understanding why that is makes some sense.
  - refurb 4y ago
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Earlier you said "The Qing conquest killed 30 million, so did the Taiping Rebellion. 40 million died during the Three Kingdom wars, in 200 AD! About half the population at the time." I'm not sure how one could interpret that as anything other "no big deal Mao killed a lot of people, lots of people have died in other empires". And you're somehow conflating their legacy with the death toll. Those are separate things. Mao's brutal rule can be condemned while at the same time acknowledging his influence on China today. And I would argue that Hitler had a massive influence on what Germany is today. Look at its role in the EU and its policy towards other countries and conflicts.

refurb 4y ago

I see a difference between millions of deaths due to war and millions of deaths due to government incompetence/policy/brutality? By your logic the 6 million killed in the Holocaust shouldn't be such a big deal either.

Barrin92 4y ago
Of course it's a big deal, but certainly we're more mature than descending into Godwin's law two posts into the conversation? Mao despite his failures is the foundational figure of modern China. He's not Hitler, who brought ruin not just to the Jewish population but to Germany as well. Mao still matters in China, Hitler doesn't in Germany. It's historically impoverished to grasp for Hitler analogies and having a reflexive panic attack every time Mao is up for discussion. Same with Stalin. Both still have significant influence in Russia and China, among the people as well as leaders and understanding why that is makes some sense.
- refurb 4y ago
  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Earlier you said "The Qing conquest killed 30 million, so did the Taiping Rebellion. 40 million died during the Three Kingdom wars, in 200 AD! About half the population at the time." I'm not sure how one could interpret that as anything other "no big deal Mao killed a lot of people, lots of people have died in other empires". And you're somehow conflating their legacy with the death toll. Those are separate things. Mao's brutal rule can be condemned while at the same time acknowledging his influence on China today. And I would argue that Hitler had a massive influence on what Germany is today. Look at its role in the EU and its policy towards other countries and conflicts.