A macro-view of the GP

[Kensai]

[MrFlibble]

It's not obvious from the pic if the statue's being removed or put back in place (there are those who'd be happy to see the latter happening too!)

[Freakzilla]

Don't you people read the news?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/world ... orgia.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Georgia Knocks Stalin Off His Pedestal
By SARAH MARCUS and ELLEN BARRY
Published: June 25, 2010


GORI, Georgia — In the predawn darkness on Friday, Georgian authorities carried out a clandestine operation in Gori’s central square. Wrapping thick cables around Stalin’s neck and under one of his armpits, they hoisted him off the pedestal where he has stood for 48 years and set him nose-first on the back of a flatbed truck.

By morning, the statue was long gone — a relief to Georgia’s leadership, which has been increasingly intent on moving the 20-foot monument since a 2008 war with Russia. It was a different matter for many citizens in Gori, however, whose claim to fame during the Soviet era was the brick house here where Josef Stalin was born, and where older Georgians still revere him.

“They were afraid of the people’s reaction, that’s why they did it at night,” said Gocha Suriashvili, 62, who had gathered with friends at the foot of the empty pedestal. Asked if he was proud of living in Stalin’s birthplace, he shrugged incredulously at the stupidity of the question.

“Who will they put up a statue to now?” said Zaza Beridze, 44, another man in the square. “Misha Saakashvili?” Mikheil Saakashvili, commonly known as Misha, is Georgia’s president.

Leaders in the capital, Tbilisi, have made it a goal to purge the country of its remaining Soviet monuments, symbolically breaking free of Moscow’s dominance. But the Stalin statue has been a delicate matter since the 1950s, when the Soviet leader Nikita S. Khrushchev denounced Stalin’s “cult of personality.” Though monuments to Stalin were later dismantled across the Soviet Union, Mr. Khrushchev left Gori’s statue standing out of respect for the city’s passionate loyalty to the dictator.

On Friday, the culture minister, Nikolos Rurua, dismissed reports that the removal was intentionally kept quiet, pointing out that several camera crews were present. He said the vast majority of Georgians shared his view of Stalin as “a mass murderer and a political criminal.”

“Stalin is popular only among octogenarians in his home town; he is not popular in Georgia,” he said. “This is not a local issue, it is a national one. No consultation was necessary.”

Georgian authorities will replace the statue with a memorial “to the victims of the Soviet dictatorship, victims of Stalin’s policies inside and outside Georgia and victims of the 2008 war,” as well as foreigners who died in the war, Mr. Rurua said. A Dutch cameraman was killed in August of 2008 when Russian warplanes bombed the square.

Some in Gori said they expected the statue to find a new home in the city’s Stalin museum, where the brick-and-timber hut where Stalin was born is surrounded by a grand Greco-Italianate pavilion. Mr. Rurua said he did not know where the statue would end up.

“To be honest, I don’t care,” he said. “That museum has been running for years glorifying Stalin.”

Even during the bitter months after the war with Russia, Georgians were split on the Stalin question. Asked if they were proud the dictator was Georgian, 52 percent said no and 37 percent said yes, according to a 2008 survey on Tbilisi Forum, a popular political Web site.

Younger people tend to take a darker view of him, even in Gori. Last summer vandals painted the statue’s base with the phrases “Get off your pedestal!” and “Your place is in the museum!”

Mikheil Jeriashvili, a 19-year-old medical student, said that he was delighted at the news and that he would be happier if the authorities “removed this statue completely, or burned it or something.”

“I would prefer if he had been born in another town altogether,” he said.

A version of this article appeared in print on June 26, 2010, on page A4 of the New York edition.

[D Pope]

Younger people tend to take a darker view of him, even in Gori. Last summer vandals painted the statue’s base with the phrases “Get off your pedestal!” and “Your place is in the museum!”

I find myself wondering how local graffiti artists would've approched these messages.

[Kensai]

Younger people tend to take a darker view of him, even in Gori. Last summer vandals painted the statue’s base with the phrases “Get off your pedestal!” and “Your place is in the museum!”

Well Stalin did kill almost as many Jews as Hitler, killed inocent clergymen, executed political oponents and anyone who spoke out against him (Leto II much LOL) so you can't blame people for having a bit of a darkend view of him.

[MrFlibble]

(I apologize in advance for getting off-topic)

Well Stalin did kill almost as many Jews as Hitler

I'll try to play advocatus diaboli on this subject, especially since lately, views are expressed by various groups that Communism should be equated with Nazism, which is something I cannot agree with.

First off, there was nothing comparable to the Nazi ideology that eventually lead to the Holocaust. True, Stalin eliminated (possible) political opponents, some of whom were Jewish, and equally many people were sent to labour camps or executed following false accusations and/or manufactured, but it was certainly not only because of nationality; people could be arrested for being "Belorussian/Ukrainian nationalists", as, for example, what happened to Vladimir Peretz, a prominent linguist who studied the history of the Russian language (that was enough for the NKVD to mark him as a leader of a nationalist counter-revolutionary underground movement). It is also true that anti-Semitism continued to exist in Russia since the Imperial times, when it was part of the official policy of the state, but it never escalated to the levels at which it existed in Nazi Germany.

Secondly and even more importantly (in my opinion), the Holocaust was part (and a result) of a large-scale anti-human ideology of dividing people into unequal categories determined by race and nationality, which is something completely alien to the Communist ideology. It could be argued that "weeding out" the "enemies of the people", which was an official motive behind repressions in the Soviet Union, was no better, equally resulting in deaths of innocent people. Yet the actions of the Nazis strike me as completely inhuman in this respect, the atrocities are really horrifying (just take the so-called "euthanasia program", a direct precursor to the "final solution"; the worst of nightmares that has come to life).

However, I do agree that Stalin grew even more paranoid as time passed, especially after the war, and his personal anti-Semitic tendencies also increased. It can still be argued, though, that some of the atrocities of that time were not solely directed against the Jewish people. In the case of the Doctor's plot, for example, it could be that Stalin's paranoia, the fear for his life and the perceived threat of an assassination attempt lead him to suspect the doctors as possible assassins, and anti-Semitism went later into play as many people in the medial profession were indeed Jewish.

[Freakzilla]

Socialism -- If you have 2 cows, you give one to your neighbor.

Communism -- If you have 2 cows, you give them to the government; and the government gives you some milk.

Fascism -- If you have 2 cows, you keep the cows but give the milk to the government, who then sells you the milk at a high price.

Nazism -- If you have 2 cows, the government shoots you and keeps the cows.

New Dealism -- (FDR Version) If you have 2 cows, you shoot one, milk the other one; then pour the milk down the drain.

Capitalism -- (Reaganomics) If you have 2 cows, you sell one and buy a bull; you then sell all the excess milk to the government who in turn ships it to fascist and communist governments.

Anarchism -- If you have 2 cows, your neighbor on your left takes one cow, and the one on the right takes the other; while your backyard neighbor takes the milk, the bucket and the stool.

Utopianism -- If you have 2 cows, Mother Nature zaps the cows, turning their udders into eternal milk-shake dispensers.

Pure Socialism -- You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

Bureaucratic Socialism -- You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. They are cared for by ex-chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and eggs as the regulations say you should need.

Pure Communism -- You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

Russian Communism -- You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the government takes all the milk.

Cambodian Communism -- You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

Dictatorship -- You have two cows. The government takes both and drafts you.

Pure Democracy -- You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

Representative Democracy -- You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

Bureaucracy -- You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

Pure Anarchy -- You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.

[MrFlibble]

Nice

[Kensai]

Socialism* -- If you have 2 cows, the government takes your hard earned cows and gives them to free loaders.

Communism* -- If you have 2 cows, the government takes them at gunpoint; and the government gives you some milk. You ask why you can't milk your own cows, and the government throws you in the gulag.

The reasons people alike Communism to Facsim is the fact that for it to realisitically work you need a fascist state. The government needs to controll everything, which just amplifies all the usual pitfalls of any government system. People are selfish and self centred and don't want to share, but people also liek to be indepentent and free. Thats communism usually has to be forced on a population.

[merkin muffley]

Bureaucracy -- You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

I love it. That is awesome.

[lotek]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/world ... orgia.html

world orgia?

[SandRider]

Representative Democracy -- You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

that's us !

success depends on how stupid/ignorant your neighbors are,
and how corrupt/insane the representative is ...

[Flair1239]

After The Scattering THE ENTIRE SPECIES CANNOT BE THREATENED, only local pockets of people(s). But as Leto says when referring to the scale of prescience, the size of "local" can be ming-boggling.

So NO, nothing can threaten the entire species. Leto did not see all threats because he did not look for them. And NO, the events in the latter books do not indicate a threat to ALL humanity.

I agree with this in principal. However it begs the question... what was being set up for the 7th book. Although I found Chapterhouse interesting... I have to admit I was having a tough time really caring about many of the characters.

By that I mean after God Emperor, I really did not feel an emotional attachment with any of the characters. At the same time I enjoyed the flow of the last two books.

For what would have been the concluding novel though... what would have caused the tension. At that point what sort of threat could have caused a reader the type of anxiety that allows them to become emotionally vested.

To tell you the gods honest truth I was fine and found resolution with the end of Chapterhouse. I thought it was fine that they left in the No ship presumably to start a new society... that seemed to work with the whole concept of the scattering.

I guess to summarise before I begin rambling. I felt the Scattering solved the problem of survival of the species. I thought the end of Capterhouse resolved the issue of the "Old Empire" reintegrating "The Lost ones". The Question in my mind is... really where could book 7 have gone?

[A Thing of Eternity]

Dune 7 could really only have been about the destruction of the Old Empire and more specifically the BG. No matter how it's spun, there simply is no "humanity wide" issue/danger that could possibley have been the topic of the last book (despite what the new authors made up).

I think Frank would have made it as huge an ending as he could, but we know he was writing the last books essentially because he'd been offered more than he could refuse, so I don't think there was any more Golden Path in his mind. He even said he didn't plan on writing God Emperor, as far as Frank was concerned - Dune could have finished with CoD.

[lotek]

yeah I agree with that.
I think it is a lesson for those who exploit that franchise to see that Frank was able to accomodate a purely commercial bid while still writing a good story!

I also believe that his lesson to us readers is that he trusts our imagination and intelligence enough not to have to feed us closure.

A big parallel but just like Leto II left humanity to fend for itself without the crutch of the oracle, I think that Frank intentionally left the future of Dune unwritten so his readers could fill it with whatever they wanted. A scattering of possible futures, all alive in the minds of the fans Or at least that's what I make of it, and by my own reasoning anyone could actually find something else there, even the exact opposite of what I think... and we'd both be right!

[Kensai]

After The Scattering THE ENTIRE SPECIES CANNOT BE THREATENED, only local pockets of people(s). But as Leto says when referring to the scale of prescience, the size of "local" can be ming-boggling.

So NO, nothing can threaten the entire species. Leto did not see all threats because he did not look for them. And NO, the events in the latter books do not indicate a threat to ALL humanity.

I agree with this in principal. However it begs the question... what was being set up for the 7th book. Although I found Chapterhouse interesting... I have to admit I was having a tough time really caring about many of the characters.

By that I mean after God Emperor, I really did not feel an emotional attachment with any of the characters. At the same time I enjoyed the flow of the last two books.

For what would have been the concluding novel though... what would have caused the tension. At that point what sort of threat could have caused a reader the type of anxiety that allows them to become emotionally vested.

To tell you the gods honest truth I was fine and found resolution with the end of Chapterhouse. I thought it was fine that they left in the No ship presumably to start a new society... that seemed to work with the whole concept of the scattering.

I guess to summarise before I begin rambling. I felt the Scattering solved the problem of survival of the species. I thought the end of Capterhouse resolved the issue of the "Old Empire" reintegrating "The Lost ones". The Question in my mind is... really where could book 7 have gone?

I agree with Thing and Lotek, but you do make a very good point. The only thing I can think of that would have been a threat to the "whole of mankind" would have been if the Face Dancers Daniel and Marty were prescient (they could absorb other's powers). Prescients could not forsee other prescients so that would explain how they came about without Letto forseeing it. Still I doubt it.

[A Thing of Eternity]

Also, after the Siona gene was spread throughout humanity, prescience was effectively useless.

[Kensai]

Also, after the Siona gene was spread throughout humanity, prescience was effectively useless.

Knew there was a reason why it wouldn't work. Forgot about that.

[MrFlibble]

Also, after the Siona gene was spread throughout humanity, prescience was effectively useless.

Hm, since we're talking about this, I wonder if prescience invisibility wasn't potentially dangerous for prescience-guided space travel? What if a sufficient number of prescience-shielded people would "cloak" a large object a ship could run into? And speaking of that, if prescients were invisible to each other, couldn't it be that Guild Steersmen could make the Heighliners they were piloting invisible to other Steersmen?

[Freakzilla]

Also, after the Siona gene was spread throughout humanity, prescience was effectively useless.

Hm, since we're talking about this, I wonder if prescience invisibility wasn't potentially dangerous for prescience-guided space travel? What if a sufficient number of prescience-shielded people would "cloak" a large object a ship could run into? And speaking of that, if prescients were invisible to each other, couldn't it be that Guild Steersmen could make the Heighliners they were piloting invisible to other Steersmen?

Even if this were true, they could still see that the trip ended in disaster, even if they didn't see what caused it.

[A Thing of Eternity]

Plus they'd have to know where the ship was going to "land" - space is HUGE.

[lotek]

and also even though a prescient can't see another one, they are still aware of each other's presence so that would avoid such accidents I would think.

[dune stroller]

Plus they'd have to know where the ship was going to "land" - space is HUGE.

Wasn't it Dan Quayle who said "Space - there's a lot of it out there!"?

[Kensai]

Plus they'd have to know where the ship was going to "land" - space is HUGE.

Wasn't it Dan Quayle who said "Space - there's a lot of it out there!"?

Space is everywhere! You can't move for it!

[DragEgusku]

I have some questions about the Golden Path. Why Frank Herbert does not mention anything about the existence of other intelligent species, non-human? If the GP is equivalent to survival (perhaps indefinitely) of mankind, then the existence of other intelligent species should be considered as a possible risk factor.
I always thought it was incredible the idea that mankind is the only intelligent species in the universe.
As I read somewhere in the Dune novels, in an infinite universe anything is possible. Therefore the existence of aliens. How could the GP to ensure the survival of mankind if it would meet a civilization far superior and more extensive than the scattering of humanity?
True, it is noted that scattering led to unlimited expansion of mankind. I do not think that is practicable because it would require an infinite time to fill an infinite universe, unless somehow folding space allows infinite speeds.
And also an infinite extension would also be possible only if mankind is the only intelligent species in the universe, otherwise it would face resistance to other species.

This confused me. In short, as if mankind would survive another encounter a civilization that would have unimaginable capabilities? For example there could be non-humans with a prescience that would see all people, regardless of the existence of genes Leto cultivated, and which could cover the entire human Scatter?

I hope you do not mind these questions, we arrived at logical thinking.