Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Ranking Washington and Lenin
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:29 am    Post subject: Ranking Washington and Lenin Reply with quote

A poster on another thread reminded me of a discussion I once had. I'm curious how other people think about it.

In historical terms, how does Washington rank? I think it is indisputable that he is more important than Lenin. Lenin's ideas didn't survive as viable political practice for even 70 years. Washington's influence continues to grow after 230 years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gopher



Joined: 04 Jun 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is an interesting question.

I've read little on Washington, but I've been able to see films of Lenin and read some of his writings, so it'd be an uneven comparison.

Lenin seems to have been pretty damned brilliant to me, even charismatic with crowds, but a comparison between the two, as national "founding fathers," or whatever, I've never seen that before.

Usually its Adam Smith vs. Marx, no?

In any case, Lenin's ideas about world revolution faltered. But didn't Washington's foriegn policy advice -- avoid foreign entanglements, particularly in Europe -- go by the wayside, too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hater Depot



Joined: 29 Mar 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lenin got a lot of innocent people slaughtered and founded a totalitarian state that impoverished and immiserated tens of millions for 70 years. No contest who comes out better on those terms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bulsajo



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington vs. Lenin?
It seems like a relevant disscussion...













...from 20 years ago.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pligganease



Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1) Washington siad that America should avoid two-party politics.

2) Washington said that America should stay out of foreign affairs.

3) Washington never wanted to be the leader of the country.

There is no Washington influence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

#2- no. he said stay away from entangling alliances. Stay away from foreign policy? Laughing

And that was our policy until the first world war.

#3- Has nothing to with influence.

On the other hand, he did retire after 2 terms, setting a precedent. Only until FDR won a 3rd term did anyone dare break the trend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hater Depot wrote:
Lenin got a lot of innocent people slaughtered and founded a totalitarian state that impoverished and immiserated tens of millions for 70 years. No contest who comes out better on those terms.


Amen. Lenin is only remembered with any sympathy because:

1) He was present at the birth of the Soviet State and not the fall.

2) People still haven't read enough after the Soviet archives were opened up wherein it was demonstrated that Leninism and Stalinism might be different ideologies, but their death tolls were similar.

As Rapier pointed out, Washington is responsible for the deaths of many Native Americans. But in pure numbers, Washington is the easy victor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
desultude



Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
#2- no. he said stay away from entangling alliances. Stay away from foreign policy? Laughing

And that was our policy until the first world war.

#3- Has nothing to with influence.

On the other hand, he did retire after 2 terms, setting a precedent. Only until FDR won a 3rd term did anyone dare break the trend.


BB, off topic, but your new avatar is really nice- where is it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leslie Cheswyck



Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pligganease wrote:
1) Washington siad that America should avoid two-party politics.


And Lenin realized that dream in Russia. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
funplanet



Joined: 20 Jun 2003
Location: The new Bucheon!

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lenin was a major influence, no doubt about that. He was quite smart (a law degree...but only practiced for a short time) and really became disillusioned after his brother was executed at St. Petersburg for being involved in some anti-Czar dissident work.

There is very littel "good" about Lenin's "work" in the early days (murders, pogroms, deportations-suggested by Stalin actually) but his 5 year NEP (new economic program) which he was starting to initiate may have been a major breakthrough had he lived. Some archives suggest he may have decided to go more to the right, albeit slowly, to move the country in a more peaceful direction, both politically and economically. Afterall, he had eliminated most of his enemies by then except for Stalin.

Washington is still revered and loved in America and other parts of the world. A reluctant warrior (not counting his days in the French and Indian Wars), a reluctant politician...all he wanted to do was live his days in peace at Mt. Vernon. Too bad most American politicians have not heeded the advice of men like Washington and Jefferson...the world would be a much better place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gopher



Joined: 04 Jun 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kuros wrote:
People still haven't read enough after the Soviet archives were opened up wherein it was demonstrated that Leninism and Stalinism might be different ideologies, but their death tolls were similar.


This is a good point. Don't forget, though, that Stalin based his political legitimacy on continuity -- Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism -- and he may have stressed a relationship that didn't necessarily exist.

I also recall hearing something about Lenin strongly recommending against Stalin succeeding him.

Moreoever, I'm not so sure I'd fault Lenin for resorting to violent tactics. The Romanov state wasn't all wine and roses. It bred the revolution. If it hadn't been Lenin, it would certainly have been someone else.


Last edited by Gopher on Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yu_Bum_suk



Joined: 25 Dec 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's no doubt that Washington was very important as a figure in his time (and a general), but there's a good reason why we refer to most of ideology of the revolution as 'Jeffersonian'. If it weren't for Washington, I think it's quite possible that someone else could have stepped into the breach and history may still be much the same. Certainly that wouldn't seem the case with Lenin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To me, Washington's influence was his committment to the small 'r' republican ideal. In his day there were few existing examples, Venice being the best known, and all of them were very small states. Republicanism had never been tried on a large scale. At the end of the war he was the winning general with an army at his command. Had he been power hungry or a man of weaker character, he could easily have marched on Philadelphia, dissolved Congress and been proclaimed king with little opposition. Neither Cromwell nor Napoleon were able to resist the temptation. Also along the same lines, he was an inpirational figure to the French at the start of their Revolution as well as to the Latin Americans. Today, nearly all countries are republics of one kind or another. Clearly, Washington had an impact on that reality. He was the 'first'.

What I understand Washington to have said about entangling alliances was that there are no permanent friends or enemies in foreign affairs. He was also speaking to a small weak country in a world of giants. His advice to a large powerful country might have been different, we'll never know. His dictum was followed for a century and a half, until World War II/the Cold War, a 50 year aberration because of a special condition. You might say that Bush II is returning to Washington's idea with his Coalition of the Willing. It's a little too early to say for sure though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the closer comparison is between Lenin and Lincoln, in the sense of using violence on a massive scale to effect revolutionary change("revolution from above" is how Barrington Moore described the Civil War).

One could argue that Lincoln engaged in less outright murder than Lenin did. Then again, what difference is there, really, between shooting an unarmed person in the head and drafting him into a war zone?

Plus, when an entire region of the country gets burned to a crisp, ya gotta figure that at least a FEW untimely deaths are gonna result from the effects.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

desultude wrote:

BB, off topic, but your new avatar is really nice- where is it?


Sanaa, Yemen. An UNESCO site well worth visiting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International