RE: Arab Spring in Moscow?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Arab Spring in Moscow?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Arab Spring in Moscow?

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Arab Spring in Moscow? - 12/20/2011 6:32:27 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

Agreed that the tsars were in power for a thousand years first the house of rurik and then the house of romanov by marriage. I misspoke in saying the romanovs were a continuous line...my point was that the tsars were a continuous line. I am sorry for any confusion.
While it is true that lennin replaced the romanovs stalin replced lennin my point was that stalin had the greater influence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The tsars had more than a thousand years to get their shit together the bolshivicks turned it around in less than twenty years.

I do not even understand the logic behind that sentence. If there is any. Or your point. If you have any. The Russian society was evolving, as any other society. And in the moment the bolcheviki took the power, the Russian society was moving fast towards a democracy - very fast. That was precisely the reason Lenin decided to make the coup, he knew that he would not have another chance.

The logic is that the tsars had a thousand years to get their shit together and could/would not.
The bolshivicks come in and bingo no more slaves,universal sufferage,equal pay for equal work,
You say that the tsars were on the way to democracy yet offer no validation.
You say that stalin say he murderd innocents but you fail to validate.

(in reply to SpanishMatMaster)

Profile

Post #: 81

RE: Arab Spring in Moscow? - 12/20/2011 8:43:32 AM

SpanishMatMaster

Posts: 967
Joined: 9/28/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The romanoff dynasty lasted about a thousand years

the Romanov actually did it to 300 years only

The history books say 1000 years.

It is obvious that you meant from the very beginning, the Romanovs. You had no idea about the Rurik until later in the conversation, where you probably have consulted the wiki. You repeatedly made the mistake and now you are inventing a fantastic story about how you knew from the beginning and you just "expressed yourself wrong" and what you meant was right. This is stupid and childish.

Your knowledge about Ancient Russia is probably as high as your knowledge about the crimes of Stalin or the Constitutional Congress. I do not need to provide "validation" of common, public and known facts. Simply read the wiki further and consult the sources mentioned there, I guess they are more than enough.

Even the objection that I should have brought "validation" (I guess you mean proof...) is absurd: where is the "validation" of all the asserts you have made in this thread?

Here I end my conversation with you, Mr. thompsonx. I really think that if I have to fight so much to get a half-hearted half-lying childish recognition of a simple and public factual error, there is no point in talking with you, sorry.

Goodbye. Hidden.

< Message edited by SpanishMatMaster -- 12/20/2011 8:53:31 AM >

_____________________________

Humanist (therefore Atheist), intelligent, cultivated and very humble :)
If I don't answer you, maybe I "hid" you: PM me if you want.
“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, pause and reflect.” (Mark Twain)

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 82

RE: Arab Spring in Moscow? - 12/21/2011 9:52:09 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The romanoff dynasty lasted about a thousand years

the Romanov actually did it to 300 years only

The history books say 1000 years.

It is obvious that you meant from the very beginning, the Romanovs. You had no idea about the Rurik until later in the conversation, where you probably have consulted the wiki. You repeatedly made the mistake and now you are inventing a fantastic story about how you knew from the beginning and you just "expressed yourself wrong" and what you meant was right. This is stupid and childish.

Have you abused the carcas of that deceased equine enough or shall we have to endure much more?

Your knowledge about Ancient Russia is probably as high as your knowledge about the crimes of Stalin or the Constitutional Congress.

This would be your opinion

I do not need to provide "validation" of common, public and known facts.

If they are so "common and known" then it should be no problem for you to substantiate your position.

Simply read the wiki further and consult the sources mentioned there, I guess they are more than enough.

Even the objection that I should have brought "validation" (I guess you mean proof...) is absurd: where is the "validation" of all the asserts you have made in this thread?

Is it your position that there were no slaves in tsarist russia?
Is it your position that there was universal sufferage in tsarist russia?
Is it you position that there was more than single digit literacy in tsarist russia?

Here I end my conversation with you, Mr. thompsonx. I really think that if I have to fight so much to get a half-hearted half-lying childish recognition of a simple and public factual error, there is no point in talking with you, sorry.

If you feel unable or incapable of continuing this discussion then you should by all means absent yourself from it.