Napoleon wasn't that barbaric

[Ibn Sina]

12 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Someone who has the capacity to spare a creature like a spider despite fearing it to me is more admirable than Napoleon could have ever been, even if he conquered the entire world.

Me too.

12 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I wonder how you would have talked about Hilter if he did succeed in creating the Third Reich. What if the world indeed would be better off without the jews? Would you then be sitting here and arguing for why Hilter had admiring qualities despite his relative cruelness?

Hitler killed innocent people intentionally for evil reason because he thought they were inferior. It is evil 101. I do not admire people who kill innocent people with such intention no matter how big an empire they have made or they were victorios or not. Being victorious does not automatically gives my admiration if they did such things.

 

12 minutes ago, Scholar said:

To me it seems like you are very biased towards Napoleon because you are attached to him. Especially because you have been reading about him from such a young age, it is likely that you have attached your identity to him.

My method is analyze him as accurately as possible without any distortions. I have already discussed this.

 

12 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I could list a hundred people who I find far more extraoridnary than Napoleon. What you value, what you find extraoridnary and admirable, depends on your level of consciousness. Do you think Jesus would have listed Napoleon in his top 5 human beings ever?

Don't immediately judge me thinking  that just because I admire Napoleon it immediately means that I don't understand the greatness of Buddha, Gandhi, Christ, Krishna. 

The thing is , my view is not black and white. For me , just because someone is a warrior, he isnot  lesser. Krishna was also a warrior, who killed many enemies and still he is revered. People understand his greatness while you might say 'what he killed people? He is EVIL!;  The difference between you and me is that for you , pacifists  > warriors, I say it's not that simple. 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ibn Sina

[Aeris]

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

Yes but I don't think we also should just relativize everything to a point where everyone is basically just a person with some flaws.

I would state that Napoleon and people like him were exceptionally egotistical and ruthless, otherwise they could have not assumed the positions of power they did. If I for example would compare Napoleon to Marcus Aurelius, I would say Marcus was definitely less egoic than him. But even he was embedded in a culture of imperialism.

When you ask the people who had to live with the consequences of what Napoleon did and what Hitler did, you will probably get very similar responses. This is even true in contemporary contexts, where the imperialism of the US in the middle east is viewed as pure evil by those who are effected by it.

Sure Hilter was more ruthless, but he also existed in a different historical context. We have to recognize that both of them were basically pure evil in the eyes of those who suffered greatly as a result of their conduct.

 

Would you ever argue that a person who rapes children but also runs a non-profit charity that cures cancer is a person with some flaws?

and those who beneficiated from him ? what about them ? What about probably the fact that if France is still a powerful country it's probably because of this big part of his history ? If I m allowed to get up and drink good water and go to the supermarket, that's maybe because of the people dead for it.

if your solid ass is on a chair today, consider that's because of the grace of the devil before us.

stop saying people are devil or good, and then you take a true step.
we all comit devilry, it's a feature of the survival mind. ( but this survival can be deeply infused in fantasy )

fantasy that happen in the head, become real sometimes though, but it create a logic of devilry, everything looks fine if the fantasy is embedded in "goodness" ( Aldous huxley talk about it, in the divin within ) ( and the truth, is NO, it is a DOGMA in itself ! )

 

We will makes this thought experiment.

You're the ultimate king of reality right now.

you can create PEACE on earth ( no more fight, everyone is spiritual, everyone is talking ( no debating ) everyone is wanting the best for others etc.. perfect utopia )

ho but there is a problem, to makes it real for 1000 years, you will have to push a button that kills random 4 billards of humans.

it is wrong you would say ? but if you don't push it, humans is doomed to devilry and dogma for 500 000 years, and this will create maybe 100000 times more suffering that if you killed only 4 billions.

what is 4 billions against peace ? then it is all relative.

Would I feel wrong If I killed 200 peoples to assure my authority, but then by this authority that I embody I can directly affect and save in reality billions of life ? ( at the CONTEXT of the time I m doing it )

 

hey what about the reality where Hitler cured cancer and give rises to peace in the world ? answer : ho well poor mind don't think about it.

it's more easy to say killing is wrong.

OF COURSE IT IS FROM THE FUCKING EGOIC PERSPECTIVE

life is fucking complex, it's not a stack of doing so call'd evil things.

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Aeris

[Scholar]

1 minute ago, Ibn Sina said:

Hitler killed innocent people intentionally for evil reason because he thought they were inferior. It is evil 101. I do not admire people who kill innocent people with such intention no matter how big an empire they have made or they were victorios or not. Being victorious does not automatically gives my admiration if they did such things.

But that is not an unbiased description of what Hitler did. First, what are evil reasons? Hitler, and actually the germans in general, thought it was a very justifiable reason. They thought the Jews were a threat to the world and the wanted to get rid of them. You call them innocent, but to Hitler they were all a threat, they were like an infestation to him.

Hitler genuinely thought he did the best for Germany and even mankind. Sure his beliefs were misguided, and surely we all disagree with his solutions. But to just say he was pure evil I don't think is a very accurate analysis.

 

1 minute ago, Ibn Sina said:

Don't immediately judge me thinking  that just because I admire Napoleon it immediately means that I don't understand the greatness of Buddha, Gandhi, Christ, Krishna.

I am not judging you. You said Napoleon is one of your top 5 human beings ever. Clearly you value something in Napoleon, and clearly there is a reason for it. And the reason for it must be your level of consciousness, as it determines what you value and how you perceive the world. And because he is in your top 5 it does not really allow a lot of room for people who I think someone would value if they had a higher consciousness. One day you might find yourself to start disliking Napoleon, when your perspective evolves and you find new things that you admire. Always be open to that.

 

1 minute ago, Ibn Sina said:

The thing is , my view is not black and white. For me , just because someone is a warrior, he isnot  lesser. Krishna was also a warrior, who killed many enemies and still he is revered. People understand his greatness while you might say 'what he killed people? He is EVIL!;  The difference between you and me is that for you , pacifists  > warriors, I say it's not that simple. 

You have no true control over what you value and who you admire. Question why you admire Napoleon in particular. And then question why you value these particularities.

If your values stay rigid, you will not evolve your consciousness.

 

 

[Aeris]

16 minutes ago, Scholar said:

But that is not an unbiased description of what Hitler did. First, what are evil reasons? Hitler, and actually the germans in general, thought it was a very justifiable reason. They thought the Jews were a threat to the world and the wanted to get rid of them. You call them innocent, but to Hitler they were all a threat, they were like an infestation to him.

Hitler genuinely thought he did the best for Germany and even mankind. Sure his beliefs were misguided, and surely we all disagree with his solutions. But to just say he was pure evil I don't think is a very accurate analysis.

 

I am not judging you. You said Napoleon is one of your top 5 human beings ever. Clearly you value something in Napoleon, and clearly there is a reason for it. And the reason for it must be your level of consciousness, as it determines what you value and how you perceive the world. And because he is in your top 5 it does not really allow a lot of room for people who I think someone would value if they had a higher consciousness. One day you might find yourself to start disliking Napoleon, when your perspective evolves and you find new things that you admire. Always be open to that.

 

You have no true control over what you value and who you admire. Question why you admire Napoleon in particular. And then question why you value these particularities.

If your values stay rigid, you will not evolve your consciousness.

 

 

and maybe without Hitler we would all be slaves to jewish institutions, we would all be dead,

 he inspired fear to all kind of "group" who want to elevate now. ( especially the west ) for the entire world.

I m not anti jew, or any religions, I m in a cold reversed analysis  

transpersonal brainstorming :

 

OF COURSE KILLING KID OR "INNOCENT" is "wrong", but how can you convince people of devilry without any devilry to point on ?

or maybe Hitler helped Israël by creating a justification for jewish.

Maybe the jewish themself put Hitler in place.

I m just taking advocacy for the devil, everyone want to feel good, and being in the camp of good, in reality, we are in the most satanic states right now ! We are in the devil places ! wake up

 

who could defeat the devil ?

answer : only something more evil

 

why greens eco politics don't work ? because humans are devils and mongs !

 

Maybe Hitler would have never allowed water polluting, maybe the entire world is doomed because we kill'd Hitler 

 

it's all speculations, but reality is only that anyway,

speculations and beliefs, all good thoughts and good faith will not create an absolute truth

 

YOU CAN T BEAT THE DEVIL BY POINTING TO IT IN THE WRONG DIRECTION

 

You can't be a geo politicians especially with egoic lenses in the addition, it's all fucking dicing.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Aeris

[Ibn Sina]

13 minutes ago, Scholar said:

They thought the Jews were a threat to the world and the wanted to get rid of them. You call them innocent, but to Hitler they were all a threat, they were like an infestation to him

Yes, but factually they were innocent. Hitler was so evil that he even thought of innocent people as a threat to the world that is why he killed them all. Isn't that evil? That is not biasness. HItler did what he did, and it was an evil thing. There is no biasness. You saying that it is biased, not truth, does not change history.

'Hitler geniuinely thought he was doing good for his country, he was misguided'

Evil people don't know how evil they are. The serial killer Jeffrey dalmer used to kill boys and eat them thinking that he loved them, from his perspective  it was an act of love. So you will say that he was not evil? 
Hitler was so evil that he didn't know how evil he was. He caused so much destruction and he thought it was the best thing. That is pure evil. 

Bullies cause suffering to their victim thinking that they are just friends, just playing with them. If they thought that what they were doing is evil, then they would feel guilt and wouldn't be able to do what they do. Evil does not mean feeling that you are doing an evil act, evil means doing an evil act and believing it is not.

13 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I am not judging you. You said Napoleon is one of your top 5 human beings ever. Clearly you value something in Napoleon, and clearly there is a reason for it. And the reason for it must be your level of consciousness, as it determines what you value and how you perceive the world. And because he is in your top 5 it does not really allow a lot of room for people who I think someone would value if they had a higher consciousness. One day you might find yourself to start disliking Napoleon, when your perspective evolves and you find new things that you admire. Always be open to that.

 

I admire many people like Buddha, Christ, Einstein, Vivekannda, Yogananda you name it. There is absolutely no reason to make a connection between me liking Napoleon and my level of consciousness. There is no reason to talk about my level of consciousness at least in this thread. 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ibn Sina

[Aeris]

3 minutes ago, Ibn Sina said:

Yes, but factually they were innocent. Hitler was so evil that he even thought of innocent people as a threat to the world that is why he killed them all. Isn't that evil? That is not biasness. HItler did what he did, and it was an evil thing. There is no biasness. You saying that it is biased, not truth, does not change history.

 

I admire many people like Buddha, Christ, Einstein, Vivekannda, Yogananda you name it. There is absolutely no reason to make a connection between me liking Napoleon and my level of consciousness. There is no reason to talk about my level of consciousness at least in this thread. 

 

who is innocent, who is guilty ?

can you be guilty of being brainwashed ? 

can you be guilty of trying to survive ?

can you be guilty of being here ?

can you be guilty of your mind tricking you into fantasy ?

can you be guilty of suffering ? 

are you guilty of being deluded or manipulated ?

are you guilty of your society upbringing ?

can you be guilty of having an harsh life ?

 

how many of you did read the biography of Hitler ? 

 

for "me" all humans are innocents

[Scholar]

5 minutes ago, Ibn Sina said:

I admire many people like Buddha, Christ, Einstein, Vivekannda, Yogananda you name it. There is absolutely no reason to make a connection between me liking Napoleon and my level of consciousness. There is no reason to talk about my level of consciousness at least in this thread. 

I think there is, what else would be the point of discussing Napoleon but raising people's consciousness?

Look, I am not saying you are a lesser being because you don't value Christ more than Napoleon. I am just telling you that one day, following this path, you will actually change your values and be valuing someone like Christ the most. There is a reason for why you value Napoleon more so than Christ. And again, that reason is determined by your level of consciousness.

Don't forget that your idenity if closely connected to your consciousness and how you perceive the world. This means that because you admire and maybe even idolize Napoleon so much, it might actually have an influence on your consciousness (it certainly has). Once you will let go of that, you can still look at Napoleon and see the good things he did, but you will see his low level of consciousness, you will see his egoism, and it will quite unattractive to you. That's just how it goes.

[Ibn Sina]

17 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I think there is, what else would be the point of discussing Napoleon but raising people's consciousness?

Look, I am not saying you are a lesser being because you don't value Christ more than Napoleon. I am just telling you that one day, following this path, you will actually change your values and be valuing someone like Christ the most. There is a reason for why you value Napoleon more so than Christ. And again, that reason is determined by your level of consciousness.

I was not here to raise my consciousness. I was here to show that Napoleon is not barbaric.  Consciousness is a different subject and I was not here to talk about that. 

'Look, I am not saying you are a lesser being because you don't value Christ more than Napoleon'

Did I ever say that? You immediately believe that I admire Napoleon more than Christ , I don't know why. Actually I value Christ 1000 times more than Napoleon . Now what are you going to say about my consciousness? That it is now highly raised?  

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ibn Sina

[Aeris]

13 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I think there is, what else would be the point of discussing Napoleon but raising people's consciousness?

Look, I am not saying you are a lesser being because you don't value Christ more than Napoleon. I am just telling you that one day, following this path, you will actually change your values and be valuing someone like Christ the most. There is a reason for why you value Napoleon more so than Christ. And again, that reason is determined by your level of consciousness.

Don't forget that your idenity if closely connected to your consciousness and how you perceive the world. This means that because you admire and maybe even idolize Napoleon so much, it might actually have an influence on your consciousness (it certainly has). Once you will let go of that, you can still look at Napoleon and see the good things he did, but you will see his low level of consciousness, you will see his egoism, and it will quite unattractive to you. That's just how it goes.

and maybe christ would bombs countries if he was living "now"

giving free bread in your face

Edited August 28, 2019 by Aeris

[Scholar]

Just now, Aeris said:

and maybe christ would bombs country if he was living "now"

Christ living now would be a vegan hippie who would mobilize entire societies to act against capitalism and greed, in the ideal scenario.

[Aeris]

21 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Christ living now would be a vegan hippie who would mobilize entire societies to act against capitalism and greed, in the ideal scenario.

yes we met expectation at our level of consciousness aswell

[RareGodzilla]

Napoleon has an interesting place in my countries historical memory. 

At the time we were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Slovenian and other slavic cultures, languages, national movements were heavily suppressed by the Austrian monarchy. Elites always spoke German, Native languages were restricted to peasant class. While out of selfish motives, the french did allow ex-Austrian territory to use their own native languages in schools for the first time ever.  One very positive thing was increased secularisation. The Church was now separate from schools and other public institutions. Some educated higher classes were very welcoming of ideas of the French revolution. But the general population was turned off by high war taxes and forced military service. The French era over Slovenia and other Balkan Slavic peoples lasted only four years, but left a big impact in terms of national revival. Especially the use of native languages in public schools left a huge impact. 

There still are some squares named after the french revolution and some supposed napoleons's bridges.