• Vncredleader@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    9 months ago

    Stalin was a modern person, but more importantly, he did predict this was the route zionism would go. He opposed zionism consistently up to this point for a reason, and while he didn’t have a clear goal or orders for the Communist Party of Palestine, he knew that even the socialist zionists would be in effect settlers and their project would be inherently liberal. He let the gamble be taken that maybe a multiracial state could be formed but after all of that

    • TheDialectic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      He had an 1800s education and he lived in the first half of the 1900s. I am not sure by what metrics we consider him a modern person.

      Good info on the rest of it though

      • Vncredleader@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        pre-modern is not exactly a relative term. Stalin lived firmly in the Late Modern Period, not early modern. When you say someone is a “pre-modern person” that indicates a specific time in historical periodization, one prior to the second industrial revolution. In terms of history Stalin is a modern figure. I don’t think we need to say Stalin wasn’t modern to defend his stance here. There is no exact science, but generally the contemporary period is post-WW2. Stalin is modern, but not contemporary.

        • Vncredleader@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yeah and post-modernism is first said in 1949, which makes Stalin firmly modern. When talking about history we are dealing with a scale so vast that modern is a century ago.