The Russian people have NEVER known freedom. Ever. They've been a war like, oppressed people with Stockholm syndrome for their entire history
One of my teachers in high school (around 1986 or 1987) said that the Russian people were incapable of freedom. He said they wanted & needed an authoritarian ruler.
At the time I thought he was just buying into propaganda, but I've been thinking he may have been right.
But then, it's starting to look like a huge portion of Americans don't value their own freedom either. At least, they seem to be willing to trade their freedom for ensuring that the people they don't like will suffer.
My personal theory is that there's a biological split in our species. Like how some people taste soap when they eat cilantro and others don't. I think some of us are wired to need and want a leader and others do not. The evolution of not needing a leader has not fully propagated to the whole species yet.
This is an interesting theory and begs the question... From an evolution standpoint, which one would be more likely to win out?
It looks like every 20's we have the leader thing win against the freedom thing. Then the leader kind of turns against the followers and the freedom thing resurfacss agqin. But since the freedom thing needs a lot of responsibility thing and people eventually fail to secure themselves the leader thing naturally arises again.
You want freedom? When someone out there is chopping off their oui-oui (pardon my French) all you think about is having freedoms? I thought this was 'Merica!
The Russian people have NEVER known freedom. Ever. They've been a war like, oppressed people with Stockholm syndrome for their entire history
One of my teachers in high school (around 1986 or 1987) said that the Russian people were incapable of freedom. He said they wanted & needed an authoritarian ruler.
At the time I thought he was just buying into propaganda, but I've been thinking he may have been right.
But then, it's starting to look like a huge portion of Americans don't value their own freedom either. At least, they seem to be willing to trade their freedom for ensuring that the people they don't like will suffer.
My personal theory is that there's a biological split in our species. Like how some people taste soap when they eat cilantro and others don't. I think some of us are wired to need and want a leader and others do not. The evolution of not needing a leader has not fully propagated to the whole species yet.
This is an interesting theory and begs the question... From an evolution standpoint, which one would be more likely to win out?
It looks like every 20's we have the leader thing win against the freedom thing. Then the leader kind of turns against the followers and the freedom thing resurfacss agqin. But since the freedom thing needs a lot of responsibility thing and people eventually fail to secure themselves the leader thing naturally arises again.
Edit: fixed a thing.
You want freedom? When someone out there is chopping off their oui-oui (pardon my French) all you think about is having freedoms? I thought this was 'Merica!