Morale penalty for too many wars

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Carking the 6th wrote:

      There has never been a single state that survived by oppressing its people forever
      There has never been a single state that survived, period. If I could manage to argue that the Romans were somehow oppressing their people (and yes, arguing in that direction is well possible), you could always tell me "Yeah but it didn't work in the long run, look, they fell after a 1,000 years".
      But they did so a whole lot less than others, no? Roman society was one of the most free in history, even considering the slave system, which was far more humane than its Atlantic counter part. Even then, that still oppressive slave system is one of the many reasons Rome collapsed, along with a corrupt and you guessed it- oppressive government. When we talk about major civilizations, it’s almost always one’s that gave better freedom and prosperity to their people. Another example is the Ottomans; at their height they promoted religious tolerance and even women had greater rights than the rest of Europe and most of Asia. It was only as they failed to modernize their economy and government, continuing more brutal oppression of people who wanted freedom. The young Turks at the end were especially bad, committing the WW1 era genocides the country is known for. That’s what caused the Arab revolts. That’s what led to its fall. Point is that more free and less oppressive societies tend to be more prosperous and long lived. Ones that people do not want to live in are destined to eventually fall apart at an eventual and inevitable opportunity. If you are a country, you should want your people to be there for you during a crisis or unstable time. If Russia was nearing collapse, I wouldn’t be surprised if ethnic groups would take the opportunity to secede and let it burn. We know that in WW2 many saw liberation in the German invaders until they started their genocide, even wanting to join them to fight the USSR. But in the US or UK? The people had solidarity and held it together until the Germans were defeated (By the way, the Nazis had a very oppressive slave economy, which would eventually lead to their collapse once they ran out of places to pillage ironically.). Once the people in the USSR realized that they’d probably rather take their chances with Stalin, they quickly turned against the Germans, launching partisan attacks. Once the Soviet industry and manpower came to bear, it was all over. Oppressive governance is simply worse in the long term.

      CarKing the 6th of the Abrahamic Caliphate
    • Ah... and Stalin's government wasn't oppressive at all, right?
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.
    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Ah... and Stalin's government wasn't oppressive at all, right?
      For me personally both Hitler and Stalin were evil men and thank the universe both Nazis and Communists did not survive as global superpowers.Can anyone imagine how the world would've been if the pact between Hitler and Stalin did actually worked?... Stalin was a coward but eventually turned into a liberater a hero,he saw the wind was not going to blow in his favor and fortunately chose the winning side.A lot of "what if" ...but for the love of breakfast and by the grace of the universe we are here now