Comment on YSK: Non-violent protests are 2x likely to succeed and no non-violent movement that has involved more than 3.5% of the country population has ever failed

• SpaceCadet@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Gorbachev

  Ah Schrödinger’s Gorbachev, both a great respector of the will of the people, as well a traitor who went against the will of the people.

  However, its the GDR Communist Chairman Erich Honecker that ultimately changed policy that resulted in reunification.

  Then why did you comment on a post that was about the USSR?

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Ah Schrödinger’s Gorbachev, both a great respector of the will of the people, as well a traitor who went against the will of the people.

    What? Do you believe everyone in a country has identical political views?

    That’s a very naive understanding of popular politics.

    Then why did you comment on a post that was about the USSR?

    The GDR was a member of the USSR.

    source

    • SpaceCadet@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      What? Do you believe everyone in a country has identical political views?

      You’re a bit dim aren’t you? The parent post that I replied to claimed that Gorbachev was a traitor who went against the will of the people, I said the USSR wasn’t wel known for respecting the will of the people in the first place, and here you are giving an example of when the USSR actually did respect the will of the people … when Gorbachev was in power.

      So my conclusion is that Gorbachev must exist in a state of superposition, where he is both things at once.

      The GDR was a member of the USSR.

      What does the G in GDR stand for?

      source

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        I said the USSR wasn’t wel known for respecting the will of the people in the first place

        The GDR was a member state of the USSR. And the dissolution of the GDR happened under Gorbachev, in a manner that did respect the public’s rights.

        So my conclusion is that Gorbachev must exist in a state of superposition

        I know you’re attempting wit, but its coming at the expense of your expressed understanding of history.

        source

        • -> View More Comments