The history thread

[alex]

Yes, he did set the limit to 2 terms (8 years total), but that would not change the fact that he was theoretically the first president. Actually, the technical part only matters by 5 days.

[Sinbad]

Hm... what is it then?

[alex]

John Adams was sworn as vice president 5 days before George Washington was sworn in as president. According to the Constitution, if there is no president, then the vice president becomes president. So, for those 5 days, John Adams was technically president. ;D

Okay: Who was the third president of Germany, sworn in in 1934?

[Sinbad]

In 1934, we didn´t have a president any longer.

[alex]

Okay, which dictator came to power?

[Sinbad]

Hitler. But that was in 1933.

[alex]

Okay, smarty pants. So who was Valkyrie?

[Sinbad]

Well..
Operation Valkyrie, the attempted assassination of Hitler by general Stauffenberg (who btw is often wrongly seen as someone being pro republic and democracy and who is therefore overestimated)

[alex]

I heard many people tried to kill Hitler, who was thought to be crazy.

Valkyrie is played by Tom Cruise. ;D
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg9GpRyVhTA

[Sinbad]

I watched that movie in February or somewhen around then, I thought it was rather decent.

Even though it was a typical Hollywood production, meaning that the really interesting part of the historical person Stauffenberg was, of course, left out for the sake of Hollywood like heroism.

Btw, Cruise played Stauffenberg, Valkyrie relates to a creature of Germanic mythology, a ghost like, often female figure that has traits of an angel of death.

[alex]

Okay, haven't seen it yet.

[Sinbad]

As I said, it is worth a watch, but more so with a critical eye. I see a problem in the fact that some people idealise Stauffenberg (the guy who planned the assassination), because they often fail to see what he wanted with it. He had been a soldier in WWI already and he was a typical example of the old elites who still thought in monarchist ways. Therefore, it is often mentioned that he wanted to get rid of Hitler, but it is barely ever mentioned that he did not have democracy in mind but a return to monarchy as it had been before 1918 (germany was a republic between 1919 and 1933, but it didn´t have a good basis because it had to be established due to president Wilson´s commands and there was no basis for democratic thinking in Germany at the time yet. The failures of the constitution of 1919, the lack of agreement in the party system and the fear of communism were what made Hitler´s rise to power possible)

So, long story short: Stauffenberg is awesome stuff for an exciting and interesting movie, but only if you dig into these gaps between mentalities because I for one would find a Stauffenberg with grey zones far more interesting than the black and white stuff that most movies work with. He was no democrat but when you watch the cruise movie and don´t know much about history, one might think he was.

[alex]

Well, I shouldn't be saying this, but I this total democracy is not good. Monarchy is fine as long as the people in power are not corrupt. The reason why China was able to withstand the global credit crisis and recession is because it has one party in power. If the government wants to do something, the whole country follows. Look, how long did it take China to pass a stimulus bill? Less than a day, while it took us..............THREE WEEKS to pass the stimulus bill. I don't know, but I think Obama should declare martial law and fix the economy without Congress.

[Sinbad]

And the prize China pays for it is a system that allows a totalitarian system, violation of human rights included... Therefore, nope. Been there, done that. Even though I believe humans are good in nature, something like that doesn´t work.

[alex]

Well, the question is do you want to have freedom or do you want to eat? Because if the economy fails, then people can't eat. There is a price for freedom. I think a lot of people here take it for granted.