Vladimir_M comments on Science Doesn't Trust Your Rationality - Less Wrong

19 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 May 2008 02:13AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (133)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vladimir_M 04 September 2011 06:18:53AM *  8 points [-]

To be fully precise, the exact extent of the revolutionary atrocities in Vendée and elsewhere is a matter of some controversy. Unfortunately, as it happens with all atrocities that become an issue in ideological battles, there has been both exaggeration and denial motivated by sympathies for one or another side. However, as far as I know, there is no serious disagreement among historians that the extent of atrocities was unparalleled by anything else in Europe that happened in the centuries between the end of the Thirty Years' War and the rise of the major 20th century totalitarians (i.e. Bolsheviks and Nazis).

(Again, if I'm missing some counterexample, I'd be really curious to hear it.)

To give another illustration, one way in which the French revolutionary regime clearly stands out is its really extreme bloodthirsty and exterminationist rhetoric, which is again unlike anything else seen in European history until the outbreak of extreme 20th century totalitarianism. (Some of this rhetoric is still reflected in the lyrics of the Marseillaise calling for the spilling of "impure blood.") When such rhetoric becomes mainstream, similar deeds usually also follow. (The advocates of "hate speech" restrictions actually have a point when they argue this, however much they tend to be confused or disingenuous otherwise.)

On the other hand, the fact about the European wars in the period 1648-1789 being limited, professional, disciplined, and reasonably considerate towards civilians is completely uncontroversial in mainstream history. The standard name for the type of war in this period is "cabinet wars" (German Kabinettskriege). The Wikipedia page gives a concise summary.

Comment author: lessdazed 04 September 2011 07:15:33AM *  0 points [-]

Never mind, I agree.

Comment author: sam0345 04 September 2011 08:45:59AM *  -2 points [-]

The advocates of "hate speech" restrictions actually have a point when they argue this

"<racist epithet> are murderous thugs" is hate speech that is apt to result in race war even if it is true of a disproportionate minority of that group, indeed particularly if it is true of a small but disproportionate minority of that group.

"<racist epithet> no-hablo-english <colorful racist epithet> with no job <racist epithet> purchased million dollar houses no money down" is also categorized as hate speech, but is more likely to result in responsible lending policies than race war.