• gimsy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Except for Gengis Khan, he never lost

    • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      He wasn’t really fascist though:

      Temüjin formally adopted the title “Genghis Khan”, the meaning of which is uncertain, at an assembly in 1206. Carrying out reforms designed to ensure long-term stability, he transformed the Mongols’ tribal structure into an integrated meritocracy dedicated to the service of the ruling family.

      Later:

      Genghis Khan remains a controversial figure. He was generous and intensely loyal to his followers, but ruthless towards his enemies. He welcomed advice from diverse sources in his quest for world domination, for which he believed the shamanic supreme deity Tengri had destined him. The Mongol army under Genghis killed millions of people, yet his conquests also facilitated unprecedented commercial and cultural exchange over a vast geographical area. He is remembered as a backwards, savage tyrant in Russia and the Arab world, while recent Western scholarship has begun to reassess its previous view of him as a barbarian warlord. He was posthumously deified in Mongolia; modern Mongolians recognise him as the founding father of their nation.

      -Wikipedia

      • gimsy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Replace ruling family with ruling class and this seems very fascist to me. Do as I say or else

        There are civilizations that went extinguished because they rebelled once conquered, and again history is written by who wins, we will never know (luckily) what history would say if Hitler or Mussolini won (the Mussolini part is just a joke, he never really had any chance without the Nazis)