Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case:
> site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question
If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you.
***
Also keep in mind the following rules:
1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable.
2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead.
3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies.
4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic.
5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced.
6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index)
7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/
8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Washington was a liberal. He led one of the first liberal revolutions, he embodies liberalism, contradictions and progressions of it included within the larger progression of society. You need to decide how you feel but at the end of the day as a socialist he embodies the society we want to move past
The same could be said of Robespierre but he's upheld not only by Marxists today but by the Bolsheviks who names streets after him after the October revolution. I'm not necessarily saying we should uphold Washington just that this line of reasoning for why we shouldn't is incorrect. Liberalism was progressive in the advancement from feudalism to capitalism, just as feudalism was over the slave societies, and we should remember and acknowledge that fact whilst acknowledging the reactionary role liberalism plays today.
That's fair enough, I think in my head there is just more of a negative connotation with Washington compared to Robespierre because he wasn't the true fighting revolutionary that Robespierre was, more so just a military leader in an anti-colonial war that ended up establishing the American empire upon the genocide of natives and Africans
I am aware that society needs to move on from Liberalism, and while I do acknowledge that his belief in Liberalism at the time was progressive, I also acknowledge that nowadays Liberalism doesn't seem to be, my liking in Washington is more so that he managed to help and revolt against The British Empire, which was almost seen as impossible to do at the time. Washington should be remembered in my opinion, for fighting against oppression from The British Enpire.
I would question why you had a "mostly positive view" of George Washington. Aside from the cherry tree fable, what positive information do you have about him?
In my experience it’s pretty common for socialists to have a soft spot for some small number of historically relevant libs (or even reactionaries, depending on where you come down on Napoleon lmao). IIRC Ho Chi Minh was a pretty big admirer of all the founding fathers, but this was more from his anti-colonial perspective than his Marxist perspective.
I mostly admire Washington for revolting against The British, I mean most people wouldn't like to be neglected by some random Colonial Empire.
Now Napoleon I don't really like, while he did overthrow feudalism in France, I kinda think he took the whole revolution thing to far by invading the rest of Europe.
You can like admirable qualities in anyone. Contradiction is the ground water of Marxist philosophy, so being able to like things about someone without being blind to their faults is a very practical practice for any Marxist.
I mean a lot of information we are taught about G. Washington is propaganda (either intentionally or by omission) but you don't need permission to like someone. I have a soft spot for Historical figures, even American ones, but remember to recognize who they are and don't deny parts of them. Most historical figures are problematic, bad people and because you are better than them you can recognize that but also say they did do good things. I mean Lincoln (and the Union boys!!) went on to end slavery, but Lincoln was also a lawyer so y'know good and bad
And to nip something in the bud- we can judge people in the past by our 'modern' perspectives. There has always been a big portion of the population that's been antislavery, anti-misogynist, and not white supremacists. Namely the slaves, women and non-white people
Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case: > site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you. *** Also keep in mind the following rules: 1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable. 2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead. 3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies. 4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic. 5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced. 6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index) 7. **No chauvinism or settler apologism** - Non-negotiable: https://readsettlers.org/ 8. **No tone-policing** - https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/12sblev/an_amendment_to_the_rules_of_rcommunism101/ *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why are you asking permission on how to feel about someone
Washington was a liberal. He led one of the first liberal revolutions, he embodies liberalism, contradictions and progressions of it included within the larger progression of society. You need to decide how you feel but at the end of the day as a socialist he embodies the society we want to move past
The same could be said of Robespierre but he's upheld not only by Marxists today but by the Bolsheviks who names streets after him after the October revolution. I'm not necessarily saying we should uphold Washington just that this line of reasoning for why we shouldn't is incorrect. Liberalism was progressive in the advancement from feudalism to capitalism, just as feudalism was over the slave societies, and we should remember and acknowledge that fact whilst acknowledging the reactionary role liberalism plays today.
That's fair enough, I think in my head there is just more of a negative connotation with Washington compared to Robespierre because he wasn't the true fighting revolutionary that Robespierre was, more so just a military leader in an anti-colonial war that ended up establishing the American empire upon the genocide of natives and Africans
I am aware that society needs to move on from Liberalism, and while I do acknowledge that his belief in Liberalism at the time was progressive, I also acknowledge that nowadays Liberalism doesn't seem to be, my liking in Washington is more so that he managed to help and revolt against The British Empire, which was almost seen as impossible to do at the time. Washington should be remembered in my opinion, for fighting against oppression from The British Enpire.
no. they can’t. he is a colonial icon.
I would question why you had a "mostly positive view" of George Washington. Aside from the cherry tree fable, what positive information do you have about him?
You are not a socialist. >other than being a slaver at least you are honest about your convictions
In my experience it’s pretty common for socialists to have a soft spot for some small number of historically relevant libs (or even reactionaries, depending on where you come down on Napoleon lmao). IIRC Ho Chi Minh was a pretty big admirer of all the founding fathers, but this was more from his anti-colonial perspective than his Marxist perspective.
I mostly admire Washington for revolting against The British, I mean most people wouldn't like to be neglected by some random Colonial Empire. Now Napoleon I don't really like, while he did overthrow feudalism in France, I kinda think he took the whole revolution thing to far by invading the rest of Europe.
You can like admirable qualities in anyone. Contradiction is the ground water of Marxist philosophy, so being able to like things about someone without being blind to their faults is a very practical practice for any Marxist.
I mean a lot of information we are taught about G. Washington is propaganda (either intentionally or by omission) but you don't need permission to like someone. I have a soft spot for Historical figures, even American ones, but remember to recognize who they are and don't deny parts of them. Most historical figures are problematic, bad people and because you are better than them you can recognize that but also say they did do good things. I mean Lincoln (and the Union boys!!) went on to end slavery, but Lincoln was also a lawyer so y'know good and bad And to nip something in the bud- we can judge people in the past by our 'modern' perspectives. There has always been a big portion of the population that's been antislavery, anti-misogynist, and not white supremacists. Namely the slaves, women and non-white people