Itt: people who deserved a better death

...

...

indeed, he shouldnt have been shot right away. having his face broken in while he was alive then burned alive would have been much better.

commie detected

Yeah, it was pretty barbarous. I don't like him at all, but I think they should have had the courtesy to respect his dying wish and bury him rather than parading his mutilated body.

That was pretty edgy, kids.

I'd say Caesar, but getting jumped by the most powerful people in Rome in the most cowardly way possible is both the thuggest way to go and the biggest stroke to his (still enduring) ego.

I knew a guy who said his grandmother was there when he got strung up and spat on his corpse.

It's strange to think his grandchildren are still alive walking around knowing their grandpa was mutilated and hung from a lamppost.

I knew a guy who knew a guy who said his grandmother was there when he got strung up and spat on his corpse.

>thinking mussolini was bad means you're a communist
>while celebrating the brutal murder of a politician in a liberal democracy

Back to your containment.

same

He should have been at Nuremberg and had a proper execution, but he still deserved death.

This. Cesar and Mussolini.

Italians are literally Arab tier, they acted like savages in killing him.

>thinking mussolini was bad means you're a communist
>while celebrating the brutal murder of a communist in a liberal democracy
I'm not seeing the contradiction friendo.

>inb4 /pol/ memes
I saved it from /k/
:3

Hoppeans are to libertarianism as Leninists are to Marxism.

>After our totalitarian dictatorship murders all who oppose it, it will magically go away and leave a utopia in its wake

Both, unsurprisingly, also masturbate furiously to mass murder.

It's only memez
It's ok
It's ok

More like as Pol Potists are to Marxism. Leninism was a highly influential theory, whereas Hoppe is the fringe of a fringe.

>act like cartoon villain
>get killed in over the top way

really makes the synapses fire

Leninism is highly influential though. Hoppes is not.

>Back to your containment.
no :^)
Caesar, Mussolini, Harold Godwinson and Alexander the Great.
Honorable mention, Frederick Barbarossa (God bless his Germanic Soul), a 100,000 man army crippled by a river.

Obviously, but the thought process is the same. Hoppe's thinking really does resemble a bizarro Marxism-Leninism.

tsar nicholas' children
their execution was necessarily brutal and messy

*unnecessarily

This, too. They could have had the family just renounce their claim to the throne. They shouldn't have been killed (arguably with the exception of Nicholas II, as tragic as I consider his life). I watched a documentary on their fall and nearly cried when the letters and diaries from their last days were read.

It's a shame we'll never read the letters and diaries of the last days of all those soldiers who got mowed down by German machine guns. The workers who died carving St Petersburg out of a swamp. The peasants who starved when their lord wanted taxes paid during a bad harvest.

the 4 grand duchesses already had no claim to the throne, and the tsesarevich was a terminally ill 13 year old who had already been abdicated. apparently even lenin didnt want them excecuted.
would you mind telling me the name of the documentary? ive had trouble finding any on the romanovs

Fuck off Red.
Notice how you never see monarchists popping up in WW1 threads arguing that it's not tragic that soldiers died, but you Bolshevik scum always trip over yourselves to imply that little girls deserve to be bayoneted to death.

>It's a shame we'll never read the letters and diaries of the last days of all those soldiers who got mowed down by German machine guns. The workers who died carving St Petersburg out of a swamp. The peasants who starved when their lord wanted taxes paid during a bad harvest.
Yes, the 13 year old carevitch and his sisters were obviously guilty for this. Get your head out of yout ass, I said "arguably with the exception of Nicholas II" for a reason. Besides, why would compassion for the soldiers and workers make me blind to the tragedy of the family? Even if I were convinced that they deserved their fate, I would still have felt compassion toward them.
>apparently even lenin didnt want them excecuted.
If I recall correctly, the documentary stated that Lenin originally wanted them put on trial, but Trocki convinced him that revolutionary justice must not show doubt in the family's guilt, as that would mean there was doubt in the revolution's legitimacy.
It was a bbc documentary by a British historian who specialized in Russian history. I recall him being a high noble, an earl, if I remember correctly. I tried to dig out the name of either the man or the documentary, but I failed. Sorry, hope the extra info will help you more than it helped me.

Not that user but I see it as being less ideological and more a strike what they perceive as hypocrisy ie constant threads and tears over the Romanovs with no one caring about the 1.5 million people here father got killed.

The fact that you wont even at least pretend to be sad or care about all those people is the kind of thing that leads to people being glad for the brutality of the Reds - Only they seemed to care for that 1.5 million dead and many more wounded or cry for justice.

>a strike what they perceive as hypocrisy ie constant threads and tears over the Romanovs with no one caring about the 1.5 million people here father got killed.
I really don't see that as hypocrisy. It is much easier to talk about and feel compassion for people whose stories you know. For example, I see people periodically mention Pavlov or Ehrler. Talking about them doesn't diminish the admiration or compassion toward other, nameless soldiers - that goes unsaid. It is just impossible to talk about their stories as they are unknown. The story of the Russian royal family is well-known and deeply tragic. It only makes sense that people discuss it.

>believing that guys who sucessfully made a revolution couldn't shoot straight and give romanov's a swift death

He done so much and died a early death because of Uremia and intestinal damage

>really don't see that as hypocrisy. It is much easier to talk about and feel compassion for people whose stories you know

Of course it doesn't make it any less hypocritical though.


>For example, I see people periodically mention Pavlov or Ehrler.

When was the last time that happened? We have daily Romanov threads.

>that goes unsaid. It is just impossible to talk about their stories as they are unknown. The story of the Russian royal family is well-known and deeply tragic

Yet as soon as someone brought those people up you instantly told them to fuck off and named them as a communist, considered them scum and the that they thought the Tzars family deserved to be bayonetted.

You fall into the same trap as the legitimate Bolshevik appologists here.

>The story of the Russian royal family is well-known and deeply tragic

What are your thoughts of the people who use that tragedy to mask the cruelty and horror inflicted by the Tzar and his empire?

>buhuhuhu the death of these children is particularly sad 'cause they're royalty

God, monarchy cuckolds make me particularly sick.

>if someone is sad over one death, they cannot be sad for others!
fuck off

Well are they sad for the others though?

You're only sad for their deaths because the west romanticizes nobility. No one gives a flying fuck about the romanovs in russia.

They're literally innocent children, it wasn't the 1400s they didn't need to get murdered

i certainly am, anyone who either hails him as an angel who could do no wrong or the very worst of his kind is an idiot, it is unfair to look through either of these lenses

>Of course it doesn't make it any less hypocritical though.
And how is it hypocrisy? If it is hypocritical to speak of one tragedy instead of the other, wouldn't it also be hypocritical to mourn your dead? I told you that talking of one tragedy isn't discounting the other.

>When was the last time that happened? We have daily Romanov threads.
You missed the point of my statement, which was that mentioning the tragedy of the Russian royal family and not other, nameless tragedies is no more disrespectful than mentioning Pavlov or Ehrler rather than other, nameless soldiers. Frequency of discussion is utterly beside my point.

>Yet as soon as someone brought those people up you instantly told them to fuck off and named them as a communist, considered them scum and the that they thought the Tzars family deserved to be bayonetted.
>You fall into the same trap as the legitimate Bolshevik appologists here.
I never mentioned communists nor told anyone to fuck off. Where are you getting that from?

>What are your thoughts of the people who use that tragedy to mask the cruelty and horror inflicted by the Tzar and his empire?
Low, but I don't see how that is in any way related to the discussion.

This

...

...

>And how is it hypocrisy? I told you that talking of one tragedy isn't discounting the other.

It is when you ignore it and are hostile to others who do.

>You missed the point of my statement, which was that mentioning the tragedy of the Russian royal family and not other, nameless tragedies is no more disrespectful than mentioning ...

See my first and last points


>I never mentioned communists nor told anyone to fuck off. Where are you getting that from?

The post of yours I responded to >Low, but I don't see how that is in any way related to the discussion.

Its tangent (hence why I put it at the end) but what I think is the reason behind the animonisty towards romanov posters.
For the record isnt me.

>buhuhuhu the death of these children is particularly sad 'cause they're royalty
And you choose to strawman me because...?
>You're only sad for their deaths because the west romanticizes nobility. No one gives a flying fuck about the romanovs in russia.
I don't at all have a positive view of the institution of nobility. How exactly is that relevant, though? Their fates are said due to the way they last days passed, not due to their blood.

>It is when you ignore it and are hostile to others who do.
I never did that.

>See my first and last points.
I am. How exactly do they answer my points?

>The post of yours I responded to #
That is not my post.

For the record (You) # isnt me.
I know, because it was me. I forgot to link the posts.

>Its tangent (hence why I put it at the end) but what I think is the reason behind the animonisty towards romanov posters.
Possibly.

>That is not my post.

Then thats probably the issue as my post and comments were directed towards and made in the context of

>Then thats probably the issue as my post and comments were directed towards and made in the context of #
Oh, ok then. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Was that guy Joey Tribbiani

...

communists aren't Italians, human or even vertebrates

t. scrawny little antifa pipsqueek

>its not a /pol/ meme because one of the cancerous noguns /pol/tards on /k/ made it
it has nothing to do with weapons, its not a /k/ meme

In bed, of old age, surrounded by his wife and children is the death he deserved.

He deserve a better console

>Although Pétain had still been in good health for his age at the time of his imprisonment, by late 1947 his memory lapses were worsening and he was beginning to suffer from incontinence, sometimes soiling himself in front of visitors.[5] By January 1949 his lucid intervals were becoming fewer and fewer. On 3 March 1949 a meeting of the Council of Ministers (many of them "self-proclaimed heroes of the Resistance" in the words of biographer Charles Williams) had a fierce argument about a medical report recommending that he be moved to Val-de-Grâce (a military hospital in Paris), a measure to which Prime Minister Henri Queuille had previously been sympathetic. By May Pétain required constant nursing care, and he was often suffering from hallucinations, e.g. that he was commanding armies in battle, or that naked women were dancing around his room.[47] By the end of 1949, Pétain was completely senile, with only occasional moments of lucidity. He was also beginning to suffer from heart problems and was no longer able to walk without assistance. Plans were made for his death and funeral.[48]
>On 8 June 1951 President Auriol, informed that Pétain had little longer to live, commuted his sentence to confinement in hospital (the news was kept secret until after the elections on 17 June), but by then Pétain was too ill to be moved.[49] He died on the Île d'Yeu on 23 July 1951, at the age of 95,[45] and is buried in a Marine cemetery (Cimetière communal de Port-Joinville) near the prison.[24] Calls are sometimes made to re-inter his remains in the grave prepared for him in Verdun.[50]

What the fuck is this shit?

Do these groups spam Veeky Forums or something?

is there a better answer than this?

...

DIA?

Fucking social democrats

Cuitlahuac
Spartacus
Napoleon
Attila the Hun

>spartacus
>literally died in a last stand against a much larger force
It sucks he didn't make it but it's better than dying cowardly

I always kinda felt bad for Didius Julianus

>Le jelly fatso "I'll run around the Mediterranean, throwing a tantrum cuz Caesar is a meanie and I want to be boss instead :^)"