"Should" is a very slippery word, implying as it does a single right course of action, and who decides what is right? If, for instance, one felt general compassion for the world and its peoples and was very brave as well, one might choose to attempt to prevent the dissolution into authoritarianism. Given what was coming, however, that would involve extraordinary courage and self-sacrifice; this would be the course of action of what might usually be called a saint. A less brave person might try to protect themself and their family and close friends by, for instance, moving to Latin America. I would not reproach anyone who took this course of action; it seems unreasonable to reproach anyone for not being a saint. An opportunistic person might choose to try to profit and also escape the coming disaster. It would depend on one's place in society as well; a German communist leader or senior party member, having had a sudden flash of precognition, might have been able to make common cause with the German social democrats; even small gestures of co-operation might have made the difference. This would, again, demand unusual courage, since opposition to Stalin's will was often a quick route to an early grave.
Personally, I will always regret not having pursued a political career after my first intuitions, back in the 1980s, that the Reagan Revolution would dissolve into authoritarianism. Why did I not? My intuitions were unclear, and unformed and I didn't believe in my own ability to make a difference. It was not like I had a vision, complete, of Iraq, torture, and La Migra raised to cabinet level (La Migra raised to cabinet level would not even have made sense to me, then); I had a not-very-developed historical analysis and, apparently, a dim vision. I still remember writing, though, that Reagan Revolution might have its Stalin.
What did you have in mind when you posed the question?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Personally, I will always regret not having pursued a political career after my first intuitions, back in the 1980s, that the Reagan Revolution would dissolve into authoritarianism. Why did I not? My intuitions were unclear, and unformed and I didn't believe in my own ability to make a difference. It was not like I had a vision, complete, of Iraq, torture, and La Migra raised to cabinet level (La Migra raised to cabinet level would not even have made sense to me, then); I had a not-very-developed historical analysis and, apparently, a dim vision. I still remember writing, though, that Reagan Revolution might have its Stalin.
What did you have in mind when you posed the question?