Western states became competitive, then "advanced", then were able to motivate their people to do things like commit themselves to undermining these governments. The key was the same thing that fostered democracy: leaders' willingness to forgive and expand their base of support.
during a period of intense, sustained geopolitical competition.
People want to attribute this to an abstraction like "advancement", so that China is "backwards" somehow, but the truth is the inverse.
China, Iran, India, and the Middle East all had access to the best weapons and all these regions had this problem.
War is not a technological contest, it is a political contest. Western states became the most competitive because they became the best at mobilizing more resources
I think the story here is that people think that some technological or cultural shortcoming must be responsible for China having a bad time in recent centuries. If they had the key weapon of the time, they would never have been subdued by the Manchu, Westerners, or Japanese.
Historically Christians have been a lot more brutal to Muslims and Jews than Muslims have been to Christians. This is swept under the rug today. The dechristianization and dejudaization of the Middle East has really only accelerated since the 19th century. We can read 18th century sources like Voltaire celebrating the tolerance of the Ottomans compared to the intolerance of Christendom.
Historically Iβd rather be a dissenting Christian in a Muslim land than a dissenting Christian in a Christian land. The latter will more likely kill me.
Historically, conquering Muslim armies have been far more ethical than Christian ones. Not even close.
"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion [β¦] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence." - Samuel Huntington
Low-IQ rightoids who entirely engage with history as a form of white middle-class grievance politics are STUNNED that others could find art and literature meaningful for reasons not ultimately derived from GamerGate
One might expect this community of untutored but enthusiastic fans of Greek and Roman history and culture to have rejoiced at the chance provided by social media to access specialist scholars and their expertise directly. Quite to the contrary.
https://t.co/c4XquHEWMV
at the origin of the Tigris, Eufrat, Pishon, and Gihon. Or the setting of Gawain and the Green Knight. The singer is telling us that we understand it's made-up.
This archaeological standard for something like the Illiad, something far enough from reality that it could derive from any number of events, such that there should be evidence for it specifically, is insane.
But the suggestion that Ithaka is made-up is valuable. It's like Eden,
@AnalyticaCamil1 everywhere and his discussions with those leaders.
The idea that Mongols leveled entire societies everywhere makes a good story but no sense. They did what other conquerors have done: destruction, then a renaissance. It was exceptional for how many countries they did it to
@AnalyticaCamil1 Juvayni's book describes a couple places that they completely destroyed, like Urgenj and Nishapur, some places they destroyed a lot, like the rest of Khorasan, and places they largely preserved, like Mawarannahr and Turkestan. He described how they reaffirmed city leadership..