Gog Magog civil war with the west

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I know that the Russians are brutal in war and monstrous; look what Putin did to Syria, and what his ancestors did in Afghanistan.
But what did the west do there, also? greet the Afghans with flowers?

A new opinion must form: both powers are evil. imperialism proved to be the most destructive force on earth,
Both combatants are imperial.
both have WMDs.
both have no morals.

Be honest - you hit yourself in the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you stop, don’t you?

Boru

[arewethereyet]

I’d like to move this thread (it’s not really Current Events), but we don’t seem to have Looney Batshit Crazy Muslim Paranoid Prophecy thread.

Boru

I think that is a grand idea for a thread.  Most of Winter's stuff could go there.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

actually imperialism also made much of humanity’s progress possible.

That progress would happened even without imperialism. At a significantly slower pace, true, but with a much lower cost in misery and human lives.

Boru

We automatically equate an imperial society with an oppressive one?

[Anomalocaris]

actually imperialism also made much of humanity’s progress possible.

Any stable environment will help. Hereditary empires are perhaps the least flexible of the available options.

too prolonged a stable environment discourages progress, periodic instability creates opportunities and demand for progress.  Imperialism is both also a natural outcome of a periodically unstable world, and competing imperialism by several powers is one of the key mechanisms that maintains this periodic instability.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That progress would happened even without imperialism. At a significantly slower pace, true, but with a much lower cost in misery and human lives.

Boru

We automatically equate an imperial society with an oppressive one?

Non-oppressive empires are the exception rather than the rule. But things seems to be getting better - the American empire, for all it’s faults, is on of the least oppressive in history.

Boru

[Anomalocaris]

if it is non-oppressive, it wouldn’t need to be imperialistic. imperialistic implied unconsented imposition.    otherwise it would be federalism, not imperialism.


also, arguably a system that is not oppressive to some people in some way would not generate the kind of instability that would promote progress.    the fear that being on the losing end will lead to oppression is IMHO a key underlying driver of progress.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

if it is non-oppressive, it wouldn’t need to be imperialistic. imperialistic implied unconsented imposition.    otherwise it would be federalism, not imperialism.


also, arguably a system that is not oppressive to some people in some way would not generate the kind of instability that would promote progress.    the fear that being on the losing end will lead to oppression is IMHO a key underlying driver of progress.

Fair enough - ‘non-oppressive’ was a poor choice of phrase. But oppression exists on a scale. Some empires (Belgian, British) were clearly more oppressive than others (Maurya, Roman).

Boru

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Any stable environment will help. Hereditary empires are perhaps the least flexible of the available options.

too prolonged a stable environment discourages progress, periodic instability creates opportunities and demand for progress.  Imperialism is both also a natural outcome of a periodically unstable world, and competing imperialism by several powers is one of the key mechanisms that maintains this periodic instability.

I didn't say "static", I said "stable". Being able to KNOW with some certainty that you can go to the market and sell your eggs, knowing that a strange army isn't going to confiscate your livestock, et cetera.

[Anomalocaris]

The empire that the romans built during the first roughly 200 years after the 2nd punic war was definitely a highly oppressive exploitative empire for the benefit of Italy-Roman elite at the expense of the provincials. it was only the passage of centuries that gradually blurred the sharp distinction between Italian Romans and provincials that inner parts of the roman empire became more like a large roman state rather than an imperial italian Rome at the center with colonial provinces all around it.

[Anomalocaris]

too prolonged a stable environment discourages progress, periodic instability creates opportunities and demand for progress.  Imperialism is both also a natural outcome of a periodically unstable world, and competing imperialism by several powers is one of the key mechanisms that maintains this periodic instability.

I didn't say "static", I said "stable". Being able to KNOW with some certainty that you can go to the market and sell your eggs, knowing that a strange army isn't going to confiscate your livestock, et cetera.

but not being absolutely sure that you will be able to go to the market to sell your produce tomorrow, because some imperial power might come in and push over your carts and seize all your produce focuses your mind on making the kind of innovations required to reduce the chance of that happening