Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Death"

Please feel free to discuss Dan's shows.

Moderators: Loki, exposno1, Parrot, Quasigriz, NickDupree, nmoore63, robroydude, Spinny Spamkiller

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Waleis » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:40 pm

Dr. Strangelove wrote:It's the same kind of person who blames America for this or that. If you show me a guy going on about the evils of the crusades, I bet money he will also go on about the evils of America, without proportionate consideration to the opponents, or any historical context.

Surrender monkeys are surrender monkeys.

What's your point, here? You've made no counterargument.

I mean, war is always inherently bad, even if it's necessary. That's obvious. If I asked "Which do you prefer: Death or Life?" I'm pretty sure most people would say "Life." In the last couple weeks you've argued the exact opposite case. You're accusing me of being a "surrender monkey" because I think the Crusades were immoral? What the fuck? And in other threads you accused me of being a surrender monkey because I think it's unfortunate when children are killed in war. What. The. Fuck.

The regulars here at the DCF have gone completely bonkers for war and death and genocide over the last couple months, for some reason.
Last edited by Waleis on Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9767
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:43 pm

My counterargument is the ruins of Antioch. My counterargument is pretty much any photo you randomly find of the Middle East. The contrast that with a random photo from France, Italy, Britain, or Germany.
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37023
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Waleis » Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:48 pm

Dr. Strangelove wrote:My counterargument is pretty much any photo you randomly find of the Middle East. The contrast that with a random photo from France, Italy, Britain, or Germany.

Well, now you're simply distinguishing between East and West. Do you believe Western culture is inherently superior to Eastern culture?
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9767
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Carlus Magnus » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:01 pm

I have a lot of the same feelings as Doc. I don't believe Western culture is superior to Eastern Culture, but lets stop bashing ourselves in the vein of Howard Zinn. Yeah, bad shit happens in war. However, Western culture has a lot to offer, we've pioneered a great many things in science, civil rights and frankly feeding most of the world. I don't need to be ashamed of my culture because we fire bombed Dresden and Tokyo any more than I need to be ashamed of Charlemagne committing genocide on Germans and cutting down sacred oaks.

I am aware enough to understand those were different times, with different values. I don't live in a culture where we fire bomb entire cities or lop the heads off POW's. I love that we have Nancy Pelosi's and Sarah Palin's in our society that can make an ass of themselves and aren't going to be physically stoned in the town square. I can't undo the history of my culture, all I can do is make better choices. And I don't have walk around every day wringing my hands and being ashamed of being of European ancestry to do it.
Molon Labe
User avatar
Carlus Magnus
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 8288
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:10 pm
Location: Cascadia

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Waleis » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:05 pm

Carlus Magnus wrote:I don't believe Western culture is superior to Eastern Culture, but lets stop bashing ourselves in the vein of Howard Zinn.

I'm in total agreement on this point. I mean, I'm not attacking the West or Europe or religion or whatever the fuck else...I'm just talking geopolitics. There was a very practical, pragmatic, political reason for the Pope to initiate the Crusades.
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9767
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby BjornP » Sat Apr 14, 2012 4:34 am

DSL wrote:As far as I am concerned, the main problem with the crusades were that we lost, and that a few armies plundered Christian cities out of greed (winning for themselves excommunication, but still causing the Schism).


The Great Schism = 1054

Crusades = Announced by Urban II 1095

Sack of Constantinople in the 4th Crusade= 1204.

As for the whole religious justice/defence BS:

If we're going with hopes from a position of desire of justice: I would have liked to see Kazaria become a huge Empire who conquered the entire Middle East, Anatolia, the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa, untill finally establishing its capital in Jerusalem. Each time any Christian or Muslim armies tried to invade, its Christian and Muslim inhabitants would be proportionately decimated, Christian and Muslim holy buildings destroyed, and any time a Christian or Muslim cleric was caught trying to convert anyone, he would be burned alive on a stake.. or impaled through the ass and mouth on a pike.

And 500 years later, they could then start growing a generation of hippies that question the "abhorrent violence" commited against those "poor Christian and Muslim realms and minorities that just wanted to mind their own business :cry: ".
Truth is not democratic.
User avatar
BjornP
Satrap
 
Posts: 4420
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:40 pm
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby The Road Rascal » Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:23 am

Waleis wrote:Do you believe Western culture is inherently superior to Eastern culture?


Superior for what? There are certain fields in which I'd say both have their strengths and weaknesses, depending on how you define "Eastern" and "Western."
User avatar
The Road Rascal
Nomarch
 
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:34 pm
Location: Louisiana

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:21 pm

Question: if I give you a million dollars in exchange for you living in a place of my choosing, either in Europe or the Middle East, and all you could choose is the region, which would you choose? It's not a trick question. I will still try to find a decent place for you either way. You need only choose the region.
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37023
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Waleis » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:32 pm

So, your argument is that we should've conquered the Middle East during the Crusades, because the Middle east isn't as successful today as Europe?
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9767
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:36 pm

It wasn't an argument but a question.
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37023
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Waleis » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:37 pm

Dr. Strangelove wrote:It wasn't an argument but a question.

Alright. I'd prefer to live in Scandinavia.
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.
User avatar
Waleis
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 9767
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:32 am
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby P. Ami » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:55 pm

Cool to see this thread revived. I only got on because I have just listened to this episode for the first time and was particularly bothered by the characterization of Europe as compared to other powers in that pre-globalized era. Dan is generally better informed then he displayed in this particular episode. It was still very interesting and I hope the thread catches Dan's eye as I'd like to see if he has a reasonable defense for what appears to me to be bad context for the story he told.

I'm not interested in engaging in the surrender monkey discussion. Obviously the events of the late Middle-Ages effect today's geopolitics. Win or lose, it's good to know the truth.

Waleis wrote:It isn't some religious thing, it's a geopolitical thing. The Crusades made Europe a much safer place...not because it kept them darned Muslims at bay (the Muslims could never take Constantinople without cannons)...the Crusades kept Europe safe because it dumped thousands of trained killers outside of Europe. Before the Crusades knights were ripping across Europe disrupting commerce, disrupting agriculture, and threatening the power of the Church. The Crusades dealt with the knights. This created a semblance of stability.


Crusades made Europe safer for both reasons. First, the bands of fighting men that went off on the first few Crusades, many were brigands, not so much knights. These men had been mercenaries in dynastic wars in Europe, were sometimes cheated out of pay and exacted their living by raiding the people. This eventually was solved, not by the Crusades, but by monarchy. Monarchs became responsible for the keeping of the peace after they had consolidated their power.

Keep in mind that the retaking of Iberia by Catalan and (shit, I don't feel like looking up Wikipedia to recall the name of the other territory) was also a crusade and was against Islam. The Normans taking Sicily was a crusade that established the Kingdom of Sicily. Finally, Constantinople is not the end-all be all of Rome. Just because the Muslims could not take Constantinople without cannons, did not mean they did not have the ability to take Antioch and very many of the various important cities in Anatolia. The Roman Emperor was responsible for the defense of a large landmass, not just a city. Google Arial Photos of Roman Ruins in Syria, Jordan, Israel, Iraq etc... Point being, it was not only the defense of New Rome, nor just of the Bishoprics of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, nor just the defense of the Eastern part of Europe. The Muslims were pinching Rome for hundreds of years, from east, West and the Mediterranean underbelly.

Honestly, I don't see any reason to think the Byzantines or the Franks would've handled those ex-Roman lands in the Middle East any better than the Muslims did. In fact, the Muslims did a markedly better job of preserving ancient texts than the Catholics did, overall. The Islamic Golden Age is worth mentioning here.


The issue isn't only who would have handled the situation better between Muslims, Latin-Romans, or Greek Romans. The issue I find dishonest is in considering the Crusades as invasions rather then liberations. Liberation is a much more reasonable characterization of those wars.

The Muslims only did a better job of preserving ancient texts because they captured the only cheap source of record-keeping. The Muslims had papyrus and the Europeans did not because the Muslims cut it off from Europe. Also, there was not so much a drop in European grandur. Just look at the architecture of the day. Written record keeping was stunted. What records were kept showed a great connection of the Roman heritage. Also, the connection with Eastern Rome was still very strong and much knoledge was passed back and forth in spite of the Schism. All that said, the Muslims were not interested in Greek philosophy, much of Hellenistic arts, or much of their culture. They preserved very little of the Classical texts. What was kept, unless under the supervision of Roman bureaucrats, was what the Muslim conquerors thought would be useful for their further conquests. They kept little of Aristotle but preserved siegecraft. They did adopt the bath-house culture and now we call these former Roman-Baths Turkish-Baths. There is a Russian version of this bath culture that they inherited from their Byzantine vassalage days (I think it was Emperor Theodoricus that got the Rus to join his patronage group, converted them to Christianity and then recognized what would become Russia as belonging to the Rus). Saying the Muslims preserved ancient knowledge is like saying the British preserved the Scone of Scotland. Sure the Scots have that now because the English gave it back after many hundreds of years, but the English took it from them in the first place through brutal repression.
"Have no twisty thoughts"

- Lao Tsu
User avatar
P. Ami
Nomarch
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:10 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Sat Apr 14, 2012 2:36 pm

Consider also that, had we been successful in defending the Holy Land from those Muslim invaders, there would be no such thing as an Israel / Palestinian conflict. There would be only Christians and Jews, with perhaps a small population of Muslims descended from peaceful immigrants. By our current age, we could easily hand over that land to Israel, no issues.

Egypt would still be populated by its original inhabitants: the Copts who are right now being slaughtered by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Where Libya and Algeria exist today would remain the Gothic kingdoms that existed there before being overrun and exterminated by Muslim invaders.

I don't write these things simply to demonize one group of people over another. It was a different time and all the actors of those days did plenty wrong. But this conception of the Crusades as some kind of awful act perpetrated by Europeans is played out and entirely inconsistent with historical record. Certainly bad things happened at the hands of crusaders. But neither did the crusaders exterminate entire nations of people. Nor were they invaders but defenders trying to protect our own civilization from being overrun and annihilated. If you guys think Muslims of that era intended to stop with the Holy Land, then you are hopelessly deluded. They were bent on total conquest. It was built into their religion. These were not innocent and peaceful poor souls attacked by the terrible European invaders.
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 37023
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Brennus » Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:11 pm

Waleis wrote:
Dr. Strangelove wrote:People who use the crusades to trash talk our own culture and heritage are typical surrender monkeys.

Dude, the Crusades happened 1000 years ago. There's no reason to be all gung ho about it. I don't see the Crusades as a conflict between Good and Evil, therefore I'm a surrender monkey? You've been hangin out with Smitty-48 a little too much. Honestly, I don't see any reason to think the Byzantines or the Franks would've handled those ex-Roman lands in the Middle East any better than the Muslims did. In fact, the Muslims did a markedly better job of preserving ancient texts than the Catholics did, overall. The Islamic Golden Age is worth mentioning here.

In any case, I think the Crusades were immoral, but good for Europe (and Western civilization) in the long run.


Dr. Strangelove chillax man. I don't see Waleis here trash talking anyone.

My two cents is that the Crusades were neither moral nor immoral. Those were the times. The Muslims and Christians armies were doin' what they do. What they did to each a hell of a lot too. They were making war, ape-man to ape-man.
Vae Victis!
User avatar
Brennus
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:20 pm

Re: Dan's "racist" episode no. 32 - "Globalization Onto Deat

Postby Carlus Magnus » Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:21 pm

Waleis wrote:
Dr. Strangelove wrote:It wasn't an argument but a question.

Alright. I'd prefer to live in Scandinavia.


Here's how to immigrate to Sweden. Drop us a line when you get there.
http://www.immi.se/migration/control.htm
Molon Labe
User avatar
Carlus Magnus
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 8288
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:10 pm
Location: Cascadia

PreviousNext

Return to Discuss the History Show

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests