Ask Ecthy - about history

[Ecthy]

Don't shy at telling me you had already read all of those

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ecthy


Oh, and the overrating of inidividual beings in history, but then there's Great Man Theory, so it's more of a philosophical or even methodological issue than a layman's mistake.

It's difficult to see how one can overrate individuals such as Ashoka, Buddha or Alexander the Great.

The impact of Ashoka's conversion and then zeal to promote Buddhism meant the spread of Buddhist missionaries as far away as Egypt, Iraq/Iran and Central Asia.

It's also unlikely that Macedonia (or any of the Greek city states or Sparta) would have gone on to create the great Hellenistic oikoumene without the impetus provided by either Alexander or his father.

And considering the massive impact that the area covered by the successor states had on history and culture and knowledge, Alexander's achievement is hard to overestimate.

This isn't to say that I consider history as a series of lulls punctuated by overachievers- I don't.

[Ecthy]

That was not a question

[BeBMan]

Ecthythreadi

Originally posted by Ecthy
Do you believe in the drive of freedom and reason? Do you think these are ultimate values of mankind? Do you believe that societies which deem themselves further advanced in these values have the right to bring them to other societies?

More to come later, it's me to answer after all

To support LOTM a bit and to annoy you your question "why freedom?" is a good one. But esp. when you think there's no objective key we can use for a view on history, then the question arises "why not freedom?" (or reason etc).

Also while I don't see freedom as a de facto universal value, I'd agree with LOTM that the opposite idea of freedom (democracy/whatever) being only a (culture-specific) western thing loses much when we look around the globe....

Third, ups and downs in history don't rule out per se a certain a "directional" drive (even 1648 could fit nicely into the freedom thing). But yeah, this is mainly a matter of interpretation.

Re the materialism thing: I basically agree, though in praxis (at least that's my personal experience) people often tend to ignore non-materialist factors too easily.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ecthy


The indivdual-rational school of thoughts, summarizing political realism and standard assumptions of economic action, would answer that politics result from pursuit of hard interest, thus trying to apply ANY "ideal" basis would be unnecessary. So why Hegel at all and not Feuerbach?

In support of that Hegelian approach of yours, I might say that humanity as it evolved never was free. Humans always lived in groups that were probably strictly hierarchical, and that advance on the technical, economic and communicative scale allow humans to overcome this basic notion, hence freedom and dignity. Never thought of this before. What exactly is that Prague shop window example, I've never really read Fukuyama I get the idea of the Maslovian approach, but then it's also western-inspired and therefore not culturally independent, is it?

The Prague shop window.

Havel, I think is quoted. Theres a shop window in Prague, under Communism, at a time when almost NO one in Czecho was a believer, that says "We support the Party Campaign to do X" or whatever it was. Why is the sign there? The practical, political reason, is that the Communist party wants everyone to know that no one is willing to defy it, and requires such signs as a sign of submission. If someone could refuse such a sign, one might get the impression that the party is weak, and that might lead to opposition taking practical steps, which might in fact weaken the party. All very tangible, material, practical so far. Havels question, however, is: why bother with the slogan, which will mean having to periodically update the sign, at some cost? Why not just have the shopkeeper put up a sign saying "I submit to the will of the Communist Party" Everyone in Prague knows (according to Havel) that that is all the sign signifies anyway. No one believes the shopkeeper really supports "the campaign against X" or whatever. To Havel, IIRC, and certainly to Fukayama, its about dignity. The shopkeeper can pretend to truely support the CP campaign, and doesnt have to admit in so many word, to himself or to others that hes simply submitting to force. There are a zillion ways, in all manner of societies, that submission of such type is disguised through "good manners" which add NOTHING materially, but respond to a human need for dignity.

Is that need really as driving as Hegel and Hegelians assert? Is it universal? Do they feel that way in China? Open questions. But worth looking into, and not dismissing with a materialist assumption (even a liberal one) about rational pursuit of interests.

[lord of the mark]

and id say there are about a billion situations in western history that can only be explained that way - rebellions over the right to tax, when the actually taxes are nominal, and far less in present value than the costs of the rebellion. People voting, when there odds of an election being close enough for it to matter are slim to none. The greater concern people express over political violence, than over death from natural causes. Lots of things hard to reconcile with "rational choice", unless dignity is part of the "utility function"

[Lancer]

Why did West Germany only spend 3ish % on defense during the height of the cold war? Particularly when the US was distracted by Vietnam it seemed like an invitation to the Russians.

If the Russians are tempted to invade conventionally by western weakness on the ground and the Germans rely on US nukes to stop them, Germany ends up getting nuked or overrun. Either way...

More power on the ground made so much sense! Right?

[Zkribbler]

Who buried the treasure on Oak Island in Canada that's so difficult to get to, no one made it yet after decades of trying.

[molly bloom]

How many beans make five ?

[Heresson]

If You were teh Allies, how would You shape Poland's and Germany's boarders after ww1 and ww2? (if it was 100% up to You?)

[Barnabas]

I would let the borders the same as before ww2, but Poland gets Danzig and Konigsberg, and the germans who live there are moved to germany.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Who buried the treasure on Oak Island in Canada that's so difficult to get to, no one made it yet after decades of trying.

I just googled this and it is an incredible story! Wow!

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Barnabas
I would let the borders the same as before ww2, but Poland gets Danzig and Konigsberg, and the germans who live there are moved to germany.

Wouldn't we even get territories with teh opressed polish minority / majority elsewhere? (Upper Silesia, Masuria, Miedzyrzecz, Zlotow)