Historical Argument That Was In the Wrong Forum

[Patine]

But when I saw Churchill, I remember the British-Raj hungry.

But Haile Selassie, the big icon and mascot of the Pan-African and Black Nationalist Movements, and the Messiah of Rastafarianism, doesn't get called out by you for his own downfall - when a drought of monumental proportions hit Ethiopia, he refused to break feudal and aristocratic traditions of land-ownership and resource distribution that had more or less governed his nation for 2000 years, and thus the common Ethiopians starved while he and his noble, land-owning and theocratic elite ate well - until the Soviet-backed Derg, under Meriam Megistu, overthrew the monarchy, promising radical land and food redistribution, ending aristocratic classism, and beginning the Marxist tradition of stockpiling resources in times of plenty - and they were initially VERY popular! But a White leader who leads to famine is a monster, unlike Haile Selassie, of course...

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I can say the same about you.
Everybody here just believe in their own sources, with their own bias.

What we are posting isn't bias though. It's actual credible information. Did you even read the official Seminole tribe web page I gave stating how they are a Native American tribe and not primarily mixed race?

My chinese teacher goes to North Korea once and told me they are the most Happy country in the world. In this European-bias-IDH source don't even have North Korea data.
Buttan also do this claim, of the most happy country in this world, this map show they as Orange.

As if North Korea would just hand over their statistics to any country in Europe?

 

[Kupe Navigator]

But Haile Selassie, the big icon and mascot of the Pan-African and Black Nationalist Movements, and the Messiah of Rastafarianism, doesn't get called out by you for his own downfall - when a drought of monumental proportions hit Ethiopia, he refused to break feudal and aristocratic traditions of land-ownership and resource distribution that had more or less governed his nation for 2000 years, and thus the common Ethiopians starved while he and his noble, land-owning and theocratic elite ate well - until the Soviet-backed Derg, under Meriam Megistu, overthrew the monarchy, promising radical land and food redistribution, ending aristocratic classism, and beginning the Marxist tradition of stockpiling resources in times of plenty - and they were initially VERY popular! But a White leader who leads to famine is a monster, unlike Haile Selassie, of course...

There IS a reason why Halie got overthown.

 

[Henri Christophe]

WTF? You believe it? A country on the same level as Somalia! A nation that would kill you on public for owning a Bible. A nation that just blew up a defacto embassy building? Maybe we don't have N.korean data because they don't share data?

I follow the Lao Tsé 老子 school of thinking.
That mean, I don't have problem to agree with two stuffs who seems be oposite one for another.
As I understand Lao Tsé, two oposite ideas make an equilibrium. 阴阳。

• I like communism, I like monarchy, I like semi-mythical kings. So I love Kim Jong Un
  
• This game don't cant celebrate the life of the tyrant, don't should celebrate the life of a Dictador. (Because Dictadores want to build an Empire, Empire is always evil)
  

Please, don't miss understand it.
My favorite kings are Ramsés II and Pachacuti, because they are gods in life.
Louis XIV failed to it, he never was the sun king.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I follow the Lao Tsé 老子 school of thinking.
That mean, I don't have problem to agree with two stuffs who seems be oposite one for another.
As I understand Lao Tsé, two oposite ideas make an equilibrium. 阴阳。

• I like communism, I like monarchy, I like semi-mythical kings. So I love Kim Jong Un
  
• This game don't cant celebrate the life of the tyrant, don't should celebrate the life of a Dictador. (Because Dictadores want to build an Empire, Empire is always evil)

Please, don't miss understand it.
My favorite kings are Ramsés II and Pachacuti, because they are gods in life.
Louis XIV failed to it, he never was the sun king.

....This is getting weird.... like cultish weird. You also believe Emperor of Japan is actual god? Like he claims?

 

[Patine]

I follow the Lao Tsé 老子 school of thinking.
That mean, I don't have problem to agree with two stuffs who seems be oposite one for another.
As I understand Lao Tsé, two oposite ideas make an equilibrium. 阴阳。

• I like communism, I like monarchy, I like semi-mythical kings. So I love Kim Jong Un
  
• This game don't cant celebrate the life of the tyrant, don't should celebrate the life of a Dictador. (Because Dictadores want to build an Empire, Empire is always evil)

Please, don't miss understand it.
My favorite kings are Ramsés II and Pachacuti, because they are gods in life.
Louis XIV failed to it, he never was the sun king.

Lao Tzu was also apolitical, and believed the ideal Taoist kept their head down and stayed out of affairs of state and power, or commentary therein. This is one of the reasons Confucius considered Taoists to be selfish and non-contributory.

 

[Ajidica]

I don't say Olmecs are African, I said I think they are Black.

You already said you don't consider the Olmecs to be of African descent, so in what sense do you consider them 'Black'?
It can't just be skin color - I can find people in China or South East Asia who appear paler than I am (German, Polish, and Irish), but it would be ridiculous to consider us has having a similar background.
During the crusades, the Venetians on one occasion allegedly paraded an Ethiopian slave on one of their galleys and pretended to pay him fealty, with the intent to mock the Byzantine Emperor John because he allegedly had darker than usual skin tone. Does that mean the Emperor, or the Byzantine Empire, were actually 'Black' in whatever sense you are using it?

Olmec civilization is not just Black, they paint their body with Black to look like more Black.

They praise Blackness..

Sources? I'm not up on my Mesoamerican history, but I was under the impression the Olmecs, because they left behind no writing and were in contact with no cultures with writing, are one big "I dunno". The only material culture they left behind were the heads, some carvings, and jade masks which tell us basically nothing about how their society, let alone how they understood something as complex as race.

I would love to see an Olmec Civilization with this kind of Olmec Leader.

Do we even know any Olmec words? What would the leader's name be? The most famous Olmec site, La Venta, doesn't even have an Olmec name.
I'm all for including interesting and unique civilizations in the Civ games (I'm still hoping they will include the Goths someday), but when we have no idea what language the Olmecs spoke or how their society was structured, I don't think they would be a good fit.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I follow the Lao Tsé 老子 school of thinking.
That mean, I don't have problem to agree with two stuffs who seems be oposite one for another.
As I understand Lao Tsé, two oposite ideas make an equilibrium. 阴阳。

• I like communism, I like monarchy, I like semi-mythical kings. So I love Kim Jong Un
  
• This game don't cant celebrate the life of the tyrant, don't should celebrate the life of a Dictador. (Because Dictadores want to build an Empire, Empire is always evil)

Please, don't miss understand it.
My favorite kings are Ramsés II and Pachacuti, because they are gods in life.
Louis XIV failed to it, he never was the sun king.

you can’t like socialism and monarchy. socialism is all about egalitarianism and equality and giving power to the people and monarchy is about having a limited few having power

also, pachacuti and ramses weren’t necessarily gods, Egyptian and Incan pantheons didn’t treat former leaders as if they were gods, they only treated them as deific, like gods.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

also, pachacuti and ramses weren’t necessarily gods, Egyptian and Incan pantheons didn’t treat former leaders as if they were gods, they only treated them as deific, like gods.

Just like Emperor of Japan. People don't say he is a god but rather he is like a god.

Also funny that you said you like Kim Jung Un when you said you hated Churchill. Kim Jung Un makes Churchil look like a saint by comparison. Chuchil might as well as be an angel compared to Kim.

Your argument is so hypocritical and two faced that it doesn't hold any value.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Also funny that you said you like Kim Jung Un when you said you hated Churchill. Kim Jung Un makes Churchil look like a saint by comparison. Chuchil might as well as be an angel compared to Kim.

Your argument is so hypocritical and two faced that it doesn't hold any value.

nah you don’t compare bad people that’s a slippery slope. Churchill wanted to put boers in concentration camps but didn’t bcs hitler ruined the optics and he said indians should be culled because they breed like rabbits

you’re right that Henri-Christophe’s arguments are hypocritical and racist but this isn’t why

 

[Kupe Navigator]

nah you don’t compare bad people that’s a slippery slope. Churchill wanted to put boers in concentration camps but didn’t bcs hitler ruined the optics and he said indians should be culled because they breed like rabbits

I mean Churchil at least has postive things to say about him. Mainly he helped to save Europe from being fully nazified.

What does Kim Jung Un have that is postive?

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I mean Churchil at least has postive things to say about him. Mainly he helped to save Europe from being fully nazified.

What does Kim Jung Un have that is postive?

he saved europe from being nazified for selfish/nationalist reasons not because he understood they were bad.

Both were/are terrible people. I don’t believe in comparing evil people, because any bad person can do a good thing. Churchill killed more people over his time as a politician than nearly anyone not named mao or hitler

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Both were/are terrible people. I don’t believe in comparing evil people, because any bad person can do a good thing. Churchill killed more people over his time as a politician than nearly anyone not named mao or hitler

You could say same thing about Teddy Rosevelt when he sold Koreans to Japan with Taft–Katsura Agreement. He caused Korea to be under Japanese rule and thus cause massive suffering to Korean people.

Thing is every leader has fair share of goods and bad and it is fair to compare which leader is better by comparing their achivements.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

You could say same thing about Teddy Rosevelt when he sold Koreans to Japan with Taft–Katsura Agreement. He caused Korea to be under Japanese rule and thus cause massive suffering to Korean people.

Thing is every leader has fair share of goods and bad and it is fair to compare which leader is better by comparing their achivements.

i mean roosevelt was fairly racist, although he improved labor and consumer protections in america immensely.


i guess what i’m trying to say is churchill was outright evil. I don’t think that he has anything redeeming besides so happening to help stop the nazis out of solely national, political and personal interest. No one makes moral equivalencies about stalin despite him doing the most to stop the nazis. Churchill and Stalin exacerbated famines to hurt a specific ethnic group, were immensely homophobic and racist, and only stopped the nazis because it was politically, nationally and personally convenient, not because they wanted to stop genocide

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Can someone lock this thread? I believe it is useless now.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Moderator Action: We prefer not to lock threads if at all possible, unless the OP requests it. If you don't want the thread to continue, simply stop posting in it. However, that doesn't mean that someone with something to say on the subject won't reply. At that point, it is your decision whether to engage or not.

 

[Henri Christophe]

You already said you don't consider the Olmecs to be of African descent, so in what sense do you consider them 'Black'?

I understand Black as a color. Countries as USA, China and India praise Whiteness skin and there is not the same race, but all praise Whiteness...
Countries as Haiti, Zimbabwe and Uganda praise Blackness skin, but they are heavilly influenced by Enlightment.
Some other racist society as Incas or Ptolomaic Egypt praise a kind of race, but it is not linked with Whiteness or Blackness...

Do we even know any Olmec words? What would the leader's name be? The most famous Olmec site, La Venta, doesn't even have an Olmec name.
I'm all for including interesting and unique civilizations in the Civ games (I'm still hoping they will include the Goths someday), but when we have no idea what language the Olmecs spoke or how their society was structured, I don't think they would be a good fit.

No one can read Olmec words, but let's took a look in this image.

It was deleted the explanation about how the Maya-Xicalanca and Olmec was mixed up before the Teotihuacan fall. I don't will explain it again, but I want to share this scene from Cacaxtla. The last Olmec-Xicalanca pyramid ever found.
In the left there is a white guy I will call Yaqui (because it is the name used in Popol Vuh) and the right guy is very black.
In the middle there is a guy also a little more dark then others, but have the same legs as the black one and going to the right.
This picture is very clear a racist propoaganda made by a Black Olmec King before the Cholula invasions.

For end, I will put another Racist picture made in Brazil around ~1900 and have a lot of commun points.

 

[Aurelesk]

I understand Black as a color. Countries as USA, China and India praise Whiteness skin and there is not the same race, but all praise Whiteness...

People praises what is an external sign of wealth and power. A lot of civilization praise "light skin" not because White > Black, but because the common population works in the farms and get sun tan. So, a lighter skin color means that people do not need to work farms to survive, and might be wealthy. They also praise "obesity" for the same reason: nobility can eats a lot while the common people were facing undernutitrion.
In most place around the world, this is still valid.

But, now you see that in most "white" country, people praise "dark skin" and "skinniness" now. Why? Because, due to industrial revolution and later on, the common people are working more and more inside, like in factory, in office... so they cannot get a tan because they are working inside during the day. Also, even if they do not face undernutrition anymore, they are facing malnutrition now. Healthy food suddenly became expensive, so common people buy low quality food and get fat. Having a tan (so having a darker skin from a white guy) is now synonymous of a guy that can afford some sunlight, so being able to go on vacation or having free time during work hour. No wonder why some people are painting their faces in orange to fake a tan: because it is now a sign of "wealth and power".

Nobody is denying that racism exist. It exists, and this issue needs to end: equality for everyone. But I don't know what are you trying to say with the Olmec.

Pigment for painting were not as common as today. I mean, whe used to put mummy in a blender so we can have the "Egyptian Brown" pigment, and some pigment were expensive. Never wondered why almost no flag feature the color "purple"? Because that color is that rare and expensive.
Dark pigment tend to fade away more quickly in sunlight. On your Olmec picture, we can clearly see that the bottom and the left of the picture faded away more easily. Your black guy has white legs, while having the yellow more "golden", red more "bloody" and the blue more "turquoise".

I understand that this issue is important for you. But finding racism on matter that is easily explained by other cause will harm you more and the cause you defend than helping you. Plus: we know so little about the Olmec society. How can we deduce their ideologies, their policies or even their tastes when we didn't figure out the basis of their religion(s?), how they gained influence or decline, even their actual language (Mixe? Zoquean? Both?) and ethnicity!

 

[Thenewwwguy]

People praises what is an external sign of wealth and power. A lot of civilization praise "light skin" not because White > Black, but because the common population works in the farms and get sun tan. So, a lighter skin color means that people do not need to work farms to survive, and might be wealthy. They also praise "obesity" for the same reason: nobility can eats a lot while the common people were facing undernutitrion.
In most place around the world, this is still valid.

But, now you see that in most "white" country, people praise "dark skin" and "skinniness" now. Why? Because, due to industrial revolution and later on, the common people are working more and more inside, like in factory, in office... so they cannot get a tan because they are working inside during the day. Also, even if they do not face undernutrition anymore, they are facing malnutrition now. Healthy food suddenly became expensive, so common people buy low quality food and get fat. Having a tan (so having a darker skin from a white guy) is now synonymous of a guy that can afford some sunlight, so being able to go on vacation or having free time during work hour. No wonder why some people are painting their faces in orange to fake a tan: because it is now a sign of "wealth and power".

Nobody is denying that racism exist. It exists, and this issue needs to end: equality for everyone. But I don't know what are you trying to say with the Olmec.

Pigment for painting were not as common as today. I mean, whe used to put mummy in a blender so we can have the "Egyptian Brown" pigment, and some pigment were expensive. Never wondered why almost no flag feature the color "purple"? Because that color is that rare and expensive.
Dark pigment tend to fade away more quickly in sunlight. On your Olmec picture, we can clearly see that the bottom and the left of the picture faded away more easily. Your black guy has white legs, while having the yellow more "golden", red more "bloody" and the blue more "turquoise".

I understand that this issue is important for you. But finding racism on matter that is easily explained by other cause will harm you more and the cause you defend than helping you. Plus: we know so little about the Olmec society. How can we deduce their ideologies, their policies or even their tastes when we didn't figure out the basis of their religion(s?), how they gained influence or decline, even their actual language (Mixe? Zoquean? Both?) and ethnicity!

completely agree. If we see another mesoamerican civ i want to see Purépecha myself, with the Navajo and Tlingit for NA and the Guarani for SA.

 

[Henri Christophe]

I understand that this issue is important for you. But finding racism on matter that is easily explained by other cause will harm you more and the cause you defend than helping you. Plus: we know so little about the Olmec society. How can we deduce their ideologies, their policies or even their tastes when we didn't figure out the basis of their religion(s?), how they gained influence or decline, even their actual language (Mixe? Zoquean? Both?) and ethnicity!

One of the reasons we don't know about Olmec society is our tendency to over separate humans groups.
The city state in the game, La venta, is about Olmec. Just Olmec
This paint in Cacaxtla is way newer and it is about Olmec-Xicalanca.
Since Olmec and Olmec-Xicalanca aren't the same people, we cannot say a lot of things.
But, if we just try to understand how the Olmec civilization evolve to Olmec-Xicalanca.
Look to their history in Teotihuacan, than, we can say a lot of things about they.

I really think this painting is powerfull enought to do a 3Deer king very Black. Not African, but Black.