1. No.
2. If I come in america, get american citizenship, and say I'm american. Am I american? Legally, yes. But humans aren't beings of legal descent - everything that made Tesla what he was, america had no influence on. Sorry
1. No.
2. If I come in america, get american citizenship, and say I'm american. Am I american? Legally, yes. But humans aren't beings of legal descent - everything that made Tesla what he was, america had no influence on. Sorry
But I'm sure the European scientists, and the inventor Thomas Edison (btw, I'm on Tesla's side of that whole debacle), sure influenced him. Plus, he did value his American citizenship over all the scientific honors he had won
1. No.
2. If I come in america, get american citizenship, and say I'm american. Am I american? Legally, yes. But humans aren't beings of legal descent - everything that made Tesla what he was, america had no influence on. Sorry
And intellect is a matter of genetics - being Serbian didn't make him a genius. What makes a recognised genius who can make meaningful advances is opportunity: Tesla would still have been Tesla in Serbia, but he might well have remained a basic electrical engineer without any opportunity to experiment or any financial backing, and might not have had access to a system that could effectively patent and market his designs as he found in America.
But I'm sure the European scientists, and the inventor Thomas Edison (btw, I'm on Tesla's side of that whole debacle), sure influenced him. Plus, he did value his American citizenship over all the scientific honors he had won
Keep quoting that America was just a means to achieve his potential - nothing more, nothing less - that doesn't make him american, no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise
And intellect is a matter of genetics - being Serbian didn't make him a genius. What makes a recognised genius who can make meaningful advances is opportunity: Tesla would still have been Tesla in Serbia, but he might well have remained a basic electrical engineer without any opportunity to experiment or any financial backing, and might not have had access to a system that could effectively patent and market his designs as he found in America.
Genius is genius, recognized or not, the recognition doesn't make him less serbian or more american. Neither serbs, croatians nor americans should feel proud of having tesla in their histroy. That's just stupid, the entire human race should, but it's funny how people get so possessive when it comes to something that isn't theirs (I'm not serbian, croatian nor american btw).
1. No.
2. If I come in america, get american citizenship, and say I'm american. Am I american? Legally, yes. But humans aren't beings of legal descent - everything that made Tesla what he was, america had no influence on. Sorry
In my opinion, this argument isn't logical. I was born in Iowa, but I have lived my whole adult life in Kansas. Has Kansas not influenced me merely because I am from Iowa?
In my opinion, this argument isn't logical. I was born in Iowa, but I have lived my whole adult life in Kansas. Has Kansas not influenced me merely because I am from Iowa?
He's saying that it is natural to have cultural assimilation after living in one place for a long period of time. Btw, Kansas is a completely different monster than Iowa. If it wasn't for KC, I would much rather live in Iowa.
Everything is relative. For much of the western world, America may very well have been the most influential factor in our daily lives. I'm thinking fashion, media, food, IT, even sovereignty for parts of Europe.
My view however, is that America has been much better at improving existing concepts, than inventing entirely new ones. Hamburgers were indeed likely a German imported food, but who who knows? It's fried ground beef on bread. Similarly, authentic thin-crusted Italian pizzas are gross.
Edison invented the first reliable light bulb, based on a British concept. America started the Manhattan project with German knowledge from Einstein. The Founding Fathers were educated in Greek literature. America did indeed create the first modern democracy, but it's not like they came up with it.
Ancient civilizations like Greece, Babylon and Assyria practically started off with nothing, crawled out of their caves, and created the very principles we still live by today.
Rome was just a much more violent version of America, but more overrated. Really, Rome was just a rural hamlet when the Greeks, Persians and Carthaginians had already been long-sprawling great empires. They mostly became greater by absorbing others.
My vote goes to Great Britain for being the only country with a global influence, and Germany and Japan for starting a war. They had colonies in all six continents and therefore they were the only country capable of bringing the entire world to war.
In the past wars were usually isolated to only a specific area and countries that were on the other side of the globe were usually unaffected. But with Britain having a global empire, an attack on Britain meant an attack on the world, and the effects could be felt on every continent.
Undoubtedly, WW2 has changed the fate of practically every nation today.
Rome, England, Greece, Arabia, India, Mongolia, China.
I tried to narrow it down, but couldn't. And I also really wanted to include Byzantium, but I have to admit that it wasn't quite as influential as those up top. Ah well.
...Ach, should have put Spain on too. Ah well.
And here's why:
Rome: Basically created a huge amount of legal systems and culture which made Europe.
Greece: Birthplace of European culture, society, philosophy and so forth.
England: Largest Empire ever, cultural and political exports (partially via America) have radically shaped a huge number of countries.
Arabia: Conquered a vast Empire, caused the entire linguistic, religious and to an extent cultural unity of a huge region.
India: Birthplace of several of the world's oldest and most important religions, a vast population (like China), an immense cultural heritage, and so forth.
Mongolia: They caused an actual evolutionary shift. Need I say more? .
China: The history of the world until the 17th and 18th centuries is basically "China, and some other stuff happening around the edges", so this was obviously the most important on the list.
Spain: The huge level of colonisation has left a vast linguistic heritage.
Of course it is. The concept of having a great impact on the world as a whole has only been possible in the era of globalisation, which was started by and continues to be led by Western powers.
Unfortunately, I don't think its sufficient to ask what civilisations have had the biggest impact; that demands being capable of isolating the actions of each civilisation, which is nearly impossible. If not for Sweden, a civ precluded, the Counter-Reformation might have had a far greater success at suppressing Protestantism, which would have undoubtedly changed the way in which the power of the Catholic Church pervaded in the centuries following, which in turn might have effected the success of British Imperialism. This is just conjecture, of course, but it illustrates the point that there's just too many variables in determining how great an impact a civilisation has had on the course of history.
However, from a political standpoint, the only standpoint with which I feel sufficiently comfortable in sharing a view, I believe France is woefully under-voted. Though from a socioeconomic standpoint, undoubtedly England deserves a vote.
That some of the Civs here received any votes at all is laughable and simply comes from a bias or hopelessly uniformed voter. Just to name 3 (there are more): the Celts, the Maya, Ethiopia. "The biggest impact on history" clearly does not belong to any of these. So far the voting seems accurate: Rome, Greece, America, and China are the top 4.
That some of the Civs here received any votes at all is laughable and simply comes from a bias or hopelessly uniformed voter. Just to name 3 (there are more): the Celts, the Maya, Ethiopia. "The biggest impact on history" clearly does not belong to any of these. So far the voting seems accurate: Rome, Greece, America, and China are the top 4.
That America has received so many is equally laughable IMHO. They have been the dominant power for about a 100 years, which really is almost no time at all. They might make the list in the future, but as we are deciding on it now they dont deserve to be that high. Britain, Mongols, China, Rome, Greece, Egypt, Ottomans, France, all deserve to be higher IMO. The ottomans had an empire that lasted almost 1000 years and had a huge impact in the middle east and Asia (and Europe). Britain had the biggest empire (most populous). the Chinese were enormous and the most technologically advanced people of their era. Rome dominated all of Europe, which is a feat no one but them has managed. Greece is responsible for the basic principles in mathematics and philosophy. Mongols had a truly enormous empire for the age, they definitely fit into the most impressive category. Egypt was again a scientifically and highly advanced civilization and their monuments were by the standard of the times, out of this world. And the French, like Britain, also had a highly impressive world empire.
If your argument is that America gave us hamburgers and denim jeans and therefore deserves to be on the list then i think that pretty much sums up your argument . Im not saying they have not done some great stuff, its just that others have more impressive things. As a great British industrialist remarked "The british invent it, the Americans develop it, the Japanese exploit it, and the french resent it".
So was the Chinese global domination during the centuries of it being a failed state, or the centuries of it being conquered territory of the steppe peoples, like the Mongols, or other various Asian civilizations, like the Koreans?
1) When the hell Koreans conquered China?
2) The only Asian nations who conquered the entire China were Mongols (who had godmode ) and Manchu. That's all during 4000 years of history.
3) Saying China was 'failed state' for centuries is overstatement. China has a size of the entire Europe, it had long periods of unity (when it kicked ass) and longs of being divided on smaller kingdoms but even then usually economy/culture/science flourished.
4) China didn't dominated the world because it 'didn't have to'. China was always major superpower in Asia and only true danger to Chinese Empire was internal turmoil or particularly powerful steppe hordes (which were historically wery problematic for all big empires). Over centuries and centuries China was giant superpower unlike European 'small' nations which always had to struggle for power and were motivated to colonise continents. China, on the other hand, was always giant, powerful and suffering more from internal problems of governing such populated empire than from other empires. Personally I am pretty sure than China could kick ass of the entire world in ancient - medieval ages but a) It was logistically impossible before industrial era b) China didn't have to do that c) China didn't want to do that.
As politically correct as regionalism is these days, it's a simple fact that Western Europe's nations, ideas and accomplishments have dominated the world's culture and politics for the last three centuries.
Lol, three centuries out of 4000 years of history No I am not crazy revisionist denying the European huge influence, but I wouldn't overrate it.
Sonereal; I understand you dont like the "eurocentrism" idea, but from a historical perspective you cant defend your viewpoints. You say that europe only had a global influence for three thousand years out of six, but who then had a global influence the other three?
Thats right. None.
WHAT? You mean THREE HUNDREDS years out of SIX (four...) THOUSANDS YEARS?
You also say that europe only dominated for two hundred years and I want to give you the same answer; Who dominated for the other 5800 years? On a global scale?
The answer is still; None.
Heh, obviously no one before era of exploration, it was logistically impossible
Excluding that, I would say that Mongolian Empire and Arabian Empire (or: Arabian culture) achieved such ridiculous power on such ridiculous extent of territory that they could be considered as 'world dominating empires' in their times
Well, I am creator of this poll and I cry much more myself forgetting about INDONESIA (facepalm) than Songhai. Poll can have no more than 25 options. To be honest I also think that Brasil is definitely not great empire (no offense, I don't think that my own country - Poland - has ever been 'empire' but you Brasilians have a chance to become powerhouse in the future )
ZULU? Are you joking? Below there is my opinion of Zulu 'empire'
Spoiler:
Zulu should be at the goddamn bottom of this list, below Shoshone, Iroquis and freakin Estonia No offense to Africa (if this game had Kilwa/Nubia/Mali/Ghana/Zimbabawe they would be on this list) but Zulu instead of Zimbabwe in Civilisation series is by far the most ridiculous 'tradition' of this franchise. Zulu were primitive (yes, primitive - if THEY weren't primitive we simply should abandon word 'primitive' ) tribe which had no cities, no writing system, society far less advanced than other African civilisations, and the entire 'achievement' of Zulu is unfair and genocidal conquest of few other tribes. On the area smaller than Belgium. With 'technology' on ancient level, in the XIX century. They won over very tiny badly commanded British band of soldiers only because of great numbers and in the meantime they had such tactical masterpieces as Rorke's Drift (3000 Zulu dead, few British soldiers injuried...) or Blood River battle (the same but with... Boers...). What's more, if we want to find British defeats in the hands of African nations, Ashanti Wars would be much much better example - Ashanti were far more advanced than Zulu and had fuch better tactics than 'charge!'. To be honest I think that the only reason of Zulu popularity is their tribe fitting stereotype of 'primitive African warriors with spears'. Zulu were great warriors (which... appeared WAY to late ) but they should never ever be called 'civilisation'. With so many great African nations missing from this game I find them wasting space.
And now let me defend the most underrated civilisation on the list, India.
I will very simply list Indian inventions and let you draw conclusions.
SOME INVENTIONS FROM 'INDIAN CIVILISATON' (Indian subcontinent/Indian faction in Civ5)
Crucible steel, chess, battle rockets , ruler, shampoo, Damascus steel, Cotton cultivation, sugar refinement, indigo dye, cataract surgery (arrived to whole muslim world and East Asia from India), plastic surgery, first diamond mining in the history, Hindu number system (used in the whole world today), Zero symbol, Sign convention, Trigonometric functions, Brahmagupta's mathematics, algebraic abbreviations, generally half of the mathematics used today morphology more developed than Western by whole centuries, ancient atomism theory, ancient philosophy as developed as Greek philosophy, mathematical analysis, very sophisticated astronomy, radio/wireless communication (Sir Jagdish Chandra Bose in 1895, two years prior to Marconi’s similar demonstration in England), FIRST DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD (century before Athenian democracy - guess why European colonialists take care of nobody knowing about that?).
n a thorough recent analysis in The Shape of Ancient Thought, American scholar Thomas McEvilley also details how Indian philosophy directly influenced key facets of pre-Socratic Greek philosophy.
Erwin Schrödinger, Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg admitted than philosophical implications of quantum theory are inspired by Indian philosophy, taoism and buddhism - especially Shrodinger.
Tales and Democritus created their theories after - guess what? - studying Indian philosophy and science.
'The concept of a merit system spread from China to British India during the 17th century, and then into continental Europe and the United States'
, negative numbers, oil well, gas fuel, pinhole camera, playing cards, pontoon bridge, porcelain, air conditioning, rudder, seismometer, tea, tofu, toiler paper, trebuchet, balloon, decimal fractions, diabetes, endocrinology, Horner scheme, acupuncutre (I was skeptical about that but science claims it works ) toothbrush, ice creams, matches, geobotanical prospecting, alcohol, mechanical clock, hundreds of others but I don't have enough space here
In the future I'll do similar list for American Indians and of course Muslim World which had INSANE impact on world science and technology.
PS
Greece is overrated, what a pity Persia didn't conquer these wild xenophobic barbarians
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
America was just a means to achieve his potential - nothing more, nothing less - that doesn't make him american, no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise 
.
