Not to be a conspiracytard but the kvetch is now imbedded into every culture, which I feel is indicative of who controls politics. No longer do Arabs (those of any political importance atleast) just claim a vengeful jihad and just openly destroy Israel. They have to kvetch about genocide and buy up YouTube ad space to show me images of bombed out dwellings begging me to fork over a monthly 5 dollars in exchange for a pin and good feelings.
I knew a guy who asked Indians for directions to a hot spring an hour walk away. He got lost and went back to his car completely ransacked in the middle of the night in the Mojave desert and almost died of hypothermia until some hunters found him.
War crimes didn’t really become a thing until the state became an abstract entity independent of the king’s existence with the power to draft people to fight war of attrition by 1790. As such, it didn’t make sense to torture and mistreat conscripts. Also, the state have to consider what come after war in order to win peace. The revolution in religion really came after the Scythians invaded every part of Asia, from China to Egypt. To counter their new mobile tactics, the early states have to become empires in order to have enough men and taxes to both garrison supply towns and to meet in the field. That means you have to find way to turn multiethnic army and society into a cohesive unit happy to pay taxes. Universalism and abstract morality became the elite tools to do so. From there, the concept of some rules was needed to pacify the captured nations. Roman Empire was the last to adopt universalist moralistic religion in the Third Century in order to provide unity in a failing empire. Slaughter of enemy troopers really depends on resources. If you cannot feed and garrison the prisoners, you kill them as Joan d’Arc often did with the Englishmen. Otherwise, you hold the rich as hostages for ransom and turn the common into slaves.
Ehh, I wouldn’t say empires relied necessarily on universal morality as they got bigger. The Han were so populous that China remained overwhelmingly Han at all stages of its history, so they never needed to adopt universalist morals. The Persians also didn’t really adopt universalism. I mean, they were definitely moralistic but they were also ethnocentrists who weren’t really interested in spreading Zoroastrianism out of Iranic areas. I think you are correct on your diagnosis of the Romans though
I know a dude on iF who used to go out naked and scare heyahoyas at night when they were out of their reservations
Not to be a conspiracytard but the kvetch is now imbedded into every culture, which I feel is indicative of who controls politics. No longer do Arabs (those of any political importance atleast) just claim a vengeful jihad and just openly destroy Israel. They have to kvetch about genocide and buy up YouTube ad space to show me images of bombed out dwellings begging me to fork over a monthly 5 dollars in exchange for a pin and good feelings.
I knew a guy who asked Indians for directions to a hot spring an hour walk away. He got lost and went back to his car completely ransacked in the middle of the night in the Mojave desert and almost died of hypothermia until some hunters found him.
This happened to George Washington too
War crimes didn’t really become a thing until the state became an abstract entity independent of the king’s existence with the power to draft people to fight war of attrition by 1790. As such, it didn’t make sense to torture and mistreat conscripts. Also, the state have to consider what come after war in order to win peace. The revolution in religion really came after the Scythians invaded every part of Asia, from China to Egypt. To counter their new mobile tactics, the early states have to become empires in order to have enough men and taxes to both garrison supply towns and to meet in the field. That means you have to find way to turn multiethnic army and society into a cohesive unit happy to pay taxes. Universalism and abstract morality became the elite tools to do so. From there, the concept of some rules was needed to pacify the captured nations. Roman Empire was the last to adopt universalist moralistic religion in the Third Century in order to provide unity in a failing empire. Slaughter of enemy troopers really depends on resources. If you cannot feed and garrison the prisoners, you kill them as Joan d’Arc often did with the Englishmen. Otherwise, you hold the rich as hostages for ransom and turn the common into slaves.
Ehh, I wouldn’t say empires relied necessarily on universal morality as they got bigger. The Han were so populous that China remained overwhelmingly Han at all stages of its history, so they never needed to adopt universalist morals. The Persians also didn’t really adopt universalism. I mean, they were definitely moralistic but they were also ethnocentrists who weren’t really interested in spreading Zoroastrianism out of Iranic areas. I think you are correct on your diagnosis of the Romans though
“War crimes” are just banter
mr sextionalism the link to witnesses engaging with the torture of nazis is broken
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223831/How-Britain-tortured-Nazi-PoWs-The-horrifying-interrogation-methods-belie-proud-boast-fought-clean-war.html
ah fiddlesticks
The phrase has lost the meaning it never had