I'm ethnically European. I live in the South Pacific, literally on the other side of the world from Europe. Why do some people think it's important for these islands to be dominated by people of my ethnicity, and by the culture and political system my ancestors imposed here?
Let's say all the European colonies outside Europe collapsed, and the countries they were set up in gradually returned to having a majority who are ethnically from that part of the world. Why would that even be a bad thing?
Ever played Civilisation?... because there's lots of answers in just starting that game...
@strypey Ever played Civilisation? (rhetorical)- because there's lots of answers in just starting that game and playing the first few minutes.
And then also asking why you still are playing after the first few minutes... (similar parallel to hundreds of years and new people coming along doing the same)
@freeschool
> Ever played Civilisation?...
Oh yes. For faaarrr too many hours.
> because there's lots of answers in just starting that game...
"...civilisation is slippery, poorly defined concept that has never really been rigorously applied to ancient societies... the whole idea of classifying societies on the basis of their level of ‘advancement’ is one that never stood up as good science and is now decidedly outdated.
@strypey
So you get what I mean and I'm sort of pointing to very natural human things - so by asking you (and I would like an answer as think it's healthy to review quickly) I think we all understand more why and I think it's almost forgiveable, like playing games or fulfilling boredom of the time.., and imagining other people were just doing the same as us killing people in soldier games prevalant everywhere (honestly I see it's very much the same, as people have to spend time somehow and to get something... and well they didn't have other games.
And then early days are what built the now which is what we can play now- which I believe is a type of war or funding (graphics so we also are built on war, though seems softer).
I guess the quote pasted represents trying to say civilisation wasn't always the same or so brutal, and was other things... but blood is decidedly part of it, if not almost all of it.
Not claiming anything but coming back to your original feeling and question - we are all still learning... and warring... even the good people when you scratch their surface / aesthetics...
Key points to why people double down and maintain the same into the future... *even the same regrettable* history...
@undefined @strypey Key points to why people double down and maintain even the regrettable results of history into the future...
(just to check off you see what I mean and it's ok if you did - also for me as a list of key points you might add to...)
█ playing army games
█ filling time + solving boredom
█ resources (people had to live and as they grew have to kill more things)
█ monetary gain / wealth / greed
█ prestige / honour in battle / needing antagonists to justify their own existence / reasonings
█ commercial expansion
█ creativity (tech inventions for war)
█ Like to feel superior (not everyone regrets it)
So not just colonisation.
Human tendency and primitive solution (or many other things as names).
And also consider many might not regret it! At all and consider it normal!
Not sure what else you were expecting different - OP seems quite simple answer of conquest, exploiting people and geo-resources and human ignorant tendencies...
Can't those other people running the show, has to be us! 🗺️ 🌍 🌎 🌏
@freeschool
I'm not sure how any of this relates to the OP. I'm guessing you are referring to how colonisation happened, but that's not really the point. We can't undo history, however regrettable it might. The question I'm asking is; why do some people seem to think it's necessary - even important - to double down and maintain the regrettable results of that history.
I could guess. But I was hoping I might get some answers that challenged my assumptions.