Those that would demonize a current group by citing a violent past seem to lack a general knowledge of history. Any and all evils that seem to be indicative of one particular group are generally so common in the historical record that it is almost always fallacious to justify a present bias on a past sin. Beheading? How about we talk about the Roman practice of placing severed heads on pikes? How about the wide-spread practice of keeping heads or parts of heads as war trophies? Headhunting was a thing a lot of different people did for a long time, and not just purely savage and barbaric peoples, but civilized places too. The Irish refined the practice into scalping, which they taught to the Native Americans. Places like Montenegro kept the practice alive until the early 20th century. Historically, beheading is such a long running and wide-spread practice, with so many variations that no one explanatory theory covers them all. Driving out of people of different faiths? Ever hear about pogroms? The practice of rioting to drive out and kill of the Jews from European towns was so wide-spread throughout the 19th and 20th centuries that it gained its own term. After being coined, it was then applied to similar types of behavior against a wide number of groups (mostly Jews though) going all the way back into antiquity. The last pogrom was in 2013 Burma, and it targeted Muslims. Executing entire towns? Which angle do you want to go for? Political resistance? The Romans have that one in spades. Faulty legal justifications? Greeks regularly killed entire cities because a few rich people disobeyed them. The Spartans would hold trials and invite enemies of the accused people to testify against them; evidence wasnt exactly something required. Medieval Italy became the playground of the militarizes of other European powers, and it wasnt that uncommon to summarily execute anyone suspected of aiding a different power, like the last occupying military. Japan flattened Chinese cities for having the audacity to have anyone the put up the slightest resistance, which was a tactic they developed in Korea. The Koreans picked up the habit after the war. And the there was the American commanders in Korea that, from time to time, ordered their troops to kill every Korean they saw and burn everything. Dresden? Hiroshima? Nagasaki? The fire-bombing of Tokyo? Oh, but here I have conflated military actions with executions... But really, is it not concerned with the proper use of force? Would it be better to bring up the race riots of the 1920s? Shall we remember those mass killings? History is one bloody thing after another. The actions of Grand Potentate Umptysquat hundreds of years ago have as much bearing on the goodness or badness of his decedents as ours have on us, i.e. practically none. In this regard we are born equal, not just to people of our own generation, but of all generations that have ever lived. We benefit from remembering what they did, but we only benefit when we remember they were human as we are human; their sins are within our capacity, but any greatness in them is also within us. Memento mori. Memento vivere.
Posted on: Sat, 04 Oct 2014 03:14:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015