War is Religion

[Voodoo_Child906]

No, that isn’t my only grievance, as I’ve pointed out, the nation-state is just one model and it does not cohere with the history of the Middle East and China.

Nationalism and the nation-state are inherently aggressive towards minorities and seeks to remove them by force, instead of voluntary assimilation over a long period of time.

A nation state would need a constitution where minorities would be protected with inalienable rights and checks and balances like the military swearing an oath to the constitution instead of the leader or the party would be present. What's to stop minorities from being trampled under a Neo Ottoman Sultanate? The Sultan's benevolence?

 

[Yehudim]

A nation state would need a constitution where minorities would be protected with inalienable rights and checks and balances like the military swearing an oath to the constitution instead of the leader or the party would be present. What's to stop minorities from being trampled under a Neo Ottoman Sultanate? The Sultan's benevolence?

It wouldn’t actually happen today, thanks to the ideas of nationalism and separatism.

But empires throughout history were able to hold on to large minorities and more or less keep the peace.

In the future we will probably have some informal empire with Turkey and Iran working together and against each other to carve out some stability

My original comment was never to be taken literally, but was just to point out how bad the state of the Middle East is today.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

I didn't follow your convo, but the Treaty of Trianon was a huge blunder that had terrible long term repercussions as well as being one of the biggest political screw jobs in recent history. Nevermind that outside powers dictating who is to be a citizen of what country goes against the "self determination of a people" principle it was supposed to be all about.

Ya the carving up of Europe and the Middle East by the Entente was strange and irrational. I really wonder how much the feeling of revenge played into their decisions.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

It wouldn’t actually happen today, thanks to the ideas of nationalism and separatism.

But empires throughout history were able to hold on to large minorities and more or less keep the peace.

In the future we will probably have some informal empire with Turkey and Iran working together and against each other to carve out some stability

My original comment was never to be taken literally, but was just to point out how bad the state of the Middle East is today.

We also have to remember the measures that previous empires took to squash uprisings and keep the peace, they were horrible. But I hear you, the borders of the Middle East were as bad as the borders in the Balkans... and the Entente was responsible for both.

 

[Inquisitor]

No, that isn’t my only grievance, as I’ve pointed out, the nation-state is just one model and it does not cohere with the history of the Middle East and China.

Nationalism and the nation-state are inherently aggressive towards minorities and seeks to remove them by force, instead of voluntary assimilation over a long period of time.

Like I said, nation-states are inherently hostile and violent towards minorities

You can invite minorities to voluntarily and peacefully assimilate in your culture like the Chinese, Persians, and Romans did for thousands of years.

Or you can form the nation state and realize “oh wait, we have a ton of minorities on the borderland” and decide you have to kill and suppress them to reach your higher goal of a homogenous homeland

Their choices were to fight or be absorbed by the empire.

A nation state doesn't guarantee genocide and genocides have happened all throughout history. Seems to me you prefer a diverse empire. The forced diversity (race, gender, religion etc) and multiculturalism (social justice) in America is part of the communist psychological warfare.

 

[Yehudim]

Their choices were to fight or be absorbed by the empire.

A nation state doesn't guarantee genocide and genocides have happened all throughout history. Seems to me you prefer a diverse empire. The forced diversity (race, gender, religion etc) and multiculturalism (social justice) in America is part of the communist psychological warfare.

I don’t prefer a diverse empire, I prefer people not being killed because of their ethnicity, language, or religion.

The Roman Empire did not force you to become a Roman, you became a Roman because you wanted to be a Roman citizen and/or work for the Roman state. When a superior culture emerges, people want to become a part of that.

You can have a relatively homogenous place via peaceful assimilation.

 

[Chappi]

Of course, the USA is the country with the most religious extremists in the world, they won't see themselves as extremists, but they really are.
As soon as you want to dictate what others can and cannot do according to your religion, you are an extremist.

 

[Inquisitor]

I don’t prefer a diverse empire, I prefer people not being killed because of their ethnicity, language, or religion.

The Roman Empire did not force you to become a Roman, you became a Roman because you wanted to be a Roman citizen and/or work for the Roman state. When a superior culture emerges, people want to become a part of that.

You can have a relatively homogenous place via peaceful assimilation.

I highly doubt multicultural empires in antiquity and medieval times were great for minorities being passed around from empire to empire. Sovereignty and maximum freedom for the lower classes is the better option. A nation state is more stable than an empire in my opinion.

Rome slaughtered its way to victory. It didn't have tribes lining up to join them and those that did had problems with the empire.

Today when a superior culture emerges everyone appropriates a bit of it to improve their own culture.

 

[Yehudim]

I highly doubt multicultural empires in antiquity and medieval times were great for minorities being passed around from empire to empire. Sovereignty and maximum freedom for the lower classes is the better option. A nation state is more stable than an empire in my opinion.

Rome slaughtered its way to victory. It didn't have tribes lining up to join them and those that did had problems with the empire.

Today when a superior culture emerges everyone appropriates a bit of it to improve their own culture.

Obviously it was not a liberal, humanist, benign force.

People were subjugated and killed, but along the way, people became Romans. You see in the Austro-Hungarian empire and the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, the people were abandoning their heritage in order to become German and Polish.

Ultimately this all boils down to the alternatives. The Middle East has tried to emulate nation states. They tried to become pan-Arab, to the suffering of Kurdish, Turkish, and Jewish minorities.

 

[Rocco Siffredi]

PS War is Money

 

[errol ansen]

As much as I dislike Islam and all of it's backwards stupidity, TS is right. It's only VERY RECENTLY, and I can't state it enough, RECENTLY that Christians stopped their extreme fanaticism that we criticize islam so much for. And I wonder if even that, because Christians still blindly go to wars thinking they are morally superior based off of being doused in dirty water and believing in a 2000 year old fairy tail book. THREE entire continents (N/S America & Australia) cultures, religions, and peoples were absolutely massacred, forced, & brain washed into giving up everything they knew and convert to christanity. Millions of Europeans got duped into believing a story from a bunch of nomadic sheep herders.

This for sure. Regarding Canada, look up religious residential schools. Scary Stuff. Canada has this reputation as being so nice, but its all BS.