Why the crusades were awesome?

[Israfil]

12 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Israfil

   I'm not here to argue and debate, heated discourse, against forum guidelines. Sometimes it's useful to study history IMO, from multiple perspectives, to learn the lessons, mistakes, and successes, especially the failures, so that we can discern the present and the future, to not repeat past atrocities. If you don't take counter history into consideration, and don't look at past mistakes, and maintain general ignorance and evil of the population, and elite class, then people who are ignorant of developmental factors, will keep on repeating their ideological worldviews thinking they're right. Again, not limited to Christians, Muslims, Jews, there's so many more ideologies like Taoists/Daoists, Confucianism, Traditionalism, conservativism, modernism, centrism, liberalism, libertarianism, socialism, progressivism, communism. and so many others.    

Almost everything you wrote is absolutely reasonable. I just don't see how speculating about how things would be if a very complex series of events wouldn't occur 500 years ago is in any way a reasonable construction of an argument in favor of said series of events. It is very useful to paint current Muslims in a derogatory light. Hence my ironic comment.

Edited August 22, 2023 by Israfil

[Sucuk Ekmek]

2 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Sucuk Ekmek

   There was a point when the Mongolian empire was so wide and big that if they were more tactical and resourceful, they'd become the next super power or at least their fall as an empire would have been later. If China's geography or evolution was different, and they were aggressive in they're expansion, they would have been the super power later. Id Germany won WW1 or WW2, Germany would have been the next superpower.

 

Could have, would have, should have. This is not fruitful.

 

[Danioover9000]

@Sucuk Ekmek

11 minutes ago, Sucuk Ekmek said:

Could have, would have, should have. This is not fruitful.

 

   It specifically is if you want to become more open minded, because at any point, if the other side won, you'd be identified differently, or be raised in a completely different world. Think about the magnitude of implications that would have had in your own life, when 500 years ago one side lost and the other won solidly. You'd be a completely different ego.

[Florian]

2 hours ago, Vrubel said:

Stronghold Crusader was a sick game though 

true

[Israfil]

49 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Sucuk Ekmek

   It specifically is if you want to become more open minded, because at any point, if the other side won, you'd be identified differently, or be raised in a completely different world. Think about the magnitude of implications that would have had in your own life, when 500 years ago one side lost and the other won solidly. You'd be a completely different ego.

You can think about this about any historical event and no amount of time doing so will change current situations. If the crusades never happened we could easily see the characteristics of current Islam completely different. His whole argument of "We would be covered up discussing how many wives should we have" is based on a version of Islam that exists as a direct effect of the Crusades. We only have this perspective because of past events any effort of trying to imagine different outcomes based on something that didn't happen already carries the bias and perspective of that event having happened. That's why it isn't fruitful. 

[Jodistrict]

Pope Urban II started the crusades to keep the European tribes from mudering each other and directing all that aggressive energy to a "noble" cause, while getting them out of Europe.   Ironically, Islam was also created to resolve the problem of warring tribes, focusing all that aggressive energy on conquering new territory.  

[Sucuk Ekmek]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Sucuk Ekmek

   You'd be a completely different ego.

 Hey I am not.

[Ajax]

History is full of nonsense. Fantasy and opinion galore. I want at least 1000 people who actually lived during those time periods to tell me what was actually going on. Mad men make decent people do bad things, that is a constant recurring pattern. Chances are, if you lived in those times, you would be doing evil things too, no matter your religion. Don't think that you wouldn't. Survival is very persuasive. 

I trust my own perception and thoughts on the matter, not someone's interpretation. Don't bother with history, focus on what improvements you can do right now. The present is the only thing you can actually do something about. 

Edited August 23, 2023 by Ajax

[Danioover9000]

@Ajax

10 hours ago, Ajax said:

History is full of nonsense. Fantasy and opinion galore. I want at least 1000 people who actually lived during those time periods to tell me what was actually going on. Mad men make decent people do bad things, that is a constant recurring pattern. Chances are, if you lived in those times, you would be doing evil things too, no matter your religion. Don't think that you wouldn't. Survival is very persuasive. 

I trust my own perception and thoughts on the matter, not someone's interpretation. Don't bother with history, focus on what improvements you can do right now. The present is the only thing you can actually do something about. 

   For example, when Lawrence of Arabia lead the tribes across the Sahara desert, to invade a coastal town, the British military had anti sea artillery cannons pointing towards the coast, but there was no mechanism for the gun to swivel back to defend the town from a land invasion on the other side BECAUSE NO ONE, INLCUDING THE BRITISH, THOUGHT AN ARMY WOULD CROSS THAT DESERT. History repeats itself during the pacific war, when Japan's imperial empire was on expansion mode, and it invaded Singapore with some military ingenuity. What happened? HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF, THE ANTI SEA ARTILLERY GUNS STILL ARE FIXED TO THE SEA, AND CAN'T SWIVEL TO DEFEND FROM THE OTHER SIDE, BECAUSE NO ONE THOUGHT AN ARMY WOULD RIDE THE JUNGLE WITH BYCILES AND MAKE SHIFT RAFTS! This is what is meant when learning about history, there are mistakes, and history repeats itself albeit in different contexts. What was the valuable lesson, in a military context? Make sure your artillery can swivel and point to another direction if needed.

   So, despite history being full of nonsense and fantasy, that is still useful information to learn from. Another example is the ancient Chinese warfare and different points of history, of how that culture dealt with wars and internal conflicts. you could focus on one part and see for example the invasions sometimes increased migrations from villagers or towns onto other places, which artificially created immigration issues in those warring kingdoms, and the military back then, some of them, realized that if they destroyed villages close to their enemy kingdom, they'd make those people leave and move into their enemy kingdom, thereby increasing chances of food shortages, and lessening war of attrition in that kingdom, making siege warfare feasible. We can see a similar dynamic play out between China and North Korea, and that it supports North Korea for geopolitical reasons, but also to prevent mass immigration from North Koreans onto China, because if North Korea fell against Sough Korea, that would create a huge immigration problem in that region.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Danioover9000

[Danioover9000]

   As @Leo Gura said, this documentary YouTuber is great:

 

[Scholar]

22 hours ago, Israfil said:

Counterhistory is not a serious argument. Christians were as fanatic, and in some regards more fanatical than Muslims in the middle ages. The roots of nationalism also have its roots in the Crusades. I could also argue that Nazism would never come into being if it weren't for the Crusades. It is simply not fruitful to analyze the past on basis of what could be, being more useful to analyze it as it is.

Nationalism doesn't have it's roots in the Crusades, rather, Nationalism will use the history of any given civilization as a nationalistic mythos.

[Israfil]

3 hours ago, Scholar said:

Nationalism doesn't have it's roots in the Crusades, rather, Nationalism will use the history of any given civilization as a nationalistic mythos.

There are many scholars who posit that the roots of national and racial conscience has at least some roots in the crusades. Here's a quick video on it:

 

 

Edited August 23, 2023 by Israfil

[Ajax]

12 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Ajax

   For example, when Lawrence of Arabia lead the tribes across the Sahara desert, to invade a coastal town, the British military had anti sea artillery cannons pointing towards the coast, but there was no mechanism for the gun to swivel back to defend the town from a land invasion on the other side BECAUSE NO ONE, INLCUDING THE BRITISH, THOUGHT AN ARMY WOULD CROSS THAT DESERT. History repeats itself during the pacific war, when Japan's imperial empire was on expansion mode, and it invaded Singapore with some military ingenuity. What happened? HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF, THE ANTI SEA ARTILLERY GUNS STILL ARE FIXED TO THE SEA, AND CAN'T SWIVEL TO DEFEND FROM THE OTHER SIDE, BECAUSE NO ONE THOUGHT AN ARMY WOULD RIDE THE JUNGLE WITH BYCILES AND MAKE SHIFT RAFTS! This is what is meant when learning about history, there are mistakes, and history repeats itself albeit in different contexts. What was the valuable lesson, in a military context? Make sure your artillery can swivel and point to another direction if needed.

   So, despite history being full of nonsense and fantasy, that is still useful information to learn from. Another example is the ancient Chinese warfare and different points of history, of how that culture dealt with wars and internal conflicts. you could focus on one part and see for example the invasions sometimes increased migrations from villagers or towns onto other places, which artificially created immigration issues in those warring kingdoms, and the military back then, some of them, realized that if they destroyed villages close to their enemy kingdom, they'd make those people leave and move into their enemy kingdom, thereby increasing chances of food shortages, and lessening war of attrition in that kingdom, making siege warfare feasible. We can see a similar dynamic play out between China and North Korea, and that it supports North Korea for geopolitical reasons, but also to prevent mass immigration from North Koreans onto China, because if North Korea fell against Sough Korea, that would create a huge immigration problem in that region.

Wow, what a masterpiece of a response! I had to take a moment to take it all in. So well thought and well done! Beautiful!

History tends to repeat itself because the basic mistakes continue to persist.  Most of the time, when one looks at the past for mistakes, it was not the basic mistake. Rather it was a result (after effect) of a chain reaction of mistakes. The danger in relying on history is in missing some critical data points that contributed to the sequence of events.

For instance, Sun Tzu mentions 2 methods of attack: There is the direct and indirect(tactical). You could also view it as the common and the uncommon, in which the uncommon is generally a variation of the common methods, modified by deception, calculation, expectations/assumptions and creative insights. Therefore, one could adjust their viewpoint to discern it into 2 main variables, while maintaining the integrity of the idea. The expected and the unexpected variables flowing together, resulting in randomness… unpredictability.

Sun Tzu also mentions that everyone can see how the battle is won (or event that occurred) but they can not see all of the long series of plans, calculations, circumstances that preceded the battle(event). There are of course, some parallels that exist between there and now and history can be useful for gaining insight into selecting a potential approach. However, such pearls of wisdom must consider the assessment of accounting for the flow of expected and unexpected variables. As this, is a result of the randomness of “common” or well-defined facts (or contingencies) that appear.

There is indeed lessons from the past, however the evaluation and of good or bad is merely contextual. What happened was through the lens of people who no longer exist and all we can do is infer or speculate. The facts are quite limited through the imperfect and biased beings who recorded the events.

It is like getting emotional and contentious or debating over an event that occurred and deciding it was the cause of our current situation. When people get serious over stories, they are off the track of controlling the present and creating the future. When there is blame and justifications over the crusades… it is just that blame and/or justification… nothing more.

I do love your comparisons about past immigrations and N. Korea, however, that is a very astute observation, and I really enjoyed you sharing that insight with me.  You have a keen eye and sharp mind! LOVE it.

4 hours ago, Israfil said:

There are many scholars who posit that the roots of national and racial conscience has at least some roots in the crusades. Here's a quick video on it:

I don't get it. Even SD Beige and Purple have attacked each other over differences in "us vs them".  It seems to me... same shit, different name.  There have been warmongers from many countries from U.S., UK and other nations that has made covert actions to destabilize the middle east for profit and ill-gotten gains. Race and Religion is an excellent misdirection tool that can be used by cruel and savage opportunists. If I wanted to benefit from other's misfortune, I would do it by instigating conflict by attacking values and demonizing one side or the other and watch the fireworks fly! "us vs them" and smile at my intelligence for being the puppeteer and would get away with it too. After all, I would present myself as a friend with a just cause and I will do what I can to help... for a fee, of course... lol

Edited August 23, 2023 by Ajax

[Scholar]

4 hours ago, Israfil said:

There are many scholars who posit that the roots of national and racial conscience has at least some roots in the crusades. Here's a quick video on it:

I reject those views because we can see racial superiority as a feature of nationalism itself. China today is a good example. There is historic and evolutionary revisionism currently taking place, in which the han chinese race is actually viewed as the race which gave birth to all other races, as well as ideas of it's superiority.

Similar things are happening in India, and obviously history is ripe with examples throughout the entire world, for example Imperial Japan.

Nationalism is a natural and necessary step in the development of higher civilization, and racial conscience tends to develop as a result of developing an imperialistic identity.

An imperialistic identity is the attempt to universalize the ingroup identity onto the whole world, and to justify that, it requires superiority. So, racism and nationalism in the end are a means to an end in regards to a process of identity expansion.

 

 

Racism especially in those times is not really surprising at all. You have to consider, you went to another continent, you had some basic ideas of evolution, and you find other human beings who look completely different from you and seemingly behave in what you consider uncivilized behaviour, and that is seemingly universally true.

Of course, with how ignorant people were back then, they would develop notions of racial superiority. From their perspective it's a reasonable conclusion.

 

One of the problems with historians is that they tend to want to attribute historical developments to historic events, because that's basically what the study of history is trying to achieve. However, historical developments can simply be a result of socio-evolutionary dynamics, and then the historic events in their particularity are just the context in which those take place.

So, historians will claims "Well, this historic event in the past is what motivated this historic event further down the line, because clearly we can see the influence of the prior event!", but this misses that the dynamic simply functions in such a way that it will be couched in whatever the given historic context is. So, of course the japanese will use japanese history to justify their nationalism and superiority, and so will the chinese, the germans, the french, the romans and so forth.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Scholar