There are a number of chuds and overall shit people in South America that genuinely think Colombus brought "civilization" to this continent, that the natives were "unable to build stuff" and ended up being "simply inferior" to the Europeans. They say that "The egyptians built the pyraminds, what did the natives ever do?"
Oh you know, like 90% of the native population was killed directly and indirectly by the Europeans, forced displacement of people, shitfting from agricultural production to mining which led people to reduce their eating habits and leaving their immune systems vulnerable to viruses and diseases, overexploitation and cultural genocide which led the natives to literally just stop reproducing. As for the material legacy, either it was demolished, burned or taken to Europe and then lost, the MASSIVE city of Tenochtitlan (which sometimes even tripled in size to those cities in Europe) was simply destroyed by the Spanish, few relics of incredible and well functioning civilizations such as the Aztecs and the Incas remain. So, some people consider the arrival of Colombus as a "blessing".
Imagine seeing the Inca build one of the most impressive road systems in history, in the fucking Andes Mountains, and concluding "nope, they build nothing of value".
All without writing, draft animals, money, or the wheel no less!
The Inca may well have had a writing system, the quipu, which consists of knotted strings of different colors. Certainly used for numeric work, they may also have been used as a kind of writing. Not many have survived, and few know how to read them, but it presents a fascinating way that they recorded data.
Whoa, this is amazing. Thanks for the link, looks like I've some reading to do!
The Spainish sailors own accounts disprove this
When we saw so many cities and villages built in the water and other great towns on dry land we were amazed and said that it was like the enchantments (...) on account of the great towers and cues and buildings rising from the water, and all built of masonry. And some of our soldiers even asked whether the things that we saw were not a dream? (...) I do not know how to describe it, seeing things as we did that had never been heard of or seen before, not even dreamed about.
— Bernal Díaz del Castillo, The Conquest of New Spain
Narrator's Voice: "They then procedded to demolish all these structures and violently overthrow the societies that built them."
Also like, geography played a big part in why the Europeans had better tech than Native Americans. Gunpowder was a Chinese invention, and America lacked animals that could be domesticated like horses, dogs, pigs, cows etc
One thing that really annoys me on this too is that people always disconsider the non sedentary natives as uncivilized, and that is so dumb, the brazilian natives for example even though they were not building great cities they were a civilization, the whole coastal was a group of tribes that were a cultural homogenous and spoke same language (A thing that actually made Portuguese comunication pretty easy as most of the first natives they found were speaking the same language) with tribes and subtribes living on a semi nomadic lifestyle, planting some food and fishing. these tribes were indepent and had like diferent interests for example during the french attempt to take over brazil ( a classic french goof) two rival tribes alied to each power to try to defeat the other one, and they founded a city after winning, which is the one i live (there is a big statue of the chief like on the street of my house)
another thing people dismiss is all of the very serious and extensive geoengineering and decentralized agriculture done at incredible scale by tribes in north and south america. europeans act like agriculture is when you micromanage the rock pile you've settled down on in order to force food to grow in the barren soil.
like yeah there is a lesser need to innovate to survive when you live in pure abundance, like for example the Amazon Natives had way more of a understanding of engineering like doing moats around their settlements and roads but that is because they were in way less habitable place they need this understanding to deal with the amazon rain and the rivers while the costal natives were living in the atlantic forest which is a lot less agressive and there is also a lesser danger from wildlife as there were not many animals that could hurt a man like in the amazon forest so them being just fine hanging makes a lot of sense there is food everywhere you can make multiple camping sites and re-use them when you come back to the area next time, which takes a lot of mapping and knowing about the area to do
They say that “The egyptians built the pyraminds, what did the natives ever do?”
love it when they imply that it was the romans who ackshully achieved everything of note in Egypt
“The egyptians built the pyraminds, what did the natives ever do?”
How the fuck can they say this about people who built their own fucking pyramids?
This map is really incomplete and misses out on some of the more interesting civilisations on the continent. For example the Ajuran Sultanate was the only hydraulic empire in Africa and exercised control over both nomadic and settled peoples by monopolising the water resources of the Shebelle and Jubba rivers. Through hydraulic engineering, it also constructed many of the limestone wells and cisterns for nomadic herders and a system of irrigation ditches known locally as Kelliyo fed directly from the Shebelle and Jubba rivers into the plantations where sorghum, maize, beans, grain and cotton were grown. It's so interesting as the entire state managed to maintain adminstration and control over what would typically be decentralised tribal peoples by controlling the supply of water.
Sounds amazing, I think I'll make a post about them so other people can see it.
I wish this was taught in introductory history classes. The anglocentric historical narrative I received in school was racist, insulting, oversimplified to the point of absurdity, and was internalized and regurgitated practically without question, especially after 9/11
if education provided a framework for understanding the progression of human achievement and how ideas, technologies, and resources were discovered, spread, and in turn altered and were altered by all of the hundreds of advanced civilizations that have existed globally for thousands of years, it would be much easier to refute the neocolonial and imperialist ideas underpinning present day fascism and xenophobia. at the very least we'd have fewer people believing in ancient aliens.
also gotta love how egypt is always just ignored when people say this lol
like mali is even like famous for the whole mali king giving so much gold during his hajj that he literally caused inflation around the world
Real question, is Egypt considered Middle East/Near East? I thought it was considered North Africa and was always confused like why tf would the aliens build the pyramids in Africa if there's no civilization there?
:thonk:
I just found this picture online and you're right, Egypt isn't there, and neither are any North African states, like Carthage and Morocco. I guess whoever made it wanted to highlight other, lesser-known civilizations?
Although I suppose that one could conceivably make the case the Egypt should be grouped more the the Middle East/Near East, as well as the general history of the Mediterranean, due to it's main involvement in history being there, both as an independent state and a subject/client state. I wouldn't make that argument, though.
The map says Sub-Saharan Africa, I'd agree with your interpretation of the intent there - North Africa gets highlighted a lot more in terms of history, in particular because of its involvement with other Mediterranean states (I.e. the European ones)
Harder for people to ascribe racist narratives about who did what for which civilizations when talking about sub-saharan states
North Africa gets highlighted a lot more in terms of history, in particular because of its involvement with other Mediterranean states (I.e. the European ones)
Damning with faint praise. Half the reason I know Carthage even exists stems from the fact that "Rome beat them" is a fact you just get tossed out at you in high school. I wonder if this is how westerners will describe the Soviet Union in another generation or two? "After WW2, America became a superpower and created a global network of trade and did a bunch of wars to liberalize the lesser nations and also they beat the USSR and then Clinton came around and now you have iPhones, you're welcome."
At least there's pretty much no way america is still a superpower in a generation or two, so maybe we'll be like European colonial powers with half the population going "ah remember when we were an empire" and the other half going "uhhh mate we shouldn't have done that" and the new world superpowers get to set the narrative around this era (pls xi)
At least there’s pretty much no way america is still a superpower in a generation or two
Until the US actually balkinizes, it will continue to dominate North America (and the western hemisphere by extension). That makes us a superpower by default, pretty much indefinitely. Our navy's reach into the Pacific and our financial sector's impact on global trade doesn't hurt us, either.
we’ll be like European colonial powers with half the population going “ah remember when we were an empire” and the other half going “uhhh mate we shouldn’t have done that” and the new world superpowers get to set the narrative around this era
Europe could have been a rival superpower, if the EU project had succeeded. That it's cracking up like a modern-day Yugoslavia illustrates a failure of modern capitalism, without a doubt. But I think Germany will still come out as a regional powerhouse in the long term. In another century or two, if it can entrench itself as the center of European financial power, maybe another Bismark will come along and finally unify Europe like Germany itself was assembled from warring principalities.
But the US is unlikely to go that route any time soon, simply because the volume of trade and travel across the states makes balkinization far more economically painful and nationalistically distasteful. Too much power continues to run through DC / NYC and too many local leaders are ultimately just proxies or cronies operating through the political center. Real degradation can't set in until our unifying infrastructure beings to seriously degrade and local powers supplant the national networks. I wouldn't bank on that happening in our lifetime.
Those are all fair points, but imo the inevitable collapse of the US petrodollar will make it happen. Idk how old you are but that's something I definitely think will happen in my lifetime as oil extraction slows and becomes more expensive and other energy sources move to the forefront.
The petrodollar only became a thing because fossil fuels powered the armies of the world. As we migrate to other resource constraints, the power balance will shift. But control of those resources will continue to fix the value of fiat currencies.
The US military is the real currency of the realm. And that's as bloated and globe-spanning as ever.
Let me know when we've lost our first aircraft carrier. That's what will really spell the beginning of the end.
To be precise, we've lost 16 aircraft carriers.
One was scuttled after being used for a target
One was scuttled "after being used for a target" (Note: This one (Saratoga iirc) was parked in Bikini Atoll for a hint at what the test was)
One was scuttled to make an artificial reef
...and 13 were destroyed in WWII, the most recent in 1946. Once by a German U-boat, and every other instance was either by the Japanese or other American ships (scuttling after crippled by Japanese so they could claim it wasn't destroyed in combat.)
…and 13 were destroyed in WWII, the most recent in 1946.
:-p Ok, let me know when we lose our next aircraft carrier.
:rat-salute:
Of course!
The precision here is so that we don't discourage people by making them think these monstrosities are infallible. These fuckers can blow up just like anything else, people just don't like to talk about it.
Sure I listen to a random dude instead of:
-
scientific marxism
-
those international relation academics from my university
-
the people dunking on the US who wihtstand their occupation
If you can't project power and aren't able to force the European core into your wars you aren't a super power.
picks up a book on Scientific Marxism
See, right here. Chapter 9, page 423. The Zizek equation for Superpowerhood. America's dipped below the Omega coefficient, so it's not Super anymore.
If you can’t project power and aren’t able to force the European core into your wars you aren’t a super power.
How many layers of Eurocentrism are you on, my dude?
What you describe is pretty much the deafault formular used in International Relations.
In regards to Eurocentrism, when you take the standards of a superpower and see if they are still relevant against states that hold power and systems of power themselves, it is a wedge in the old term. (Western) Europe was a natural ally and there is no equal successor.
-
france is projected to have the largest population and economy in the eu by 2050 because the only country more stagnant than germany is japan
Half the reason I know Carthage even exists stems from the fact that “Rome beat them” is a fact you just get tossed out at you in high school.
Probably the only reason they made it into Civ, which is the other half the reason most people knew the city existed lol.
for me it was the opposite, it was highlighted how much they kicked Rome's ass in the Second Punic War.
Yep, Carthage, and Phoenicia in general, doesn't get enough press, despite inventing one of the most widespread linear alphabet systems.
it’s main involvement in history being there, both as an independent state and a subject/client state. I wouldn’t make that argument, though.
I know you're not making this argument, but I disagree with this as well. Medieval Egypt and Nubia were an incredibly imporant destination for African traders and caravans. After the Arab conquest, Islamic Egypt's military was run by subsaharan African slaves soldiers and administrators. It is a shame that many westerners (again, not accusing you lol) try to highlight Egypt's Mediterranean aspects and downplaying/ignoring it's African connections and heritage.
And still missing so much. I love to mention Beta Israel, an early medieval Jewish kingdom in the mountains of modern Ethiopia.
I just looked it up, the modern Jewish community in Ethiopia still use this term to describe themselves. In Ge'ez it literally means "House of Israel", it originates from the 4th century CE when the Emperor of Aksum declared Christianity the official religion and the Jewish tribes refused.
Hunter gatherers have all sorts of ingenious methods for hunting, finding food, crafting tools, etc., and they generally had better health, nutrition, and quality of life than ancient farmers and city dwellers, so the idea that a culture has to have produced "civilization" to have value is just racist bullshit that's been passed down to us from 19th century ideas about "progress" anyway.
The thing is that's not even true. The Haya people in Tanzania were making high grade carbon steel over 2000 years ago.
Write up about it by another Hexbear user:
https://hexbear.net/post/97537
Hey, I wrote that one too, glad to see it referenced.
