Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Riley37" data-source="post: 7396781" data-attributes="member: 6786839">I encourage your questioning of that narrative. Especially the portions of that narrative, which people have used as a pretext to kill, enslave and otherwise mistreat others for their own advantage. Also the parts which universalize patriarchy. There's some major gaps in the consistency of those narratives. But you have not yet answered this question: whether you have *also* questioned, critically, the counter-narratives which boil down (losing nuance and useful aspects in that reduction) to &quot;Down with global western civilization!&quot; If you are interested in questioning along those lines, then I have offered you some entry points. Take what you can use, let the rest go by.Shidaku did not use the term &quot;savages&quot;. YOU brought that term into the conversation. That's a historically significant term, because colonizers have often used that term to equate &quot;member of a non-western culture&quot; with &quot;less trustworthy person, more impulsively violent person, person of lesser worth, person we may kill or enslave with moral impunity&quot;. Shidaku pointed out differences in knowledge-base between people 5K years ago, and participants in this conversation. Shidaku did NOT designate anyone as a fair target for &quot;kill them and take their stuff, they deserve it because they're just savages anyways&quot;. Shidaku did not jump from &quot;modern people tend to know more than pre-literate people&quot; to &quot;one group is better than another.&quot; That part is on you, buddy. Shidaku did not justify the Roman conquest of the German tribes, nor the German arguments, centuries later, for ethically parallel conquests in Africa. If you wanna pin either of those on Shidaku, then provide something more compelling than &quot;well, other people used that pretext, so clearly you were using it too.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Riley37, post: 7396781, member: 6786839"] I encourage your questioning of that narrative. Especially the portions of that narrative, which people have used as a pretext to kill, enslave and otherwise mistreat others for their own advantage. Also the parts which universalize patriarchy. There's some major gaps in the consistency of those narratives. But you have not yet answered this question: whether you have *also* questioned, critically, the counter-narratives which boil down (losing nuance and useful aspects in that reduction) to "Down with global western civilization!" If you are interested in questioning along those lines, then I have offered you some entry points. Take what you can use, let the rest go by. Shidaku did not use the term "savages". YOU brought that term into the conversation. That's a historically significant term, because colonizers have often used that term to equate "member of a non-western culture" with "less trustworthy person, more impulsively violent person, person of lesser worth, person we may kill or enslave with moral impunity". Shidaku pointed out differences in knowledge-base between people 5K years ago, and participants in this conversation. Shidaku did NOT designate anyone as a fair target for "kill them and take their stuff, they deserve it because they're just savages anyways". Shidaku did not jump from "modern people tend to know more than pre-literate people" to "one group is better than another." That part is on you, buddy. Shidaku did not justify the Roman conquest of the German tribes, nor the German arguments, centuries later, for ethically parallel conquests in Africa. If you wanna pin either of those on Shidaku, then provide something more compelling than "well, other people used that pretext, so clearly you were using it too." [/QUOTE]

Verification