Is it fair to judge history through modern political lenses?

Depends. Is it fair to judge another culture through an ethnocentric lens?

>>3257372
>ethnocentric lens
the hell is that?

>>3257375
It means
>Chinks were inferior to Europeans because muh Europe had guns when Chinks didn't

>>3257378
It would actually mean that Chinks were superior because muh Asia had gunpowder when europeans didn't.

>>3257367
If we have to reserve judgment of modern foreign cultures it only makes sense to do the same for those from the past.

>>3257404
I was just providing an example of "ethnocentrism". Chink ethnocentrism would be something like this:
>Europeans were infeliol because we had gunpowdel when they didn't,

Is it more important to understand history as the actors who lived it understood it or as an outside party with the benefit of hindsight and foreknowledge of what their plans will come to and how they fit into a larger picture of humanity?

>>3257415
It would actually mean that e*ropeans were inferior because they didn't start a civilization.

>>3257422
Incas truly are the ultimate civilization, huh?

>>3257426
I was just posting an example. Don't compare me to the Incatard.

>Is it fair to judge history through modern political lenses?
Well humans have been anatomically modern for far longer than recorded history.
So given that historical humans were the same intellectually as modern humans it's fair to judge them for being cunts that should have known better the same way we judge 3rd world countries doing dumb nigger shit.

How else can you judge history?

>>3257428
I like how he is universally despised now.

>>3257509
Who?

>>3257509
United Statian detected.

>>3257513
t. Eurangutan

>>3257367
>Is it fair to judge history through modern political lenses?
No. But it is bound to happen. Personal bias slips in too. History can be more or less objective if you stick with being descriptive but I am skeptical of fully objective history.

>>3257367
Sure, if you're aware that's what you're doing.

>>3257367
You can do it, but it isn't very useful. Saying
"You know, Thomas Jefferson was kind of a dick by modern standards." doesn't tell you anything about him in the context of his time, or why he did the things he did.

>>3257367
No.If at all possible a historian shouldn't judge history at all. Historians are supposed to be impartial, objective observers, at least if they are Historians in the truest sense of the word. Any judgement in the moral sense of a historical society, individual or practice would go against this. The only reasonable judgement that can be passed is relative to the opinions of the time in order to clarify the political atmosphere. It is not right to say that Napoleon=Hitler, but it is perfectly alright to say that many of Napoleon's contemporaries reviled him and his tactics in proclaiming the Empire and destroying the republic, or what remained of it.

>>3257367
Yes
How else would you judge it?

>>3257367
You just have to be consistent. If your judging things by the time then you have to do so for all times in all places. If your judging by today's standards you have to do so for all times and places.
I prefer not to at all, it makes more sense to discuss why a group felt the need to do something than focus in on how it was shitty for the other group.

>>3257367
Can we list the stupid shit that this cuck has said
>communism created ancient civilizations
>The Greeks should have surrendered to the Persians because they were superior
>calling someone great is sexist

Only to an extent. God knows I don't want to be seen as a monster 500 years down the line because the future happens to be vegan and I'm a meat eater.

yes, duh

>>3258123
>No.If at all possible a historian shouldn't judge history at all. Historians are supposed to be impartial, objective observers, at least if they are Historians in the truest sense of the word.

Literally all historians prior to like the 1970s disagreed, they all pulled moral lessons from history and made judgements.

>>3257367
No, it's not. You cannot judge a person for not being morally correct according to a zeitgeist which simply didn't exist at the time. You instead have to judge history by the moral standards which existed at the time you're studying. You can't talk about Cicero's homophobia when the modern conception of homosexuality and heterosexuality quite literally wouldn't be invented for centuries, if not millennia.

Anyway Green is a fucking hack and shouldn't have been given a platform to talk about history that's been considered outdated for a half-century under the guise of being "progressive".

>>3258123 Yes but this is not possible as we are judging by nature. A good historian should try to become aware of once's biasses.

>>3259064
>>3258123
Being a historian used to be all about giving an account of history with your bias in full view. Do you think Voltaire was being objective when he shit on the HRE?

No.

It's not even productive. The whole point of studying a subject like history is to understand it. It's hard to understand the subjects of your study if you're constantly pausing to think about how evil they are and how much more moral and intelligent you are.

Why did Columbus kill natives? He was a evil racist.
Why did Caesar invade Gaul? He was a evil imperialist.
Why did Henry V have his wives put to death? He was a evil misogynist.

People's motivations are complicated and the kinds of things we'd consider these days - civil liberties, treating people equally, etc. didn't even occur to most people of the past. Concepts like racism didn't even exist throughout most of history. Looking at any pre-enlightenment history through a social justice lens literally blinds you to ALL the motivations people might have had at the time except for the ones you made up for them.

It's not just wrong, it's literally the opposite of what you should be doing.

>>3257367
i don't think it is, a comfortable, well nourished and well informed person today can pretend they are better and people used to be 'stupid' but back then people had it much harder, relationships between friends and among the communities were very different from today.

To understand a culture now or in the past, it's obvious that you need to look at it through it's own view. But this is just understanding some shit and is not a moral judgment. Obviously if I want people to believe I'm an authority on certain event or culture, then I have to be able to say how do they think and all of that which then I can exemplify as something I consider wrong for some other reason.

Good luck not doing it tbqh

>>3257509
Of course he is. He shitposts absolutely everywhere and whenever some makes a post that BTFO him, he just doesn't respond to it and keeps baiting the retards.

>>3257513
Some Peruvian/Peruvian backgrounded poster on /his/ who, at every opportunity (and I mean every) opportunity, espouses the evils of Europe and how the Incas will rise again. No, I'm not kidding you.

His catchphrase is 'Eurangatans'

File: atrump.png (333KB, 498x589px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 498x589px

Be China
>Have gunpowder since the 2nd century
>Build fire lances
Be the UK
>Have gunpowder for a few centuries
>Build Dreadnoughts

What did China mean by this?

>>3259228
Who BTFO'd him? All I saw was buttblasted retards falling for the bait over and over.

>>3259235
That's wrong, though.

>>3259760
>be china
>create civilization
>be europe
>...
What did yurop mean by this?

>>3259850
>be china
>create civilization
>He actually believes this

I hope China gets destroyed in a war with Russia and Japan.

>>3259235
Best part is guy's probably a rape baby.

>>3259855
>be china
>create civilization

>be europe
>"I hope China gets destroyed in a war with Russia and Japan."

>>3259867
>implying i'm in Europe

>>3259901
You aren't an eurangutan?

>>3257367
It's ignorant

>>3257367
No. Why should we expect people in the past to understand our modern moral standards, most of which have only been popular since the 19th century? We are just asking to be judged poorly by future historians with new moral standards

>>3257459
>doesn't understand that moral standards are developed over extended periods of time and vary wildly by era.

File: inca.jpg (133KB, 678x960px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 678x960px

>>3259235
>he doesn't believe in the return of the Condor King

>>3257367

In germany we rename streets and remove memorials to racists like von Lettow-Vorbeck. Why should former national "heroes" get a pass on their racist and vile behaviour?

>>3259056
>>3259068
One should at least be aware of and upfront about ones biases. And this still doesn't invalidate the point

>>3260129
He probably got BTFO'd and is just complaining about him.

>>3260136
What point? Not him btw

>>3260136

I'm just saying that the idea of a historian being objective is a very, very modern idea. Our parents grew up in a time when that wasn't the case and historians were fully expected to interject their own personal thoughts on the subject. Read any of John Keegan's work on the first world war and you'll see.

Or hell, Voltaire's famous quote of “History is filled with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up.” That is a moral judgement on civilization, that becoming civilized makes us soft and vulnerable compared to (usually steppe peoples) those who grow up in hardship and thus are toughened by their upbringing, and that eventually the barbarians will destroy the empire.

File: oh perhaps he is wondering why someone would poison a frog before killing it.jpg (132KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1024x768px

>>3257367
i hope he dies slowly and in pain for the millions of brainwashed zombies he enticed. Every time I see his souless eyes I wonder how many goths, junkies and homeless he will create with flashy stickmen and loud music. How long until his mask slips and he is devoured by his own diseased neo-marxist cause? I hope he withers and sees all he holds dear dead and rotting and then maybe I will begin to forgive him.

File: 2017-03-08.png (300KB, 523x625px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 523x625px

>>3257367
European/American history? Hell no

>>3257514
*USAian

>>3257426
They are desu, they managed to create a massive administrative state without writing or the wheel.

File: imperial feels.png (13KB, 339x318px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 339x318px

>>3259090
This.

>>3257509
Why do you hate me?

Sure, so long as you are aware you are doing it.

>>3257367
No

>WOMEN WERE BASICALLY CHATTEL

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. IT IS NOT FAIR IT JUST MAKES IT ALL SUBJECT TO SHITTY COMMON THOUGHTS THAT CHANGE REGULARLY

One day they'll erect a statue to Obama

50 years later the same people's kids will tear it down because he was a bigoted meat eater

>>3263752
And a smoker, though apparently he's tried to quit and moved to nicotine gum.

File: dunce.jpg (34KB, 619x501px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 619x501px

>>3257378
>Europe had guns when Chinks didn't
>The Heilongjiang hand cannon or hand-gun is a bronze hand cannon manufactured no later than 1288 and is possibly the world's oldest confirmed surviving firearm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heilongjiang_hand_cannon

>>3263752
>50 years later the same people's kids will tear it down because he was a bigoted meat eater

And?
The cruelty of factory farming will be totally unnecessary when synthetic meat production becomes advanced enough.

>>3259041
Yeah, he and his video making can be really fucking annoying.

>>3264617
Yeah but not all meat you eat comes from factory farming

>>3259862
?

>>3257509
Incoming rant about eurangutangs

I really want to know who that dude is, just to laugh at him

>>3260137
Lol you're not fooling anyone, incatard

>>3257367
Simply a thing that you can't avoid

>>3257408
This. Good take, though sadly this kind of thing is lost on many, it's just certain politics, can't help it can you!

>>3257418
I prefer to understand the actors and read stuff from the horses mouth as much as possible, just a preference thing in the end.

>>3257404
But the Chinese didn't use the power properly.

>>3257422
But they did, you're living in it now.

>>3257509
he just posts the same shit over and over again. It's like that "ancient egypt was Ethiopian" idiot.

>>3259090
sad.

I think Columbus is gonna get fucked in the next alt-left culture purge.

>>3262521
I hate the green brothers. I really hated him when he latched on the blacklivesmatter nonsense back in 2014.

>>3263752
don't forget bombed "people of color".

>>3257418
equally as important, depends if you're looking for a guide for the future, or to have a better understanding of the past

>>3259235
Wait what the fuck. I visit /his/ once every couple of weeks, I thought it was just some meme that popped up.
It's one fucking guy?

>>3267629
Wrong. This is the heritage of north-african and mesopotamian civilization.

>>3268527
Nah, wrong. That is just the heritage of whatever human society preceeded them. It turns out we all just owe everything to the africans :)

>>3267723
Yeah, there's also some Turkish dude whose catchphrase is "whi*Te".

>>3257367
No it's anachronistic

>>3268536
Wrong. The first civilizations were those. The rest have been copying them. Europeans did the same. Try again.