Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Discussion of current events
User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:47 am

You'd expect people who lived a thousand years after the height of Rome to be more advanced technologically. Saying, "Look flying buttresses! Christianity means progress!" is ridiculous. Doubly so in that it was the Islamic world, not Christendom, that was the centre of technological progress during this era. I mean, by that standard the Egyptians from six thousand years ago were the most advanced civilisation ever, since we still don't fully know how they built the pyramids.

The point is that you don't get to give Christianity the credit for every shred of progress and then handwaive away every step backwards -- as you completely did with slavery, which was even more brutal and uncivilised under Christian Europeans in the Americas than it was even under the Romans.
Last edited by SteveFoerster on Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5596
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by Sertorio » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:54 am

cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:01 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:15 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:32 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 1:35 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:31 am
And yet strangely, for how spiritually edifying Christianity is supposed to be, it did nothing at all to stem the carnage raging across Europe for two thousand years, and it's only been in living memory during its decline that Europe has by and large seen peace. Funny that.
How do you know that they were all that "spiritually edified" back in those times anyway?
Christianity was a totalitarian doctrine which succeeded in transforming the Roman Empire into a land of illiterate savages. It took one thousand years before the enlightening of the Renaissance could start re-civilizing Europe. And peace remained a dream until the 21st century. And it will remain a dream unless Europe frees itself from NATO and the US...
What a load of rubbish. Even during the medivial period, Christian science and arts were already more advanced than the Romans. Not to mention social progress such as the abolition of slavery (which admittedly restarted after the New World was discovered).
I'm sure Galileo Galilei would agree with you. He was advanced, but look at what the Church did to him...
Yes. That's not the church's finest hour. But his ideas were the same as Copernicus, a canon of the church. Nothing happened to him. Galileo invented the telescope which confirmed Copernicus' theory. The Romans and Greeks did not have the telescope. The Pope got angry because in Galileo's book, there was a character called Simplicio (which sounds like simpleton to me) that the Pope recognised as referring to him. He was insulted and this caused the inquisition. Galileo was not mistreated. He was placed under house arrest.

When I am free, I will reread Rodney Stark's book which gave all the scientific, cultural, architectual, musical achievements of the Middle Ages that were more advanced than the Romans.

Of hand, I can recall the windmill, more advanced musical instruments, flying buttresses in architecture, the stirrup, plate armor. Meanwhile, I will leave you with this picture of Notre Dame, built in 1163. I think it rivals anything the Romans built.
Yes, in the Middle Ages they were good at building big churches, at the expense of the poor people...

But, windmills?... What about this:

Image

The Roman watermill complex at Barbegal (France), its 16 waterwheels - arranged in two parallel rows - made it the largest known mill complex in ancient world.

https://www.beyond.fr/sites/barbegal-aqueduct.html

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 5151
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by cassowary » Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:19 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:54 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:01 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:15 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:32 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 1:35 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 pm


How do you know that they were all that "spiritually edified" back in those times anyway?
Christianity was a totalitarian doctrine which succeeded in transforming the Roman Empire into a land of illiterate savages. It took one thousand years before the enlightening of the Renaissance could start re-civilizing Europe. And peace remained a dream until the 21st century. And it will remain a dream unless Europe frees itself from NATO and the US...
What a load of rubbish. Even during the medivial period, Christian science and arts were already more advanced than the Romans. Not to mention social progress such as the abolition of slavery (which admittedly restarted after the New World was discovered).
I'm sure Galileo Galilei would agree with you. He was advanced, but look at what the Church did to him...
Yes. That's not the church's finest hour. But his ideas were the same as Copernicus, a canon of the church. Nothing happened to him. Galileo invented the telescope which confirmed Copernicus' theory. The Romans and Greeks did not have the telescope. The Pope got angry because in Galileo's book, there was a character called Simplicio (which sounds like simpleton to me) that the Pope recognised as referring to him. He was insulted and this caused the inquisition. Galileo was not mistreated. He was placed under house arrest.

When I am free, I will reread Rodney Stark's book which gave all the scientific, cultural, architectual, musical achievements of the Middle Ages that were more advanced than the Romans.

Of hand, I can recall the windmill, more advanced musical instruments, flying buttresses in architecture, the stirrup, plate armor. Meanwhile, I will leave you with this picture of Notre Dame, built in 1163. I think it rivals anything the Romans built.
Yes, in the Middle Ages they were good at building big churches, at the expense of the poor people...
Well the Romans and Greeks also built magnificient temples to their gods. The temple of Zeus and its giant statue was one of the original seven wonders of the world.

And your vaunted pagans did not care two hoots about the poor. It was Christians that took care of the world during the Roman times. This won them converts. A good example was St Martin of Tours, who used his sword to cut his cloak into two and gave one half to a beggar. That was how Christianity displaced paganism. The tradition carries on with modern day Mother Theresa.
But, windmills?... What about this:

Image

The Roman watermill complex at Barbegal (France), its 16 waterwheels - arranged in two parallel rows - made it the largest known mill complex in ancient world.

https://www.beyond.fr/sites/barbegal-aqueduct.html

Yes, that's also impressive. But the Romans failed to encourage education while the Church built schools and universities. That's also another advance from Roman times. The Sorbonne aka the University of Paris were started by the church as charter schools. The Greeks were better at education than the Romans. Aristotle and Socrates started schools but the number of students was small.
The Imp :D

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 5151
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by cassowary » Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:14 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:47 am
You'd expect people who lived a thousand years after the height of Rome to be more advanced technologically.
Tell that to Sertorio. I was replying to his assertion that Christianity brought civilization backwards after his prefered Roman times. The truth is the reverse. European society during the Middle Ages were more advanced than the Romans.
Saying, "Look flying buttresses! Christianity means progress!" is ridiculous. Doubly so in that it was the Islamic world, not Christendom, that was the centre of technological progress during this era. I mean, by that standard the Egyptians from six thousand years ago were the most advanced civilisation ever, since we still don't fully know how they built the pyramids.
I only pointed out to Sertorio that civilization progressed and not regressed that his Marxist indoctrination claimed was the fault of Christianity after the Fall of Rome. So I simply pointed out the advances made by medieval Europeans in the so called Dark Ages.

None of these civilizations - Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Islamic, Chinese sparked the scientific revolution which according to the book, "The victory of Reason" and "For the glory of God", by Rodney Stark were due to Christian beliefs.

In all these early civilizations, humans discovered all the easy investions. But after a point, you need to invest in research to spark further progress. This takes time and money. It was not profitable. You can make a scientific discovery but there is no immediate practical use for it. It could take years before the new knowledge is of practical use.

But scientists like Newton were not thinking of making a profit. Instead, for the early scientists, it was a quest to understand the working and mind of God to better marvel at it. It was possible to do this because of the Christian view of the world. Thomas Aquinas and later Peter Abelard made the point that faith must be compatible with human reasoning. God had created the world according to fixed principles which could be discovered.

In contrast, the Muslim world's theology took a different turn. The Mutazilites had similar ideas as Aquinas but were opposed by a different school - the Asharites. These taught that faith overides human reasoning. We are mere mortals and can never understand the mind of God. We only just obey blindly. There is no fixed laws of science. If an apple falls to the ground it is Allah's will and not due to any fixed law that it must. If Allah wishes so, the apple can rise instead of fall.

Such beliefs were not conducive to scientific discovery. The Gold Age of Islam came at a time when Islam had not fully developed. The bulk of the Hadiths were collected 150 years after the death of Mohammed. Debate about its interpretation took more time. Scholars, like Goldziher believed that the "gate of itjihad" were closed in the 13th century.

(Itjihad is the process of formulating Islamic laws to deal with new situations not mentioned in the Koran. This is based on the study of the hadiths, Koran and reasoning. Some progressive Muslims have called for the "gates of itjihad" to reopen so as to allow Islam to be modernised. But they are sometimes met with accusations of heresy and we all know where that goes.)

Once Islam solidified, the Golden Age was over. Stagnation was ensured. So yes, I believe that Christian beliefs created the conditions that made the scientific revolution possible which in the end undermined Chritian faith. The scientific revolution did not occur in other cultures.
The point is that you don't get to give Christianity the credit for every shred of progress and then handwaive away every step backwards -- as you completely did with slavery, which was even more brutal and uncivilised under Christian Europeans in the Americas than it was even under the Romans.
Christians were more brutal than Romans? The Romans practiced infanticide and crucified their criminals. Their slaves were not well treated. Abolition was possible because of Christianity. An early abolitionist was St Bathielde. She started out as a slave but later became a queen. See excerpt:
During this period the poorer inhabitants of France were often obliged to sell their children as slaves to meet the crushing taxes imposed upon them. Bathilde reduced their taxes and made it illegal to buy or sell a slave in France, passing a law that any slave who was brought into the country immediately became free by paying the ransom, which she often did herself.
By the 10th or 11th century, western europe had no more slavey except at its periphery where Muslims and Christians captured and enslaved one another.

As I said, slavery restarted when the New World was discovered and the need for slave a labour to work the plantations. Don't forget it was also common in most of the world, including Africa. In fact, the slaves from Africa were bought from Africans. So they too bear some responsibilty for slavery. Even today, the last holdouts for slavery is in Africa.

Mauritania is slavery's last stronghold.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 5954
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by Doc » Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:16 am

Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:15 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:32 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 1:35 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:31 am
And yet strangely, for how spiritually edifying Christianity is supposed to be, it did nothing at all to stem the carnage raging across Europe for two thousand years, and it's only been in living memory during its decline that Europe has by and large seen peace. Funny that.
How do you know that they were all that "spiritually edified" back in those times anyway?
Christianity was a totalitarian doctrine which succeeded in transforming the Roman Empire into a land of illiterate savages. It took one thousand years before the enlightening of the Renaissance could start re-civilizing Europe. And peace remained a dream until the 21st century. And it will remain a dream unless Europe frees itself from NATO and the US...
What a load of rubbish. Even during the medivial period, Christian science and arts were already more advanced than the Romans. Not to mention social progress such as the abolition of slavery (which admittedly restarted after the New World was discovered).
I'm sure Galileo Galilei would agree with you. He was advanced, but look at what the Church did to him...
Galileo's "sin" in the eyes of the church wasn't his discoveries but his lecturing about what his discoveries said about God. -- Giving his personal spin on the bible.. After which he had the good sense to stop talking about it. Where Bruno apparently could not help himself, and thus was executed.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

neverfail
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by neverfail » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:05 am

............................................................................................................................................

Cassowary, you make some good and valid points on relationship of slavery and Christianity. They do you credit.
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:14 pm
During this period the poorer inhabitants of France were often obliged to sell their children as slaves to meet the crushing taxes imposed upon them. Bathilde reduced their taxes and made it illegal to buy or sell a slave in France, passing a law that any slave who was brought into the country immediately became free by paying the ransom, which she often did herself.
By the 10th or 11th century, western europe had no more slavey except at its periphery where Muslims and Christians captured and enslaved one another.

As I said, slavery restarted when the New World was discovered and the need for slave a labour to work the plantations. Don't forget it was also common in most of the world, including Africa. In fact, the slaves from Africa were bought from Africans. So they too bear some responsibilty for slavery. Even today, the last holdouts for slavery is in Africa.
Within the last year or two I learned to my surprise that slavery was a widespread practice among the Anglo-Saxon English: the English of the Dark Ages. It had been a widespread practice among the Romans during their three centuries of occupation of Britannia that the natives had apparently themselves adopted and passed on to subsequent invaders. Then came the 1066 and the Norman conquest and things began to change.

Even with Norman rule it did not happen overnight but even during the reign of William the Conquerer quite a number of slaves were freed. Before 1,300AD there was not a single slave left in England or Wales. Agreed, there were serfs but that is not the same.

I wondered where the Normans got the impulse from and then recalling that the Dukes of Normandy were in fealty to the kings of France I drew the conclusion that this was an element of French law they must have subsequently inserted into English common law. I had no previous idea that it dated all the way back to Queen Bathilde of early Frankish royalty or even who she was.

Just as well for the sake of posterity that the Normans did. In 1774 William Wilberforce created a precedent in law when as a young barrister he represented an escaped slave from the West Indies whose owner was trying to claim him back. The judge ruled there was nothing in English law that permitted ownership of slaves. That however did not prevent the legislative assemblies allowed in some of the overseas colonies (like in the British West Indies and the future American south) from passing laws that did.

I have previously assumed that the Norman invasion of England had been a disaster because it imposed Continental feudalism on a previously free people. In light of the widespread practice of slavery among Anglo-Saxons and the abolishionist drive of the Normans I have since had to radically revise my opinion. I can see it now has having moved English society forward. (Another example of God working in his mysterious way through His people here on Earth perhaps? :D ).

neverfail
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by neverfail » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:17 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:47 am
You'd expect people who lived a thousand years after the height of Rome to be more advanced technologically.
So what?

Your undue focus on technological attainment as the benchmark standard for "civilisation" befits a man who cannot see beyond our finite life of but several decades in this world to the eternal afterlife beyond. Like Sertorio you seem to crave an earthly paradise through "progress" as an ungodly substitute: even though your definition of progress and his may differ.

Has all of the "progress" made over the past 2,000 years ever created a single saint or saved one mortal sinner from damnation? Answer that if you dare to!

(...and do so without mocking!)

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5596
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by Sertorio » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:34 am

neverfail wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:17 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:47 am
You'd expect people who lived a thousand years after the height of Rome to be more advanced technologically.
So what?

Your undue focus on technological attainment as the benchmark standard for "civilisation" befits a man who cannot see beyond our finite life of but several decades in this world to the eternal afterlife beyond. Like Sertorio you seem to crave an earthly paradise through "progress" as an ungodly substitute: even though your definition of progress and his may differ.

Has all of the "progress" made over the past 2,000 years ever created a single saint or saved one mortal sinner from damnation? Answer that if you dare to!

(...and do so without mocking!)
1. There is no eternal afterlife. Epicurus already knew that 2,300 years ago...
2. Progress does not create an earthly paradise, it only may make our life more comfortable...
3. There are no saints, no sin, no sinners and no damnation...

Your life would be a lot more pleasant if you stopped believing all that nonsense...

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5596
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by Sertorio » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:44 am

cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:14 pm

None of these civilizations - Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Islamic, Chinese sparked the scientific revolution which according to the book, "The victory of Reason" and "For the glory of God", by Rodney Stark were due to Christian beliefs.
Is that so?
Aristarchus of Samos (/ˌærəˈstɑːrkəs/; Greek: Ἀρίσταρχος ὁ Σάμιος, Aristarkhos ho Samios; c. 310 – c. 230 BC) was an ancient Greek astronomer and mathematician who presented the first known heliocentric model that placed the Sun at the center of the known universe, with the Earth revolving around the Sun once a year and rotating about its axis once a day. He was influenced by the concept presented by Philolaus of Croton (c. 470 – 385 BC) of a fire at the center of the universe, but Aristarchus identified the "central fire" with the Sun and he put the other planets in their correct order of distance around the Sun.

Like Anaxagoras before him, Aristarchus suspected that the stars were just other bodies like the Sun, albeit farther away from Earth. Often, his astronomical ideas were rejected in favor of the geocentric theories of Aristotle and Ptolemy. However, Nicolaus Copernicus knew about the possibility that Aristarchus had a 'moving Earth' theory, although it is unlikely that Copernicus was aware that it was a heliocentric theory.

Aristarchus estimated the sizes of the Sun and Moon as compared to Earth's size. He also estimated the distances from the Earth to the Sun and Moon. He is considered one of the greatest astronomers of antiquity along with Hipparchus, and one of the greatest thinkers in human history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos
That was 2,300 years ago, without any instruments, just with the power of the mind. It took another 1,800 years until Copernicus was able to shake Christian obscurantism and "reinvent" heliocentrism...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 5151
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Why did the US failed in nation building in Afghanistan but succeeded in Japan?

Post by cassowary » Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:03 am

neverfail wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:05 am
............................................................................................................................................

Cassowary, you make some good and valid points on relationship of slavery and Christianity. They do you credit.
cassowary wrote:
Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:14 pm
During this period the poorer inhabitants of France were often obliged to sell their children as slaves to meet the crushing taxes imposed upon them. Bathilde reduced their taxes and made it illegal to buy or sell a slave in France, passing a law that any slave who was brought into the country immediately became free by paying the ransom, which she often did herself.
By the 10th or 11th century, western europe had no more slavey except at its periphery where Muslims and Christians captured and enslaved one another.

As I said, slavery restarted when the New World was discovered and the need for slave a labour to work the plantations. Don't forget it was also common in most of the world, including Africa. In fact, the slaves from Africa were bought from Africans. So they too bear some responsibilty for slavery. Even today, the last holdouts for slavery is in Africa.
Within the last year or two I learned to my surprise that slavery was a widespread practice among the Anglo-Saxon English: the English of the Dark Ages. It had been a widespread practice among the Romans during their three centuries of occupation of Britannia that the natives had apparently themselves adopted and passed on to subsequent invaders. Then came the 1066 and the Norman conquest and things began to change.

Even with Norman rule it did not happen overnight but even during the reign of William the Conquerer quite a number of slaves were freed. Before 1,300AD there was not a single slave left in England or Wales. Agreed, there were serfs but that is not the same.

I wondered where the Normans got the impulse from and then recalling that the Dukes of Normandy were in fealty to the kings of France I drew the conclusion that this was an element of French law they must have subsequently inserted into English common law. I had no previous idea that it dated all the way back to Queen Bathilde of early Frankish royalty or even who she was.

Just as well for the sake of posterity that the Normans did. In 1774 William Wilberforce created a precedent in law when as a young barrister he represented an escaped slave from the West Indies whose owner was trying to claim him back. The judge ruled there was nothing in English law that permitted ownership of slaves. That however did not prevent the legislative assemblies allowed in some of the overseas colonies (like in the British West Indies and the future American south) from passing laws that did.

I have previously assumed that the Norman invasion of England had been a disaster because it imposed Continental feudalism on a previously free people. In light of the widespread practice of slavery among Anglo-Saxons and the abolishionist drive of the Normans I have since had to radically revise my opinion. I can see it now has having moved English society forward. (Another example of God working in his mysterious way through His people here on Earth perhaps? :D ).
Why, thank you neverfail.
The Imp :D

Post Reply