Who writes history? (Romans, invention, origin, German)

[Dd714]

TrickyD - dude, the issue is you are getting offtopic. We can bring up a post about ancient Rome archetecture and somehow you will spin America's involvement in Iraq into it. Give it a rest! I don't post in the political forum anymore because I was tired of the same old debate.
The politics forum is the place for you.

[Moth]

And I am not anti-American, but I somehow I doubt you'll believe me.

I don't. But anti-Americanism, though occassionally quite legitimate, is largely a variation of nationalism. And nationalism is a human trait.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by LordBalfor

You are certainly not scoring any points by seemingly championing the Japanese in WW II (a situation where they were CLEARLY in the wrong).

Because I am not really interested in the Iraqi war.
Nor do I care about scoring points.
The only reason I admire the Japanese is because of their pragmatism; as a society they did in a relative short time what most western civilizations took a couple of centuries and yet they remained distinctly Japanese. As far as I know there is no other non-western nation that can say the same.
I also don't tend to look at wars as good guys vs bad guys, because a war is so ugly that even the 'good' guys do 'evil' things to win.

And nationalism is a human trait.

I guess you haven't noticed that I'm am not rooting for anyone. I simply have no home-team to root for. Just because you believe that I am anti-American you probably assume that I am pro-European or pro-Indonesian which is not the case.
I only support my nation which is a nation of 1 (me).

[LordBalfor]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

.
The only reason I admire the Japanese is because of their pragmatism; as a society they did in a relative short time what most western civilizations took a couple of centuries

Maybe because they didn't have to actually invent the technologies but merely to copy or borrow them?

Tends to be a bit easier & faster that way.

Ken

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by LordBalfor

Maybe because they didn't have to actually invent the technologies but merely to copy or borrow them?

True, but can you copy anything and vastly improve it at the same time? If that was so easy more non-western nations (heck even other western nations) could do the same. The Japanese did more than just copy technology, they socially restructured their 'backwards' agricultural civilasition to become the technological world power that they are now. In this regard alone they truly are masters of adaptation.
Anywayz, as an artist I find copying the highest form of flattery and can assure you that 'forging' art sometimes takes more skill than that of the original master himself.
Besides all that, copying or imitation is one of the first forms of learning and only the true skillfull student can improve the technique of his teacher.

[ESFP]

Wow! Many good explanations of historians vs history buffs. I avoid Civil War discussions and such... don't get me started on current politics. However, "The first casualty when war comes is truth" (Hiram Johnson, Calif. Senator (R) 1917).

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by ESFP

"The first casualty when war comes is truth" (Hiram Johnson, Calif. Senator (R) 1917).

I agree.
The problem is that discovering the truth will always be a matter of interpretation (of the facts).

[Sweden]

ALL sides of historical events write the history. The history taught in the US about WWII is not the same as in Japan, and vice versa. The history taught in Sweden about the Thirty Year's War is not the same as in France. The events in the Tiananmen Square in 1989 are not depicted the same way in China as in most of the world.
We might think that what we're being taught in school is the "truth as everyone else knows it", but in reality it is far from it.

The winner writes the history that will be the majority-truth, but in the "losing area etc" another history will be written. It's like when we were kids and got into a fight with someone else. "He did this and I did that..." were never the same as "I did this and he did that..." from the other side of the argument.
Historians are people too. Trust me, my father is a historian...

[njkate]

Originally Posted by Sweden

ALL sides of historical events write the history. The history taught in the US about WWII is not the same as in Japan, and vice versa. The history taught in Sweden about the Thirty Year's War is not the same as in France. The events in the Tiananmen Square in 1989 are not depicted the same way in China as in most of the world.
We might think that what we're being taught in school is the "truth as everyone else knows it", but in reality it is far from it.

The winner writes the history that will be the majority-truth, but in the "losing area etc" another history will be written. It's like when we were kids and got into a fight with someone else. "He did this and I did that..." were never the same as "I did this and he did that..." from the other side of the argument.
Historians are people too. Trust me, my father is a historian...

Kind of like there are two sides to every story and the truth is usually somewhere in the middle

[southernjewishgal]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by Dd714 True, but how about American history?
I mean we can blame the Japanese from being brutish and such, but how about imprisoning American citizens just because they are oriental? To me that is even a greater sin, since there is no difference between this and the racial profiling the Nazis are guilty of.
Isn't imprisoning your American citizens as you did during WWII on the count of race not a crime against humanity?

Comparing what America did with the internment camps to Nazi Germany? Those are two very different issues and there is absolutely no comparison in what these people went through. I just find that statement laughable.