Update

Not really too much to say. So here, having a Daybreak chapter update.

For those enjoying Daybreak for the world contents, I do have something to recommend that I've been really hooked on lately. Crash Course is amazing at summarizing very complex topics in very short videos. For example, the first 56 seconds of the following video is pretty much how every history course should begin... because when one doesn't understand the world, it really doesn't take long in conversation before their ignorance shows.

I also recommend this/these video(s) for anyone who believes "Kaede has something to teach the world". Because that view of 'civilization always moving forward'? Yeah... not necessarily.

You're just more used to it, therefore automatically thinking anyone who doesn't live your way as "savage". Don't worry though, the Romans will think you barbarian for wearing pants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

25 thoughts on “Update

Open Message Board
  1. john

    Good series, but John Green ruined so much of it with his snarky socialist comments.

    Reply
    1. AoriiAorii Post author

      You must be American. (sigh)
      No, he really isn't a socialist. He is an fervent egalitarian though. But it's clear he actually supports capitalism/privatization, even if he's wary of its drawbacks.

      Reply
  2. Chad Jennings

    Yeah, these videos really helped me when I was in World History last year. Although they don't have all the info, it's still good to use as a beginning to start a new chapter.

    Reply
  3. Owl

    After Rome collapsed, they didn't call the period after that the "Dark Ages" for nothing.

    Reply
    1. Owl

      Oh yeah, context. This is a response to "civilization always moves forward".

      One thing also to remember is that the average lifespan for people in the past was 25-40 years. Got to keep that in mind when comparing relative health. They are active until something forcibly stops them from living.

      Reply
    2. AoriiAorii Post author

      They also have a video about how the 'dark ages' was... not exactly accurate

      Given that Romans were kind of terrible people who marginalized and disrespected every culture that wasn't their own, I kinda wish Rome collapsed faster. Thankfully, they never dominated across the Rhine so at least we have interesting Germanic cultures.

      That being said, medicine, especially antibiotics, is awesome (as long as we keep inventing more because you know, evolved immunities apply to germs/viruses too)

      Reply
      1. Owl

        That might have a point....if all the other cultures respected others too. :)

        It was a dog eat dog, every culture for itself time, not as egalitarian as nowadays. So basically it's the norm for the time, the Romans were not the exception, they were the norm, it fact they might be more enlightened than the rest. The one that was really culturally destroying were the Babylonians. Think of it, why would the language of that time be Greek if the Romans were so "scorched earth"? Not to mention they do have Roman citizenship without interference for sale, a lot of the times, their conquests would have puppet kings placed in, with a governor overseer, then left to their own devices.

        That is why in Biblical History, you get things like a Bedoin like King Herod (all 3? of them) ruling over Roman occupied Judea, the Romans simply couldn't bother. And also screwups like "tax farming". They set a bid system for sub-contractors, then let the sub-contractors re-collect the money from the population....without setting limits to how much their local stooges could extort out of the population. They simply did not want to get that closely involved with the "lesser cultures".

        Reply
      2. Owl

        Gah, how do I edit...

        Antibiotic resistance is an overstated problem, one thing most people are not told is that if the evolutionary pressure is released, the specific resistance is no longer favored and actually "released". After all, it takes material and energy to make the plasmid, resources that could be better used elsewhere, so you can get by with alternating antibiotics. Once a plasmid conferring a specific resistance becomes common, switch to another one. When that other one induces resistance, switch back. Just make sure you don't switch too fast or you'll get a temporary "dual immunity" stage. i.e MDR [multi-drug resistant-"superbug" (always hated that term, makes people thing that stupid thing is like "Superman")]

        This technique is used in genetic modification to delete gene traits, they call it "plasmid breeding". You breed a "wild-type" strain with a "resistant type" strain in a no-antibiotic agar plate, the "wild type" will overrun and breed out the resistance. Unfortunately you can't use this in humans because the "wild type" bacteria overgrowing can possibly be fatal. Works on agar, agar can't die. So we can't simply take someone off antibiotics to weed out resistance.

        Ah the days of ole MRSA and VRE.

        Reply
        1. AoriiAorii Post author

          What major/career are you, if you don't mind me asking? That's a lot of in-depth knowledge on pharmaceuticals =o

          The spreading of Greek eastward was mostly because of Alexander the Great's conquests. His generals ruled the lands after his death and brought many concepts over, including the widespread use of Greek. The Eastern Roman provinces always had far more autonomy than the west due to the fact (1) they were conquered/integrated later (2) communication channels were less reliable (hence the breakaway of the Eastern Roman Empire later). Judea/Syria was also a trade center of the ancient world, and the constant influx of new ideas makes cultural standardization impossible anyway.

          And no, Rome was not 'the norm'. In fact the Persian Empire set up a model for 'light' decentralized rule with locals governing locals that the Romans later adopted in the east, and there were plenty of other decentralized empires. Their successors, the Sassanids, believed in centralized rule but also in tolerance -- welcoming artisans and theologians of many cultures and religions. This would influence the Turks (who believed in tolerance of religious minorities), the Abbasids (who embraced 'islamic' identity instead of any singular cultural identity), the Mughals (who successfully ruled over India and left praiseworthy reputations despite being neither Indian nor Hindu), etc.

          Compare this to the classical view of the Romans (us civilized folks vs them barbarians who need to be tamed), which later became a root cause for the brutal if not vile European model of imperialism...

          Reply
          1. Owl

            Linking Rome to European imperialistic thinking is a bit of a stretch, considering that the Europeans are actually the descendants of the people who cooked Rome to a crisp. :) After the fall of Rome, Roman influence on thinking became minimal, especially with the Northern barbarians. My call is that the arrogance of the Europeans is simply the innate xenophobia (mild, not extreme) that is in us all against things that we are not familiar with and a nationalistic spirit. Whenever a country is doing well, people tend to be proud, which can sometimes shade into looking down on others if the person happens to be a bit "crass".

            And yes, my major was "Molecular biology" aka biology on a molecular scale aka genetics.

          2. Owl

            I really need an edit button....

            Back to nationalistic arrogance, look at the example of China now. Their citizens are getting more and more proud as their country develops and with that, a rise in the number of "arrogant tourists", very, very similar to the old "arrogant Englishman". It's something innate in us all, the ability to corrupt virtues like pride in achievements to arrogance in action. Man is wonderful in his ability to muck things up.

          3. AoriiAorii Post author

            Except the Enlightenment period brought a revival for everything from the Classical period, which also brings back Classical (Greco-Roman) values. I'm not going to refute that human sin (pride) is certainly at work, but traditional values also contribute quite a bit. So does the black-vs-white good-vs-evil polarity of the Abrahamic religions.

            China has a history of looking down upon everything not Chinese (they considered the English barbaric... right up to losing the Opium Wars). The recent economic success simply revived the bad habit. The saving grace is that historically, China didn't care much for domination outside China; but modern China's obsession toward natural resources changes things...

  4. Armaell

    Pretty amazing intro yeah. I will have to watch this .... with ... my .... english oral understanding skills ... ouch, will be hard (yeah, I used the youtube translated subtite for the intro, shame on me)

    And for the Aorii case... always gold to see a news of you :D

    Reply
  5. MochiMochi

    Hence why the only outsiders to succeed in an invasion of Russia... were the Mongols.
    That line was totally ripped off Crash Course, wasn't it?

    Reply
      1. AoriiAorii Post author

        So did Napoleon, right before he retreated and lost the rest of his army in the process
        Russia's conquer of warsaw, on the other hand, lasted quite a lot longer than one year =P

        Reply
        1. krytykkrytyk

          Well, Poland is unfortunate enough to lie in the heart of Europe, between Germans and Russians. And the stupid political decisions over the ages...

          Reply
          1. krytykkrytyk

            Polish suffer a naivety and messiah syndrome, main reasons for the fails over the ages. Moreover, they STILL do suffer those (in current geopolitical situation they're used by US and Germany).

      2. Chen

        >Actually, Polish occupied Moscow in 17th century y'know.
        Sometimes I wonder what would be the country was born if Poland was able to unite all Slavs. Or at least Western and Eastern Slavs.

        Reply
    1. AoriiAorii Post author

      Is it? I need to watch the episode on Kievan Rus again. I would have wrote the same regardless due to being a huge fan of the mongols myself (the meritocracy part, not the massacre part), but all that mongol-tage may have affected my wording of things =P

      Reply
      1. Sonoda YukiSonoda Yuki

        Random: Genghis Khan has roughly three times as many descendants as Confucius in China alone, despite the latter having a headstart of roughly one and a half millennia.

        Reply
        1. AoriiAorii Post author

          The advantages of sleeping with all the beautiful women presented as tributes every time he conquered a town.

          Reply