|
Starshark posted:Option three is he's someone who thinks the Aborigines were an inferior civilization - check that, he doesn't think they were a civilization at all - and his opinion doesn't belong here any more than someone from Stormfront. You might give the time of day to unabashed racists but don't expect me to. You know what I'm trying to say and you disagree, but you're choosing to insult me and my choice of friends. All I'm saying is that you win more with honey than vinegar - because right now the unbridled hate I'm seeing makes me not want to be here anymore. You can have conversations without ad hominems 
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 08:33 |
|
|
Skellybones posted:The Maya didn't have wheels either. Good point, my apologies. Reading up on the history of the wheel it makes sense ("only useful if there are strong animals capable of pulling wheeled vehicles"). I guess my personal view is as wikipedia posted:Civilizations have distinctly different settlement patterns from other societies. The word civilization is sometimes simply defined as "'living in cities'".[27] Non-farmers tend to gather in cities to work and to trade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
Was the colonisation of Maya lands less just than the colonisation of indigenous Australian lands?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
LibertyCat posted:OK quoting from Simple aka "Wikipeda for Retards" is getting desperate. It's appropriate for your comprehension level, OP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Would nomadic steppe and tundra people, with or without wheels, count as civilisations?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
I don't think taking anyone's lands are "just". Unprovoked Invasions are Bad. We're just arguing over the meaning of a word, not that Aboriginals are terrible people, sheesh. edit: I would vote that no cities = no civilization.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
tithin posted:You know what I'm trying to say and you disagree, but you're choosing to insult me and my choice of friends.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
Would a nomadic horde suddenly become civilised if they murdered everyone in a city, built a pyramid out of their skulls, and then lived in the city?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
tithin posted:You know what I'm trying to say and you disagree, but you're choosing to insult me and my choice of friends. I don't know what the hell you just read, but it sure wasn't my post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Would a nomadic horde suddenly become civilised if they murdered everyone in a city, built a pyramid out of their skulls, and then lived in the city? What colour are they and do I want their land
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
oh no wont somebody please care about pisscat's feelings
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
hang on - I am talking about the term "Civilization", not "being civilized". If the murderous horde took over a city and adopted a market economy, specialized roles for its citizens, a system of law, kept track of debts on sheets of human skin etc then yes they have a Civilization.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
But you can have all those things without a city.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
what is the most advanced "Civilization" you can think of that did not actually build cities? It seems to me that historically cities go hand in hand with the rest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Would a nomadic horde suddenly become civilised if they murdered everyone in a city, built a pyramid out of their skulls, and then lived in the city? Yes, Ancient Assyria was a civilisation! Ten points.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
LibertyCat posted:what is the most advanced "Civilization" you can think of that did not actually build cities? It seems to me that historically cities go hand in hand with the rest. The Huns or Ghengis Khan's Golden Horde?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
I look forward to the pedantic debate about what counts as a city.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:I look forward to the pedantic debate about what counts as a city. anywhere the bishop lives?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:03
|
|
|
LibertyCat posted:I don't think taking anyone's lands are "just". Unprovoked Invasions are Bad. We're just arguing over the meaning of a word, not that Aboriginals are terrible people, sheesh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
*develops sharing economy *isn't a civilisation* *is pisscat*
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
How do you define 'advanced'? The Americas had huge cities and burgeoning empires without having wheels, metal tools or domesticated livestock beyond llamas. Steppe nomads invented the stirrup and routinely dominated their city dwelling neighbours despite having nothing more permanent than large tents. Arctic tribes invented a thousand and one uses for seals and whales that nobody else figured out. Polynesians colonised the whole Pacific. The richest man in all of history was from Mali. The inhabitants of Easter Island built so many large stone monuments they destroyed their ability to live there, they dominated the environment to an extent far beyond the bounds of almost any other group in history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
homer wasn't civilised because he didn't write
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
Be honest, how many of you knew the difference between Atilla the Hun and Genghis Khan?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Does a giant pyramid of skulls count as an urban construction? The Mongols were really good at making those.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Be honest, how many of you knew the difference between Atilla the Hun and Genghis Khan? Well duh they had separate campaigns in AoE2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
LibertyCat posted:Pretty sure Aboriginal tribes don't qualify. Social/political/technical development seems to have stagnated for a few thousand years. Actually Aboriginals had highly complex social structures. What a surprise that the guy who is a racist doesn't know what the gently caress he is talking about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
[Libcat Looks at literally the oldest traceable civilization in existance] Hmm, no good
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Well duh they had separate campaigns in AoE2. Monk, I need a monk!
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Endman posted:Monk, I need a monk! WOLOLOOOO
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:23
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:How do you define 'advanced'? The Americas had huge cities and burgeoning empires without having wheels, metal tools or domesticated livestock beyond llamas. Steppe nomads invented the stirrup and routinely dominated their city dwelling neighbours despite having nothing more permanent than large tents. Arctic tribes invented a thousand and one uses for seals and whales that nobody else figured out. Polynesians colonised the whole Pacific. The richest man in all of history was from Mali. The inhabitants of Easter Island built so many large stone monuments they destroyed their ability to live there, they dominated the environment to an extent far beyond the bounds of almost any other group in history. All good points! Guess I'll have to shift the ol' goalposts here... Aborigines weren't civilized because they didn't have numismatic currency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
I don't even know what numinastic means!
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:I don't even know what numinastic means! Coins and poo poo, basically. One step up from a barter economy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Money is evil and distracts society from the communist ideal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:32
|
|
|
One cool thing we do know about pre-colonial Australia is that there were continent-spanning trade routes; archaeologists found shells and other miscellany that can only come from Australia's southern coast in the top parts of WA and the Northern Territory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
I'm skimming too much to weigh in in depth on the poop-touching tone argument. But I just wanna say that LibertyCat, you made a decent effort to respond to a fair few posts but Mithranderp's effortpost with scientific backing was not one of them. You need to fix that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
Endman posted:Coins and poo poo, basically. One step up from a barter economy. Barter economies didn't exist, we just think they did because Adam Smith said so 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:Barter economies didn't exist, we just think they did because Adam Smith said so What
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Starshark posted:See where engaging meaningfully with people like this has gotten us, tithin? Do you still think we should adjust our tone for the sake of filth like this? Politeness is not the reason everyone got sucked into a dumb semantics argument.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
Mithranderp posted:This exactly. Women and people of colour are passed over for positions for which they're qualified all the time. And this isn't just anecdotal; it's backed up by peer reviewed research. I don't disagree. Without going into specifics, I do my best to prevent such things from happening, and let people be judged on their qualifications and experience without ethnic background and gender coming into play. quote:And it's not really even something most employers do on purpose; it could possibly be solved with a "blind" application process, but that's something that a lot of small-medium businesses don't even know about. And even then you're always going to have an interview so it's impossible to eliminate bias even with an application process that is as fair as possible. and THIS is where quotas come in. We agree there is a problem, we disagree on what the solution is. What is a fair quota? Should this quota apply to rubbish collectors? What happens if there are nowhere near enough qualified applications? Should we give scholarships and bonuses to male preschool teachers to encourage them to enter the profession? Men are over-represented in prison, should they be treated with more leniency to correct this? As a partial solution we should eliminate some of the more useless subjects in school and have a mandatory "life skills" class. It would include things like conflict resolution, role-playing how to negotiate a pay rise, how to do taxes etc. If nothing else maybe it would help with the "women being less willing to negotiate salary" problem. Many of the people I know who are really good in their field have been interested in it since primary school. If we're going to change attitudes (and get more great women Scientists/Engineers/Doctors/Mathematicians) I'd start there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 08:33 |
|
|
LibertyCat posted:As a partial solution we should eliminate some of the more useless subjects in school and have a mandatory "life skills" class. It would include things like conflict resolution, role-playing how to negotiate a pay rise, how to do taxes etc. If nothing else maybe it would help with the "women being less willing to negotiate salary" problem. Why do you think that the problem here is that women don't know how to negotiate a salary?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 11:08
|
|
