Has studying history changed your outlook on life and your political views? In what way?
>>1338900
Yes
It made me non-nationalistic for starters.
>>1338908
Why surprised?
Studying an area reveals that many civilizations, cultures, and "nations" moved through it, lived for a while, got toppled, and so on.
The more history you know, the more you know that "nations" are temporary and having loyalty towards one makes you a fool.
The greek philosophers were citizens of the world, humans from humanity, not of the greeks.
>>1338918
Please don't ruin the thread with your butthurt.
If this discussion triggers you, retreat to your safe space.
>>1338922
One reason to study history is to learn from it, and to potentially not make the same mistakes. Yes, many civilizations have come and gone, especially Western ones... but the Chinese and Jewish civilizations, for example, have been going strong for thousands of years and with no end in sight.
The Greek philosophers may have been world travelers and "timeless", but they were still Greek. And could they have had a second chance to prevent their homeland and culture from being conquered first by the Romans, and later by the Turks, don't you think they would have done so?
>>1338900
Yeah, like the other poster said, it made nationalism seem really dumb and stupid. Imaginary lines on a map are all that nations are. It made racism seem even worse, every single human is mixed, there are nothing but extremely broad racial categories which mean very little.
It also has made me very sceptical of politics, it's easy to see that it's just an endless cycle of repetition. I feel like if more politicians had backgrounds in history rather than law or business we'd have a better world.
A country i was living in recently had a sham election where the new supposedly democratically elected president responded to a terrorist "Threat" by declaring a state of emergency giving him absolute power. I was one of the few people there to see and clearly understand what was happening, even the large amount of people against the man didn't understand.
>>1338937
>Yes, many civilizations have come and gone, especially Western ones... but the Chinese and Jewish civilizations, for example, have been going strong for thousands of years and with no end in sight.
What bullshit is this? The Chinese ones have fragmented and rejoined as much as Europeans. Europe as a collective civilisation has never truly collapsed. This idea that China is one continuous civilisation is bullshit only believed because of a western slant on history, with more focus on European history we see the more intricate specific details of various cultures and nations, while China, looking more foreign, appears on the surface to just be one homogeneous culture. In reality they have split and unified many times, and they share a cultural history, as do Europeans. There's a reason Americans, much to the annoyance of Europeans, clump every nation in Europe just as "Europe", clumping Brits and French together, or Germans and Italians, because from the outside, it can look like a singular culture. You could say the Chinese had the Han empire which was basically China. Yes but Europe had the Roman empire which was basically Europe, we had Charlemagne's empire, the father of Europe, we even recently had Napoleon almost unite Europe again.
>>1338937
>Yes, many civilizations have come and gone, especially Western ones... but the Chinese and Jewish civilizations, for example, have been going strong for thousands of years and with no end in sight.
There was no "chinese" civilization or nation until recently. They have historically been warring kingdoms. China isn't even united right now, it has claims to all of its neighbors.
I wont even entertain the notion of a jewish civilization or nation, since most of them don't even live in their nation state, and they haven't even had one for most of history.
>>1338938
>It made racism seem even worse, every single human is mixed, there are nothing but extremely broad racial categories which mean very little.
I thought genetics already did that.
Seriously, ever since genetics the racial model is outdated. Only uneducated people refer to it.
Studying the history of Islam has made me very, very wary of Islam and its followers
This was not like Christianity, which when involved in destruction historically was often just used as a method. Islam appears to be 100% the destruction of everything that is not Islam.
>>1338981
Christianity killed plenty in Europe, and has since been castrated.
Muslims were stuck in the Ottoman empire and skilled the enlightenment process of separating state and science from faith, and still haven't properly reformed.
Islam too needs to be castrated if we are to keep it around. Right now its a rabid dog. So what needs to be done is elect a caliph who is a western puppet, force him on everyone, unite the arabs under him, and use him to declare how this or that reading of the holy scripture is outdated, how we now know more and have better insight as to what the prophet meant by these words, and so on.
Basically give it the same treatment given to christianity, and relegate it into the same traditional culture and philanthropy niche, and keep it away from science and politics. Either that, or kill it, though I figure the former would be easier than the latter.
>>1338918
>>1338922
>Be Filipino
Nationalist History:
>AYYYYY LMAO WE WUZ CIVILIZED N SHIET HAD, IT WAS THE SPANISH WHO MADE US SHIT WITH THEIR MEDIEVAL EUROPEAN WAYS HENCE WE FAILED TO CATCH UP WITH DA WORLD, PHILIPPINES PRIDE WORLD WIDE
When I was older and studied history, this, I found out, was what actually happened.
>Our ancestors weren't stone age nignogs alright but we didn't have cities n shiet, the most sophisticated being large agrarian confederations consisting of allied clan villages.
>Spics arrive due to their exploration hijinks.
>Spain actually failed to colonize the place via stick approach but initially settled for setting up fortified trade posts, offered conversion for protection schemes, and allied with local rulers. Basically played into tribal clan politics like everyone else in 1500's Philippines.
>Accidentally acquired a lot of Flips due to the fact that the Pagans are in the losing end versus the Muslim Flip Kingdoms and converted to save their asses. Spics inadvertedly unite shitloads of Flips.
>By 1570 uses these to whack Muslim Flips and establish formal rule.
>Compared to Latin America, Spanish rule was actually pretty egalitarian (Casta system was almost unimplemented here) and indirect due to the distance. Local Nobles who converted were made into lesser Spic nobles even.
Fast forward to 19th Century.
>In 1811, Filipinos ask to become formal subjects of the Kingdom of Spain, with full rights under Spic law and representation in court.
>Spics said no, you can't
>Ask why.
>Conservative Spanish Leaders: Cuz you're not white :^)
>Liberal Spanish Leaders: YOU IDIOTS THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LOYAL TO US UNLIKE LATIN AMERICA.
>Conservatives: They are still not white :^)
>Liberal Conservative Tug of War in Spanish Court leads to Conservatives winning.
>Flips lose hope and rebel, the nationalism memes start here.
tl;dr our nationalist version of history is bullshit. Turns out, so is generally the agenda of many nationalist narratives.
>>1338970
Well i know a lot about genetics too but history really knocks down racism as well. An early example for me, as a Brit, was in high school, one kid was claiming he was 100% English, that all his ancestors were the original English and had never mixed, not even with the Celts, Germans, Saxons, Vikings or Normans. I called him out, there's no such thing as such genetic purity, but he wouldn't have it. He wanted to believe he was a pure original Briton with total disregard for reality.
>>1338981
>Studying the history of Islam has made me very, very wary of Islam and its followers
That's just dumb. Christianity has done more killing and conquest as a whole but you'll gloss over that as just the "Method" when its clearly the same for Islam, do you really think the Turks gave a shit about spreading Islam rather than just wanting power in Europe?
History should teach you that its stupid to judge people today by the deeds of their ancestors but you seem to have managed the opposite.
>>1338966
>There was no "chinese" civilization or nation until recently. They have historically been warring kingdoms. China isn't even united right now, it has claims to all of its neighbors.
Just like how there's no such thing as France until the French revolution?
>>1339078
>Just like how there's no such thing as France until the French revolution?
Yes, very similarly to that.
Protip: the french language was spoken only in the area surrounding Paris, most ""french"" couldn't speak french.
Most italians still don't speak italian in their day to day life.
>>1339015
You filipinos are literally the mexicans of Asia. Can you make asian tacos?
>>1339134
Most of Flip Cuisine is 10% Local, 10% Spanish, 10% Arabic/Indian, and 70% Chinese.
So no Tacos.
>majoring in history because lazy fuck
>the fact history repeats itself finally sinks in
>depressed
>gain weight, drink even more
>futility of life won't go away
I still graduated, but will probably never shake the deep cynicism that comes with a Jesuit-delivered education in history.
![Evstafiev-Radovan_Karadzic_3MAR94[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/JHw07M2.jpg "Evstafiev-Radovan_Karadzic_3MAR94[1].jpg")
>>1339153
>Jesuit
>>1339169
You want to slam Jesuit schools?
>>1338981
I don't know what you're reading, but that's pretty contrary to what I've read. Islam is an amalgamation of so many different cultures and tradition that both predate Islam and were added as Islam encountered other cultures. The influence of Judaism, The Greeks, and Zoroastrianism is heavily present within the traditions of Islam.
Islam wasn't as destructive as people would have you believe, but it wasn't as tolerant as all that either. If you bring your modern biases and ideologies into history you're not going to get anything from reading about it.
>>1339027
bullshit. its clear muslims did more conquesting based on the sheer size of their territories that spanned from spain to the "stan" countries in the east. christian territories were never that big until the discovery of the new world and colonies. but by that time europeans were more motivated by trade and more pragmatic motives, they were acting solely because of their religion
>>1339228
*weren't acting
I used to think this world that I live in today was the absolute worst. I thought that America was a big brother state and that freedom was an illusion. I thought that racism was a white people problem and that it was still rampant today.
Now I just realized this worlds always kinda been messed up, 2016 USA is probably the comfiest time to have ever lived, and that racism is not exclusive to White folk.
Oh and that all history does at the end of the day is repeat itself.
>>1338981
islam =/= the modern salafi movement
>>1338944
>Americans
It was good up until there.
Youre arguing against sweeping generalizations and then you make one.
>>1338900
>Has studying history changed your outlook on life
A little. Everything repeats itself and overall stays the same. There are certain rules and ways to do things, interest groups and they sometimes end in a gridlock. That's when exterior threats (and solutions) are actually meaningful, or revolutions, conquests etc. happen.
>your political views? In what way?
Yeah, in a roller coaster way.
First, the typical teenage "I can do better if I was in charge here" meming. All autocratic to the max, wtf is a succession.
Then, more and more freedom loving, libertarian and roadless, because people can surely be trusted to not fuck themselves over and think for themselves, right? They know history like me, right?
Wrong. Now I am at that point where, knowing history and getting to know "people" better by the day, and like le church ill man said
>half the voters are even dumber than the average
I became completely cynical.
I hate lefties, because they don't see that and still believe in people that have no qualifications other than breathing for 18 years, at times.
I hate moderates, because they think all this is fine.
And I hate righties, because they never find a consensus and when they do, it's under a dork who abused their non-consensus to begin with.
If anything, it's taught me not to trust history books. Given the opportunity, I prefer reading works contemporary to the period rather than a later perspective. Hindsight is a different way of seeing the past, but it sure as hell isn't 20/20. Of course, primary sources are also biased, assuming they exist at all, so reading other contemporary sources is a must.
We don't know, man. We weren't there.
I'm staying out of the cocksucking eunuch scribes scribblings.
I'm waiting to see what the paternity results actually tell us about history.
History taught me to be wary of history.
>politics
High verbal IQ humans prefer encapsulating things into verbal terms, even when mechanically what they are trying to communicate doesn't make any godamn sense.
That and most humans are absolute trigger-finger happy cocksuckers for simple Platonism which fits with their tribalism.
>>1339292
I'm using a sweeping generalisation as an example.
>>1339228
>christian territories were never that big until the discovery of the new world and colonies.
Yes until they conquered most of the world
The Spanish were definitely doing it in gods name
>>1338922
One of the truest things I ever read on 4chan
>>1339540
What you mean is you agree with the sentiment, so you view it as truth.
>>1338900
It made me nationalistic for starters
>>1339228
>muslims conquered for religion, definitely not for trade
>europeans conquered for trade, definitely not for religion
Ah, classic Western bias. If a muslim does it, it's automatically in the name of islam. What a terrible way of thinking.
For the early Muslims under Mohammed, you can make that argument. However, it becomes increasingly clear throughout history that the caliphates, just like any other polity, sought to expand for economy and power.
Take the Ottoman Empire for example. The Turks claimed to be the leaders of islam. Then what do they do? Siege and capture the Holy Sites, killing the very people they claim to universally lead. They didn't do this for Islam, they did it for themselves.
>>1340799
Not to mention than religion (evangelization) was a very important reason and basically the only justification for the creation of the first two european colonial empires, the portuguese and the spanish. Specially the spanish, since even the economic gains in the Americas were destined to fight for their religion in Europe.
>>1338922
Didn't it also aquatint you with the rich experience and mileu of things that made each culture unique and make you want to preserve that?
Made me switch from social democracy to socialism.
Made the future look boring everything seems so repetitive in history still if i get to life through something that will be in the history books that will be good enough for me i guess
>>1338900
It made me stop giving a shit about politics.
>>1340817
Doesn't necessarily entail nationalism. If I were nationalistic, I would pursue the survival of my own culture over others, given such a choice.
But instead, I appreciate (nearly) all of them for themselves.
>>1338922
This isn't bait, but it deserves to be.
>>1338966
>this whole post
>>1338905
>It made me non-nationalistic for starters.
But it didn't make you read a single fact about what nationalism is. Because, let's see:
>>1338922
>having
>Studying an area reveals that many civilizations, cultures, and "nations" moved through it, lived for a while, got toppled, and so on.
Which the entire point of nationalism, to establish the most stable state.
>having loyalty towards one makes you a fool.
There is nothing in nationalism that warrants loyalty for the state. Patriotism is what you are looking. Why do so many well read people refuse to understand what nationalism actually means.
>>1339088
You're fucking retarded.
The French nation and "French" as an identity developed in the early 1700's.
>>1338966
That is THE most retarded post I have ever had the displeasure of reading. Everyone in this thread has been made slightly dumber thanks to this asinine post. Learn your history, or start a thread you god damn faggot. China has had the longest running civilization in the world. Civilization does not equal a single nation dominating a region's history. It is the continued preserved records of that region, the culture, and the systems implemented. All of these have stayed largely the same, barring Mao the Tard's shitty attempt at a Cult of Personality. Try again elsewhere, fucking shitposter.
>>1338900
Please note that browsing /his/ doesn't count as studying history
>>1338900
I've been reading history ever since i was about 5 so i wouldn't say it changed my outlook but instead was the foundation of my outlook on life and politics. It also made 7 year old me interested in becoming prime minister of my country.
>>1340938
imagine being this bad at reading history
>>1339295
>>First, the typical teenage "I can do better if I was in charge here" meming. All autocratic to the max, wtf is a succession.
>
>Then, more and more freedom loving, libertarian and roadless, because people can surely be trusted to not fuck themselves over and think for themselves, right? They know history like me, right?
>
>Wrong. Now I am at that point where, knowing history and getting to know "people" better by the day, and like le church ill man said
>>half the voters are even dumber than the average
>I became completely cynical.
lel just like me
"wtf i hate foreigners now"
We as individuals tend to overestimate our own knowledge; things are not as simple as many people think they are.
>>1338900
Of course. It has made me a traditionalist authoritarian. Oligarchy and Monarchy have the best track records for human government as far as written history is concerned, and these methods have produced grand and lasting empires while democratic institutions generally don't last long and don't produce large empires. Additionally, quality of life tends to suffer very badly from the instability of democratic institutions. Modern 'liberal representative government' is a flash in the pan that seems to have existed for arguably between 50-200 years from the enlightenment until WW2.
>>1338900
Made me more leftist since keeping with "da gud ole dayz" is a one way ticket to having your enemies outclass and conquer your shit.
>>1339295
Same here for me, really. I've become unrelentingly cynical, and even those things I do believe in I sort of know are irrational and just as impermanent and deeply flawed as every other belief.
I have a deep inclination towards peace and order, so I don't hate moderates as much because while they may be the only type of people 'sheeple' might be unironically applied to, they at least don't latch onto stupid idealism and rock the boat. I like anything that makes the perennially smug liberals upset in any capacity, but the right wing is also filled to the brim with idiots and falls for the same stupid "issues" that liberals do.
I have a better appreciation for the way history is used in an instrumental way to support all sorts of political agendas today.
For example, people are drawing all sorts of analogies to Brexit to show that the British can prosper. Most of such opinions surrounding Brexit now- whether for or against- are just pure speculation and the cherrypicking of facts.
>>1338900
It has shown me that young liberal ideologues who preach change are nothing but cancer and puppets of "intellectuals" who only seek the corruption of institutions and the suffering of common people.
plebs read history and pick a side. patricians read history and pick not to have a side
>>1340817
4chan nationalists shit on literally all other cultures, and want everyone but whites and nips exterminated
>>1342524
except there's plenty of chinese, korean, and african nationalists on /his/.
>>1341656
You are talking about language, people, culture. Not about nations.
You are unintentionally supporting me, while randomly flinging shit in my general direction.
>>1342582
>african nationalists
unless you're talking about rhodesiaboos i have no idea what you're on about
>>1340943
Which is thousands of years since there were people living in France.
Being born in X doesn't tie you to some nation, there were many ""nations"" in that place throughout history. Nationalism is stupid.
>>1340943
>early 1700s
An incredibly influential book by Eugen Weber puts the date more around 1870-1910.
>>1342686
Contemporary french nationalists and neo-nazis put it a few centuries earlier though. Who are you going to believe?
