• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

suppressed history.

Dirty Dragon

Well-Known Member
Yes, until you describe the hows, you have these objections:
How did the Sahara desert in Africa made the Tuareg so much different than their corresponding Cowboys in the Mojave desert?
Or how did the wide snow planes around Moscow and Warsaw produce different mentalities than those of the Finish and Swedes?
Or how did the Aokigahara forest produce Japanese who manufactured TV and playstations while the Amazons produced various latino tribes who are still chasing monkeys with curare?

Here is another potential objection:
How did the Lands of the American continent produce today's most powerful empire while the native Americans did not even invent the wheel ?
Why did they not invent the wheel in the first place ?
 

My Moria Moon

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Here is another potential objection:
How did the Lands of the American continent produce today's most powerful empire while the native Americans did not even invent the wheel ?
Why did they not invent the wheel in the first place ?

They did not invent the wheel because the wheel was not needed to chase horses with. So the land invented the horses for the natives to chase other horses with, while the powerful candidates for the coming empire were busy creating the land.

Your turn.
 

Dirty Dragon

Well-Known Member
They did not invent the wheel because the wheel was not needed to chase horses with. So the land invented the horses for the natives to chase other horses with, while the powerful candidates for the coming empire were busy creating the land.

Your turn.

There were no horses in America. Neither sheep nor goats nor cows.
The candidates for coming empire brought the land that made them powerful, with them.
 

My Moria Moon

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
There were no horses in America. Neither sheep nor goats nor cows.
The candidates for coming empire brought the land that made them powerful, with them.

See, now we're talking. I told you they made the land, and not vice versa. :D They had prepared it bel day3a in Yorkshire and Toulouse, and shipped it over in small pieces with them.
 

Dirty Dragon

Well-Known Member
See, now we're talking. I told you they made the land, and not vice versa. :D They had prepared it bel day3a in Yorkshire and Toulouse, and shipped it over in small pieces with them.

Hu2 uh. The land made Yorkshire and Toulouse, which could have ended up on the American continent had God's random number generator rolled different coordinates for the horses cows sheep and goats.
 

Mighty Goat

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
They did not invent the wheel because the wheel was not needed to chase horses with. So the land invented the horses for the natives to chase other horses with, while the powerful candidates for the coming empire were busy creating the land.

Your turn.

A consideration in the distinction between people and tribes must be made. I do not wish to use the term nation, since nation today in too many quarters has come to mean tribes as well, so we will leave this term aside.

A people are not connected by tribal lineage. They are like those people in South Lebanon and Mount Lebanon. They are families of farmers and land owners. They compete within a system characteristic by farming and trade over territories where they have settled. A people unite for common defense of territory. Since territory secures their settlement. Consequently a people unite over security of their territory within a defense alliance. These people may be competitive among each other and warlords and whatever you wish, but they will unite over the defense of the territory that secures their existence. Consequently, they would invent the wheel to reach across space and conquer territories with such innovations.

A tribal system is something like the tribal systems of Arabia. Tribes have no sense of settlement, their attachment is racial defined by blood lineage to the tribe. They move from one place to another so they do not feel the need to secure land and settlements. They gather from nature to survive. Consequently, they do not invest in innovation and technology of war to secure any territory.

So, the native people of Canada having been a decentralized tribal system never experienced settlement until something called the "reserve" was built for them by a people that understand the meaning of territory, security and the associated war technologies and innovations required to ensure trade and agriculture from the exploits of land ownership.
 

kmarthe

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
We are staying on the topic, do you see us going anywhere? :troll:

Not when the discussion shifted to zionists, sheeps, goats and f7ouleh :)

Unfortunately, some mods have to clean up this thread at some point in time. Sorry folks but some people are trying to have a good read of the thread topic!
 

Dirty Dragon

Well-Known Member
Not when the discussion shifted to zionists, sheeps, goats and f7ouleh :)

Unfortunately, some mods have to clean up this thread at some point in time. Sorry folks but some people are trying to have a good read of the thread topic!

We all support your A effort to keep the thread clean and organized. Time to whip out the big eraser

BigMistakes.jpg
 

Dark Angel

Legendary Member
They did not invent the wheel because the wheel was not needed to chase horses with. So the land invented the horses for the natives to chase other horses with, while the powerful candidates for the coming empire were busy creating the land.

Your turn.

there is some truth to what you are suggesting. there is always a reflection of the land in the culture that thrive or dwindle on it.

but here is an intriguing one, egypt produced the greatest civilization of ancient times, the land is still the same. the egyptians are not. so it is a parameter in the equation but it is not all there is. rough lands usually produce sharper civilizations, but the progress of these civilizations becomes dependent on ideology, values and tradition once the inhabitants overcome the harshness of their environment.

people, and consequently civilizations, are always defined by what they hold most sacred or treasure the most, without any exception.

but to link it back to our discussion, arabs for instance have roots in the desert, the sand erases everything, their history becomes more fluid, it shifts with intent.
 

My Moria Moon

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
there is some truth to what you are suggesting. there is always a reflection of the land in the culture that thrive or dwindle on it.

but here is an intriguing one, egypt produced the greatest civilization of ancient times, the land is still the same. the egyptians are not. so it is a parameter in the equation but it is not all there is. rough lands usually produce sharper civilizations, but the progress of these civilizations becomes dependent on ideology, values and tradition once the inhabitants overcome the harshness of their environment.

people, and consequently civilizations, are always defined by what they hold most sacred or treasure the most, without any exception.

but to link it back to our discussion, arabs for instance have roots in the desert, the sand erases everything, their history becomes more fluid, it shifts with intent.

It's like the issue with words. For example, on this forum words are the only identity for folks. Enter an alias and start writing and your words become your face, voice and character, the person -or robot- you become to be for readers. And you make your words.

Similarly, lands, say harsh lands, does make of the people an amplified version of what they already are, but ultimately it is the people and what they already are that decides what land they end up having around. Kind of like this: If you leave all material resources in place and as is and move all the Norwegian population to Lebanon and ship all Lebanese to Norway, you end up having a little paradise of well organized and well functioning Norwegian society on Lebanese lands and a dramatically deteriorating second hand third world Lebanese state in old Norway.
 
Top