First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply Should Genghis Khan be considered evil ?
6604 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/22/16
i generally consider those with dreams of global conquest to be bad no matter what time period their from. though sometimes you may get a conquer who treats the conquered well and such but i would usually that's somewhat a rarity especially for that time period.
1164 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/22/16
You're better off not thinking of historical figures from that long ago in terms of morality, because it really colours the perception and makes it hard to objectively judge them. I'd say that even for the time he lived in he was an exceptionally brutal and ruthless conqueror who was able to wage wars on a scale never seen before and would never be seen again for centuries. His reaction to a diplomatic insult by the Kwarahzmid Persian empire was to completely wipe it out. Not just conquer it but completely and utterly destroy them (the Iranian plataeu's population would not recover until at most the 20th century). However, he was also a responsible governor who promoted a meritocratic system that made the early Mongol empire one of the most well-managed polities of the time, and he was a fair ruler to those who chose to submit to him. Those who didn't however got shafted hard, and once prosperous and advanced civilizations were reduced to dust under his watch.

From an objective point of view I'd say he was a ruthless pragmatist whose actions were notable because he was able to carry them out on a scale that contemporaries could only dream of. By our modern standards a warlord going out and conquering Asia because he thought it would make a nice backyard and killing literally everyone who opposes him is pretty evil, but at that time he was a dime-a-dozen. Only difference was he succeeded and actually successfully governed all that conquered territory.

From a moral point of view, yeah he was pretty friggin evil since he had no issue with killing tens of millions of people when they displeased him, and I'm sure the places that actually had to deal with the consequences of the Mongol invasions don't think as highly of him. Good empire builders are rarely ever good people. But when researching historical figures from almost 800 years ago you're better off not trying to bring morality into it and saying he's a bad person for killing millions or a good person for being smart enough to govern all the conquered territory. That's not a valid historical debate.
168 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / In your heart baby.
Offline
Posted 12/22/16
HEY GUYS REMEMBER WHEN THIS WAS AN ANIME SITE? I DON'T.
47137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 12/22/16

TomJJones wrote:

HEY GUYS REMEMBER WHEN THIS WAS AN ANIME SITE? I DON'T.


You can talk about anything here not just anime.
21555 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/22/16

gornotck wrote:

Why does that make him 'bad'?


As you might guess, he didn't do that by peaceful negotiation and smooth diplomacy – Genghis Khan was a conqueror by force. The wars led in his name killed some 40 million people (about 10% of the world's population at the time)!

21555 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/22/16

TomJJones wrote:

HEY GUYS REMEMBER WHEN THIS WAS AN ANIME SITE? I DON'T.


I think your looking for the anime forum http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumcategory-3/anime

Banned
371 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 12/22/16

Dark_Alma wrote:

He is also known for raping and pillaging across the EU if I recall.

He contains both sides of the story, just as every ruler did.

Hitler created animals rights and destroyed the Jews.
The USA commit genocide against the Japanese and also pioneered the biomedical system.

The list goes on and on. No one is perfect, same goes with the Kahn.


America committed genocide against the Japanese? Are you referring to the nukes? You were implying that it was evil when you countered it with the biomedical system statement, and in a sense, yes, but here's something to think about. The Japanese kicked off the war by bombing Pearl Harbor, and were basically the nazis of Asia, killing and raping all over the place, such as the infamous rape of Nanking China. Plus, the Japanese were teamed up with Hitler and Mussolini. They were also shilling to literally fight to the last man, woman and child, even doing kamikaze attacks., which is why we eventually we nuked them. After that, they still didn't surrender, so we nuked them again. Were we really so bad in that context? Certainly not Christ like, but if we were turning the other cheek, the world could currently be like the Man in the High Tower right now, being a MUCH worse world than how it is as we speak. So in that context, I would say we were ultimately the good guys, and did a good deed in my opinion. To compare America in that context, who was trying to free Asia from Japan's iron fist to Genghis Khan, who was possibly the greatest mass murderer and rapist of all time doesn't really make sense. Kahn wasn't defending, but destroying all in his path. Japan in ww2 is more comparable to Khan ironically.

My grandfather fought in Asia in ww2. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have thought of the Japanese as nice guys with the stuff he probably saw that they did to the natives of southeast Asia.
Banned
371 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 12/22/16

johnnymcool wrote:


Dark_Alma wrote:

He is also known for raping and pillaging across the EU if I recall.

He contains both sides of the story, just as every ruler did.

Hitler created animals rights and destroyed the Jews.
The USA commit genocide against the Japanese and also pioneered the biomedical system.

The list goes on and on. No one is perfect, same goes with the Kahn.


America committed genocide against the Japanese? Are you referring to the nukes? You were implying that it was evil when you countered it with the biomedical system statement, and in a sense, yes, but here's something to think about. The Japanese kicked off the war by bombing Pearl Harbor, and were basically the nazis of Asia, killing and raping all over the place, such as the infamous rape of Nanking China. Plus, the Japanese were teamed up with Hitler and Mussolini. They were also shilling to literally fight to the last man, woman and child, even doing kamikaze attacks., which is why we eventually we nuked them. After that, they still didn't surrender, so we nuked them again. Were we really so bad in that context? Certainly not Christ like, but if we were turning the other cheek, the world could currently be like the Man in the High Tower right now, being a MUCH worse world than how it is as we speak. So in that context, I would say we were ultimately the good guys, and did a good deed in my opinion. To compare America in that context, who was trying to free Asia from Japan's iron fist to Genghis Khan, who was possibly the greatest mass murderer and rapist of all time doesn't really make sense. Kahn wasn't defending, but destroying all in his path. Japan in ww2 is more comparable to Khan ironically.

My grandfather fought in Asia in ww2. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have thought of the Japanese as nice guys with the stuff he probably saw that they did to the natives of southeast Asia.


Also, I want to add that good and evil are technically subjective. How is evil defined? How is good defined? How do you define evil, and how do you define good?
22979 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Online
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/25/16

johnnymcool wrote:

Also, I want to add that good and evil are technically subjective. How is evil defined? How is good defined? How do you define evil, and how do you define good?


This sounds like a history class assignment in all honesty, perhaps one to counter or challenge perceived bias in portrayal of leader, or lack thereof. Or perhaps to see how those close to such monumental figures might have felt. Though you are right, it is somewhat arbitrary I imagine.
Banned
371 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/25/16

Dark_Alma wrote:

We nuked Japan as well as commit genocide on the Native Americans.

Around 250,000 died from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That easily fits genocide. Especially because it wasn't soldiers we killed.


And Japan wiped out the Ainu. You forgot to mention that. And native Americans were killing, raping, and enslaving each other, as well as scalping and eating people. Don't forget cutting out hearts and other organs of their enemies while they were still alive, and chucking their enemies into volcanoes as a sacrifice to the gods.

Point is all cultures have committed atrocities, but for some reason, people on crunchy roll only seem to focus on America when it comes to it. Too much leftist brainwashing propaganda I guess, combine that with the general young age of most of the posters on here. Look for my posts on the second page on where I speak more on your genocide claim.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

This sounds like a history class assignment in all honesty, perhaps one to counter or challenge perceived bias in portrayal of leader, or lack thereof. Or perhaps to see how those close to such monumental figures might have felt. Though you are right, it is somewhat arbitrary I imagine.


It is not arbitrary, because it applies to the subject matter of the op. The op spoke of good and evil, and I gave my thoughts on just that. Was America good for the bombing or evil? Was Kahn good for pillaging, or evil? See the parallel? So yes, it's not arbitrary.



johnnymcool wrote:

It is not arbitrary, because it applies to the subject matter of the op. The op spoke of good and evil, and I gave my thoughts on just that. Was America good for the bombing or evil? Was Kahn good for pillaging, or evil? See the parallel? So yes, it's not arbitrary.


Besides, what the fuck does it matter if it's arbitrary or not? Ask me how many fucks I have to give if it's arbitrary or not. The fuck's the point of even mentioning that? Even if it was, it still was talking about things that were mentioned. It's not like I responded to the op's question with "....I like tacos and cats!"

Take your subtle sneaky dig criticism judgmental shit somewhere else!


22979 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Online
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/25/16

johnnymcool wrote:

Besides, what the fuck does it matter if it's arbitrary or not? Ask me how many fucks I have to give if it's arbitrary or not. The fuck's the point of even mentioning that? Even if it was, it still was talking about things that were mentioned. It's not like I responded to the op's question with "....I like tacos and cats!"

Take your subtle sneaky dig criticism judgmental shit somewhere else!


No, I am stating the labels of good and evil may appear slightly arbitrary, hence subjective with some reasoning tying into survival aspects. In any case, I was agreeing with you.
21555 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/22/16 , edited 12/25/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

No, I am stating the labels of good and evil may appear slightly arbitrary, hence subjective with some reasoning tying into survival aspects. In any case, I was agreeing with you.


History is written by the winners right? Over here in the USA Neapolian is not considered evil at all while I am not sure it's written the same over in Europe.
19379 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 12/22/16
Evidently people fail to understand the basics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_definitions

1. 127+ Million Japanese alive in Japan today.
2. 5+ Million of people directly descended from the Pre-Columbian indigenous
population of the land within the modern boundaries.
Estimates of the pre-Columbian population are from one to eighteen million.
(2 to 3 Million likely)
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.