I think we should have left Afghanistan to the Russians and let them bury their heads in the mess for 20 years. I have no illusions that I prefer what Kabul wanted to what a bunch of rural religious extremists wanted.
-
-
Or take the Han Dynasty, an empire that rose (202 BC), declined in the first century BC, effectively collapsed in the first two decades AD, was restored in the 20s AD, reached a new peak (88AD), then held strong for a bit, then declined (late second century AD) and finally...
-
...collapsed again, this time with finality, beginning in 184 and running out to around 220. History is not simple; it does not have simple rules.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
I rather know history is complex, prof. I lived through some interesting times. I think we're also different from those times that began with communication at near light speed (telegraph -- see U. S. Grant for how that worked for him, and you were aware of it in WW I).
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Thinking about this -- I think historians don't have terms that describe several different things and so "colonialism" and "empire" are terms that confuse how several different things work. Something like Asian rice taxes varied from 12-15% to Japan's 45% from what I've read.
-
So being taxed could be anything from not that bad to have to make things in the winter to buy rice back. Tributary states could be fairly hands off and tax non-catastrophic amounts. Or you could have something like the Aztecs who were quite hated.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.