After completing the demographics and once they were con-fident with the tutorial version of the game, participants were left alonein a room to play the video game against the computer for 10 min.
It is not clear if the participants knew that they were competing against a computer. I think that this is a highly significant variable.
This studyprovides further evidence that competition in video games plays asignificant role in determining aggression and should be included infuture studies.
Exactly, if we want to do any pearl-clutching about what video games do to kids, we should be worrying about addiction, excessive competition or poor responses to competition, and especially communication with other players in these games. (Although any kind of online communication should be considered a danger to children, we mostly think about predatory behavior and not how the language and verbal abuse used in competitive gaming can affect the development of kids).
It has been reported thatthe tribunal system reduced verbal abuse by 40% while the pre-gamemessages reduced negative attitude by 8.3%, verbal abuse by 6.2%, andoffensive language by 11% (
To be honest the efficacy of the pre-game messages is kind of shocking to me as it seems that everyone collectively scoffs at them. I think you really need to force gamers to behave, hence why reputation systems work much better than just asking players to be nice.
Firstly, the dimension of competition shouldbe considered when rating the level of suitability of a video game forchildren. For example, FIFA(TM), which is seen as a low violence but ahighly competitive game, is rated E by the Entertainment SoftwareRating Board which means it is available for anyone to play. However,given the impact of competition on aggression perhaps this should berated higher, e.g. parental guidance required to alert parents to possi-bility of them helping their child deal with competition in a non-ag-gressive manner
This is a very interesting thing that almost nobody talks about, probably just because of how modern games were (and still kind of are) fundamentally misunderstood by older generations in the era that they became popular. The shock value of new imagery and the moral hysteria of people linking games to mass shootings has detracted from serious discussions of what kids should be allowed to play and how games actually affect all people. They are plenty of technically suitable games for children which have a highly competitive nature and online culture which would suggest otherwise. Rocket League, Clash Royale, Fortnite, etc. ESRB ratings seem very pointless when you consider that games like Apex Legends, Overwatch, and Fortnite, which all have T ratings, are some of the most prominent, highly competitive games of recent years. Regardless of imagery, these games have a highly competitive and constantly toxic culture built around them.
Finally, it is interesting that participants did not rate the competi-tive version of the game as being more competitive even though themore competitive version increased aggressive affect. This may be dueto participants not being consciously aware of the subtle cues (presenceof a scoreboard and time pressure) or the fact that they had no “point ofreference” because they only played one version of the game (Elson &Quandt, 2014). Given the usefulness of knowing the level of perceivedlevel of competition for these games, future studies should considergetting participants to play the other version of the game so they cancompare one version to another in terms of level of competition.
I think that a 1v1 will feel competitive no matter what cues are given in the game. It is still direct competition. Still, I think it is very important not to overlook investigating this and understanding why it is that the "high competition" version created more aggression. Regardless of felt competition, the perceived importance of the competition created different levels of aggresison.
This fits into the frus-tration-aggression model (Berkowitz, 1989) as it theorizes that if a goalis being thwarted, i.e. winning, then frustration and thus aggression ismore likely. This is further supported by the results in this current studythat showed that participants who lost in the low-competitive version ofthe video game (no goal to win, thus no goal could be blocked) did notshow an increase in aggression
This is an okay conclusion, and of course it needs to be general, but I think we could also investigate the importance of the user's expectations. A highly skilled gamer would be frustrated to perform even marginally poorly. I think you would find this effect in any type of game, multiplayer or not, competitive or not.
However,when analysing participants in the competitive group alone, losing didshow a significant main effect, F (1, 30) = 4.87, p = .035, partialη2 = 0.14, with participants who lost having a higher aggressive affect(Won M = 68, SD = 14.33; Lost M = 80.92, SD = 18.82). No sig-nificant main effect was found for participants in the low-competitivecondition (Won M = 62.56, SD = 18.01; Lost M = 66.69, SD = 15.56)
Exactly - reinforcing the importance of competition made losing hit harder, and thus more aggression
The first-person shooter game Unreal Tournament 3: BlackEdition (TM) was used for this study
I'm not super familiar with this game, I think its a quake type arena shooter, so probably a good choice. The skill ceiling in these games is insane, it would be really interesting to conduct some studies with only highly skilled or invested players, like people with 1,000 hours or more of playtime.
Participants were asked to rate on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = not atall, 7 = extremely) how experienced they were at video games overalland first-person shooting games. They also rated how skilled they wereat first-person shooting games (which was used to set the difficulty ofthe video game)
I'm glad that they considered skill, I would hypothesize that it would be very important in shaping how invested a player is and their expectations for play - which would likely create more frustration. It seems like they didn't consider this aspect of it, but I will have to read on.
a study assessing chil-dren aged between 8 and 11 over a 1-year period found that competi-tive video game exposure reduced behaviors associated with conductdisorders (Lobel et al., 2017). The researchers argued that the differ-ence in results was due to competitive play being fundamental tochildren's development. Children will learn to deal with winning andlosing and the negative emotions associated, and competitive play canalso involve cooperation with other team mates (Lobel et al., 2017).This is a very important and interesting differentiation; however, lim-itations in both Adachi and Willoughby (2013, 2016) and Lobel et al.(2017) also explain the inconsistent results.
That's really interesting and super cool.
After factoring outthe violence within the competitive video games it was again found thatcompetitive video game exposure had a bi-directional relationship withaggression for both high school students and university students.
So previous literature has already established this relationship
For example, it could be considered losing if a player fails to complete atask in a puzzle game, despite not actually competing against anotherentity.
I would think that the more invested in gaming or a specific game a person is and the more that they perceive themselves as skilled, the more likely they are to become frustrated when playing. Extrapolating from the uses and gratifications theory, we can infer that a player who expects to perform well will become frustrated if they perform poorly, even if that performance is above average or in a non-competitive setting.
Studieshave consistently found that participants who lost in a video game hadhigher levels of aggression and hostility post gameplay
Obviously. I would infer that frustration is the main source of hostility between gamers. People are competitive and thus when their goal - winning - is blocked they take out their anger. Unluckily for everyone else, being behind a screen makes the other players seem like safe targets so the upset person or persons will freely let loose on others. This is also super unsatisfying for the frustrated person because their targets for venting aren't really tangible, and once they are upset they will probably lose even harder to their enemies.
The impact of entertainment media on aggression has been dis-cussed for centuries. Even in the gladiatorial era of the Roman Empire,Tertullian (200) theorized that Christians might be seduced into sinfulbloodlust if they watched the gladiator games
This is interesting. I think something important that I will bring up is that video games are so incredibly different from other forms of media. They need to be researched much more and can not be treated like other forms of media. There also needs to be understanding of the nuances of how and why people play and experience games. The whole "violence in video games" thing was so focused on imagery in games but most gamers today are focused on gameplay and incredible levels of aggression come from people playing relatively harmless looking games - think league of legends
Initial studies that include competition indicate thatcompetition within video games does impact aggression, and that it is the competitive nature of violent videogames rather than the actual violence that has increased aggression. However, previous competitive video gamestudies have assumed levels of competition within video games or have used different games across conditions,both of which may have confounded results
This is very interesting, and kind of exactly what I had hypothesized.
with participants in the com-petitive condition demonstrating greater aggressive affect.
This is interesting - they may have not reported a difference in competition level, but the competition created more aggression when it was reinforced through the conditions.
Participants reported no significant difference between the compe-titive and low-competitive condition on the four-item competitivenessscale, F (1, 62) = 0.18, p = .68.
I somewhat expected this. Scoreboards and time are not necessary to feel that you are competing. If you are playing a game with an opponent you will know and feel that you are competing. The choice of this study to use only one game was admirable, but you can't really make a 1v1 fps not competitive. I do think, however, that demonstrating how a game with direct competition leads to more aggression than one without is kind of a mute point. Also, an interesting point could be to see how emphasizing the importance of competition leads to aggression, like if the researchers encouraged some participants to win or even scolded them for losing, or if the game itself did this.
A four-item scale (Elson et al., 2015) was used to assess if the vio-lence manipulation was successful. The items are: “You had to usephysical violence in this game”, “The characters in this game werehurt”, “Physical damage was inflicted on the characters in the game”,“You had to kill humans in this game”. Responses ranged on a 7-pointLikert scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely) and then all four itemswere averaged to give an overall violence score. The internal reliabilityof the four-item scale was good (α = 0.86)
Okay so they were aware of this flaw. I've never taken psychology so I wasn't sure how much work they do to measure the accuracy and limitations of their experiments.
This meant that participants had no indicationof whether they were winning or losing. In addition, before playing,participants in the low-competitive condition were informed that therewas no winning or losing. No time pressure was displayed and the videogame did not end after 10 min, rather the researcher came into theroom and informed participants to stop
This is not a bad way to do it, although I would suspect that people with a high competitive drive would still feel the competition
In the low-violent condition, the “Bio Rifle” was described to participants as apaintball gun which would freeze the opponent when hit enough times.In addition, when a player hit their opponent a “ping” noise would bemade rather than pain noises. Also, any text which stated that theplayer had “killed” their opponent was changed to “defeated” theiropponent
ultimately whether you are killing or “defeating” your enemies, there is still a level of inherent violence and aggression. In the non-violent condition, researchers described the weapon used as a paintball gun, but there is certainly something still aggressive and violent about paintball in real life. It doesn’t matter how viscerally violent the actual fighting is, if you are engaging in direct competition where you need to attack your opponent in some way then aggression is inherent. In fact I would think aggression is likely in any kind of competition.
The situation of poor whites was similar to that of slaves in that there was no major, overt opposition to the existing order. However, just as slaves feigned illness, broke tools, or worked at a slow pace, poor whites also resisted affluent whites in similar ways.
This is super interesting. This is what the class is all about - RESISTANCE
“I understand an historical phenomenon, unifying a number of disparate and seemingly unconnected events, both in the raw material of experience and in consciousness.” Viewing class not as a thing, but instead as a relationship, Thompson claimed that in “the years between 1780–1832 most English working people came to feel an identity of interests as between themselves, and as against their rulers and employers.” This feeling, of course, formed the basis of class consciousness, which Thompson defined as “the way in which these experiences are handled in cultural terms: embodied in traditions, value-systems, ideas, and institutional forms.
Very good definitions
To fully establish whether or not poor whites harbored class consciousness, two terms deserve more careful definitions
!!!!! LOOK HERE
it is necessary to note that many of the “aspirational poor whites” of whom he speaks were actually younger sons from families of wealth and property. Just beginning their professional lives, they had yet to accumulate wealth or inheritance
Important distinction
He further held that the “savage ideal” of white supremacy kept poor whites from allying with blacks
This is simply untrue
I contend that scholars can safely assume that by 1860, at least one-third of the Deep South’s white population consisted of the truly, cyclically poor.
More important numbers
In no instance … did the lowest quartile of farming families own more than 1 per cent of the land.” However, the top quartile in every sample region laid claim to between two-thirds and three-quarters of land wealth.
Important numbers
Southern land varied so much in value that it had been known to sell for as little as a quarter an acre on one extreme, and as much as $100 an acre on the other. Most non-slaveholders and small-holders owned the least desirable plots.
This is a very significant detail. It dictates where certain people and groups live, where wealth was accumulated, what ownership of land truly meant etc.
As Charles Bolton and others have found, the vast majority of Southerners from all classes historically had worked as farmers, farm laborers, and tenants
the rebuttal
Owsley concluded that by 1860, 80 to 85 percent of the “agricultural population”
Interesting. I need to be wary of this well being poisoned. Of course I knew that this subject would have ill-intentioned scholarship but I naively assumed that I would not fall victim to it. So it is critical to remember that the yeomen did exist and were a significant class, but that they were certainly not larger than poor whites.
Both abolitionists and free-labor supporters frequently referred to the “poor, deluded, ignorant masses” of southern whites, but southern politicians and intellectuals were loath to respond.
So how did the poor whites themselves respond?
“It is worthy of remark that in their denunciations of the populace, the rabble, those who work with their hands, they refer not to complexion, but to condition; not to slaves, but to the poor and laborious of their own color.
William, the second son of John Jay, was an abolitionist lawyer who appealed to non-slaveholding southern whites in 1849.
Another intriguing figure that I should look in to
Because slavery’s association with agricultural and manual labor “rendered toil ignoble in the estimation of the whites,” poor white laborers adopted “a willful, determined indolence, which actually became the badge and ensign of their independence.
Very interesting. Here we have a callback to the importance of liberty in the southern mind.
whose ranks were rapidly increasing in southern cities due to immigration
Immigration is an interesting facet. These are not all people who are familiar with slavery
t first acquaintance, a Christian is an enigma[puzzle] to them, never being seen to engage in prayer
?? What is he on about
on his goods lestthey be stolen, or ejaculate a curse on his apprentice, or tell a passing customer towait a little while and he will attend to him.
More shade being thrown. Watching his goods is such a ridiculous jab.
All places are regarded as suitable for prayer.
Another jab
The muezzin may be an educated mullah5 or an ignorant man. A wealthyneighbor had the call given from his housetop by an illiterate scavenger or porter,who had simply memorized the Arabic words, and was paid for his trouble withsome loads of wheat.
This might be intended as an insult but I think it is a sign of humility
assisting Armenian Christian refugees fleeing from Turkeyduring what has come to be known as the Armenian genocide.
He was doing a lot of good. This is the true side of Christianity
Wilson became fluent in Armenian and AzeriTurkish, the primary languages spoken in Tabriz and its surroundings. Ascholar and intellectual,
Truly dedicated
Theological Seminary in Allegheny, PA, and completing a graduate course atPrinceton in 1880, Wilson began work in Persia.
A very scholarly religious man
“Is that all?” replied the Persian. “Of course I’ll apologize; I’ll say whateverhe wishes me to say. I lied when I called him a liar. I am a liar, the son of a liar,and the grandson of liars. What more does he want me to say?”
This reading is perhaps one of the most normal ones covering orientalism, but it is still rife with stereotypes. We see the typical fascination with women and splendor. It also reveals the intentions of the westerners as it is essentially a guide for business and exploitation.
I therefore sent the saddle back to him with amessage that I did not need instructions as to what kind of a present I should give,and that he ought to be thankful that I had remembered him at all.
So sassy
despotic government.
Always characterizing them as despots
requires a good figure to show it off to advantage. The scant garmentsworn indoors admit of considerable scope in the exercise of taste for color andembroidery, but otherwise there is no difference in the home-dress worn by thePersian women of Teheran either in the palace or the meanest hovel.
Legitimizing European fantasies
which is the quarter ofthe residence devoted to the women.
This misconception again
country knows little or sees less
Of course, the mysterious oriental women
while by strongly asserting his claim toall the privileges which he has the right to demand, suitable to his rank, he receivesthe respect which is his due, but which no Persian will give except when he seeshim firm on these points
Because a European is assumed to be of high rank, right
will be very careful that his host does not occupy it instead, and quiteas careful not to accept it if inferior in rank, although urged, for to do so under suchcircumstances would be to affront the host, and invite an affront in retur
I feel as though what really contributes to the stereotypes and mysticism is the fact that they write what what are essentially proto-ethnographies with a voice of absolute bewilderment, turning behavior into a complex and absolute thing and not a living, normal thing
let him considerthat it is scarce two centuries since Nadir returned from the sack of Delhi,
This paragraph is highlighting the idea that oriental countries are sort of stuck in the past or in a different time entirely. To the Europeans Persia is still sort of the Persia it has always been, or at least very close.
he ocean is entirely of turquoise, andPersia is represented by a compact mosaic of diamonds.
I wonder how much of this is true. I don't necessarily doubt it, seeing as Persia was a longstanding and powerful empire.
not wholly the fictions of a fancy steeped in opium or b’hang
So he is self aware of the orientalist fixation, but he believes that it is reasonable
he Alhambra
To be fair if you were trying to see extravagance and beauty you would find it here - the Alhambra is quite beautiful
one of the mostimposing halls in the world
Already showing extravagance
served as the first United States ambassador to Persia,establishing the Legation in Teheran in 1883 and heading it until 1885
He should be very knowledgeable and have a realistic depiction of Persia.
“Here,” said the Nagib, addressing the katib, “take thy wife and lead her away,for she is thine truly.Then, turning to his guards and pointing to the fellah, he said, “Give this manfifty blows of a courbash [hippopotamus hide whip] on the soles of his feet.”The katib walked off with his wife, and the guards gave the fellah fifty blowsof a courbash on the soles of his feet.Next came the fruiterer and the butter merchant in their turn.“Here,” said the Nagib to the fruiterer, “here is thy money; verily didst thoutake it from thine own purse, and never did it belong to him by whom thou artaccused.”Then, turning to his guards and pointing to the butter merchant, he said, “Givethis man fifty blows of a courbash on the soles of his feet.”
More repetition
extract of cantharides,9 in powder, to the amount of eight or ten grains, warninghim against taking it except in very small doses
What an odd tale. The European, with his knowledge of sciences and potions, provides the powerful Eastern man with an aphrodisiac.
He asked for what these Orientals are ever seeking,
He is perpetuating the idea that eastern people are obsessed with sex.
I know that Europeans are singularly versed in such knowledge,” rejoined he
Interesting thing to put in
Until then I had always looked upon the tales related to us in the ArabianNights as mere fictions; but on witnessing the delivery of these two judgments, Ifelt convinced that some of them at least were founded on facts. Of course they areworked up into romances, but they have a basis of reality
This is very goofy. I have a hard time believing any of this is true, although perhaps he did witness some court cases and felt inspired to craft a tale. Its interesting that he mentions Arabian Nights because this reads so much like an old tale typical of such works.
And now, byMohammed, our great Prophet, I swear that this man lies in saying that I havestolen his money, for that money is truly mine.”
The mirrored words here make it almost certain this is a fabrication. This reminds me of passages from the bible where phrases are repeatedly identically.
theNagib ordered a chibouque [long Turkish tobacco pipe] to be brought, which helighted and presented to me with his own hands
Apparently Couret is so cool and the Naqib respects him
The truth of these assertions is highlydebatable.
This a funny conundrum in the subject of Europeans discussing other societies. A lot of people wrote about places they had never been to and the people who actually went to these places were inclined to embellish or even tell outright tall tales.
blows might be given to the attendant as his share,according to agreeme
Old stories like this are amusing to me. This is how people used to chop it up and have a laugh
O Prince of the Faithful! the third is enough for me, givehim the two thirds!” This restored the caliph’s good temper, and, laughing heartily,he rewarded them both.4 bastinado: a form of torture that involves caning (beating with a cane) the bare soles of aperson’s feet.
This is a pretty goofy story which seems rather harmless to me. Sure there are stereotypes, but I feel like this is an almost timeless type of story where locale is irrelevant. If you told me this same story but set it in England or France or anywhere in Europe in the 8th century I would not notice and I doubt anyone would. All that would need to be changed is the people's names and the name of the Tigris.
“If you do not make melaugh, I will beat you three times with this leathern bag,”
Here we have a hint of the stereotype of despotism.
Haroun al Rashed2
I've noticed how much these tales focus on powerful figures in the East. Just an observation.
interpreter-in-chief to the British forces
This dude was very accomplished, having a genuinely useful ability and serving in several high positions.
Sinai Peninsula andNegeb deser
Foreshadowing
these officials portrayed resistance to colonialrule as proof of the irrationality and barbarism of peoples who were incapable ofunderstanding what was in their own best interest.
This is the same idea in Kipling's "White Man's Burden". What an unbelievable, goofy rationalization.
Rulers were represented aseffeminate, sensual and cruel; subjects were depicted as oppressed and docile.They also characterized the societies of the “East” as existing in a timeless, staticcondition—i.e., outside of history and modernity. Nineteenth-century Westernerstended to cast their mission, therefore, as a positive one in which they werecivilizing, modernizing,
A classic excuse
given expression in literature, art, travel writings,politics, and supposedly scholarly treatises
This period of conquest is of note because the countries of interest had a particular effect on the Europeans. There was a certain fixation and fetishization of the East by European artists and writers that was spread throughout society. The imagery and cultural artifacts of the East were exported throughout Europe and had a drastic effect on art and culture - buildings, paintings, sculpture, clothing etc. The Orientalist movement speaks for itself but another good example is the Empire Style.
During the European Renaissance of the 14th through the 17th centuries,western, European soldiers, traders, and missionaries began to venture into Asia
What were relations like before this? The history of this has always interested me. Like did Europeans just not care what was going on?
o
Its pretty sad how bad both our actual relations with middle eastern countries have been and our view of middle eastern people have been. Our government has been focused on meddling and destroying, and our news/figures our focused on spreading pro-war, pro-Israel propaganda.
old t
It is pretty wild how our media has been used to brainwash people into believing certain things. Like it shouldn't be surprising but it is still shocking. I think also because I'm relatively young and haven't seen a lot of pointless, low acclaim action movies I didn't realize how bad it was.
rzimmerman@saddleback.edu
Pretty engaging reading. It is good to be reminded of how biased our culture is. We've really been sold on hating a lot of other cultures and states, and perpetuating conflict for no reason. Like why do people hate China? Why do people hate Muslims? There is no organic reason for the US to be at odds with the Islamic world. We meddled in their affairs. In any case, we messed around in the Middle East for decades, preventing proper development, installing dictators, and fumbling our own neo-colonial projects so badly that we made things horribly worse for everyone, including ourselves.
Protection shall be given to life and property; and every man shall enjoy,henceforth, his just rights, without fear of molestation.
Interesting reading. Its sort of what you would expect from such a statement. The British frame it as their obligation to take over because of the Treaty. I wonder what conditions in Awadh were actually like, if it actually was dangerous and incompetent. Regardless, it is 3 pages of niceties and formal language predicating the truth of the matter, that being total British dominion which the locals must submit.
If any officer of the Durbar — Jageerdar,9 Zemindar,10 or other person — shallrefuse to render such obedience, if he shall withhold the payment of revenue, orshall otherwise dispute or defy the authority of the British Government, he shallbe declared a rebel, his person shall be seized, and his jageers or lands shall beconfiscated to the State.To those who shall, immediately and quietly, submit themselves to theauthority of the British Government [i.e., the BEIC], whether Amils or publicofficers, Jageerdars, Zemindars, or other inhabitants of Oude, full assurance ishereby given of protection, consideration, and favour
This is really the important part of the text, where they say what they've really been wanting to say. "Submit or die"
or it must put forth its own greatpower on behalf of a people for whose happiness it, more than fifty years ago,engaged to interpose, and must at once assume to itself the exclusive andpermanent administration of the territories of Oude.
So generous of the British
But his Majesty the King refused to enter into the amicable agreement whichwas offered for his acceptance.
How wicked of him, to resist being a puppet
which its position under the treaty servesindirectly to sustain, or continue to the sovereign that protection which aloneupholds the power whereby such evils are inflicted
This excuse is so silly. "We have to take over because we signed a treaty saying that we would make things good here"
The powers of government throughout his dominions are for the most partabandoned to worthless favourites of the court, or to violent and corrupt men, unfitfor their duties and unworthy of trust.The collectors of the revenue hold sway over their districts with uncontrolledauthority, extorting the utmost payment from the people, without reference to pastor present engagements.The king’s troops, with rare exceptions undisciplined and disorganized, anddefrauded of their pay by those to whom it is entrusted, are permitted to plunderthe villages for their own support, so that they have become a lasting scourge tothe country they are employed to protect.
These are the apparent corruptions and evils of the government. I wonder how many of these are true. I wonder if any deteriorating of government may be caused by the British neutering them.
Bentinck refused orders from theHome Office of the British government in 1831 and again in 1833 to annex Oude.
Bentinck was all talk
the people of Oude are still the victims of incompetency,corruption, and tyranny
Again, their conditions are apparently horrible. Also, who is really the Tyrant here?
ameliorate the condition of the peopleof Oude had been thwarted or evaded
What is this horrible condition that they keep referencing? What was actually wrong here?
power and authority of a royalrace who, whatever their faults towards their own subjects, have ever been faithfuland true to their friendship with the English nation.
What an odd statement. They're basically lil broing them. The rulers were certainly not blindly loyal as we read in the head note. This statement seems intended to give the pretense that the British respect the people.
The obligations which the treatyimposed upon the Honourable East India Company have been observed by it formore than half a century, faithfully, constantly, and completely
The obligations being to pilfer their treasuries and rule their sovereign territory
the purported despotism, corruption and misrule
The classic excuse
MirJafar, as Nawab of Bengal
The dude who sold out and became Clive's ally
the wholesome white faces of Havelock’s good fusileers,
This one speaks for itself
Havelock’s glorious Highlanders answer with conquering cheers
Conquering is a positive here.
Cholera, scurvy, and fever, the wound that would not be healed,Lopping away of the limb by the pitiful—pitiless knife,— 85Torture and trouble in vain,—for it never could save us a life.Valour of delicate women who tended the hospital bed,Horror of women in travail19 among the dying and dead,Grief for our perishing children, and never a moment for grief
Where is this level of sympathy for the people that are colonized? We just read about how the English shot a street full of Chinese civilians with grape shot.
Had they been bold enough then, who can tell but the traitors had won?
Traitors, not even rebels
Strong with the strength of the race to command, to obey, to endure
Oh naw. White people are better soldiers apparently
the dark pioneer
???
And ever upon the topmost roof our banner of England blew.
Such classic imagery. Seems like this was the go to for battle poems.
that we held with our lives
Who's we? Bro thinks he's on the team
ritten more than twenty years afterthe events it depicts by a writer who had never been to India, Tennyson’s
Good context. This is reminds me of the poem by Drayton.
French Rococo aesthetic.
Rococo was essentially their version of brainrot. Terrible movement
it had a profound effect on French architecture and decorative arts of the period, as evidenced in the dominance of Egyptian motifs in the Empire style.
This is the beginning of the era of appropriation from Africa and the East. We get a lot of cool art out of this.
This approach appealed particularly to British artists, as the explicitness of detail encouraged in the Orientalist style upheld the Protestant necessity for iconographic clarity and fidelity to nature in religious art.
Very interesting angle. We see this with depictions of mosques as well, being a fantasy of religious piety.
Some of the most popular Orientalist genre scenes—and the ones most influential in shaping Western aesthetics—depict harems.
Very telling of how they viewed this subject. Its entirely a fantasy which has been objectified.
their principles corrupted at their very setting out, and as they generally go a goodmany together, they inflame one another’s expectations to such a degree, in thecourse of the voyage, that they fix upon a period for their return before their arriva
A good point. There is a culture of greed, but that does not exonerate him. He, as the most powerful there, is chiefly responsible.
he must be seduced at last, or fly. Now theBanyan is the fair lady to the Company’s servant. He lays his bags of silver beforehim today; Gold tomorrow; Jewels the next day, and, if these fail, he then temptshim in the way of his profession, which is Trade.
What a funny analogy
hese policies included its insistence thatIndians plant commercial crops such as indigo, jute, and opium poppies inplace of rice and other food crops; its monopoly on trade; its seizure of landfrom hereditary landowners; and its extraction from the Indians of high taxes
Its quite telling that despite this appearance to care about what the BEIC was doing, the British government was happy to reap the fruits of their labor and take over India in 1857
the Commander-in-Chief of BritishIndia from 1756-1760, and Governor and Commander-in-Chief from 1764-1767
That's a very high and powerful position
Behold that vile English nation!
Strong start
Let us all rise, arm, unite, andgo against them. We do here bind ourselves to vengeance, and express these oursincere intentions in order to exhibit our high principles and patriotism. The godsfrom on high now look down on us; let us not lose our just and firm resolution.China from 1796-1820.4 Chusan (today Zhoushan) was a port city in eastern China. In 1793, Macartney’sdelegation asked for and was denied permission to trade there. The British also asked to begiven a small island near Chusan to establish warehouses and residences. This request alsowas denied.
Here we see the sentiment which led to the second war. Its honestly not at all surprising that they would fight again considering what the British were doing.
They aredogs, whose desires can never be satisfied
I like this paper. Its like the other side to Lin Zixu's formally addressed piece. Its always fun to see people outright talking crazy in old language.
delegation asked for and was denied permission to trade there. The British also asked to begiven a small island near Chusan to establish warehouses and residences.
Just big and greedy. Fr though the British had such a crazy entitled mindset. Is this what colonialism does to a nation?
steadily devoured all the western barbarians
I'm not exactly sure what this is referring to. Possibly the many wars between the British and other powers
China was forced to pay Britain a $21million indemnity, representing the value of the destroyed opium andBritain’s costs of winning the war. The island of Hong Kong was ceded to theBritish, and a total of five port cities were forced to open their doors to Britishtrade. Canton, which had long been the sole center of China’s import-exporttrade with Europe, was now designated one of these “treaty ports.”
Such crazy punishments for a war that was fought over literally dumping heroin. I get why the Chinese regard this as the beginning of the century of humiliation.
Be sure not to put this off. Theabove is what has to be communicated
This is a very straightforward but very accurate and effective letter. He makes all the best arguments, pointing out that the English are either openly selling drugs out of their enormous greed, or are either too unwilling or inefficient to control what their own traders are doing. Its funny how clearly it is just a kindly worded diss. He's pretty much saying that the English can either stop being evil or otherwise China will not give them awesome stuff.
certainly you will not letyour subjects dare again to violate the law
Basically telling them to get a grip and manage their own people
Naturally you wouldnot wish to give unto others what you yourself do not want
Hit em with the golden rule
This is the source fromwhich your country has become known for its wealth
Wow, basically saying the Chinese gave the British their bag. Its so funny how in documents like these people are just throwing shade and talking smack.
have always been noted for their politeness andsubmissivenes
Cap.
his is because he takes the mind of heaven andearth as his mind.
The mandate of heaven
Lin Zixü
I suppose this is the Lin that La Motte mentioned as having something of a Boston Tea Party.
enowned for his competencein administering fiscal matters and public works, and his skill at governance.
Likely also a philosopher / political philosopher. China had a very unique focus on the learning and philosophy of governance. I should consult my reading from PS10, but as I recall there was a rich history of political philosophy and development. Confucius himself was a statesman. Even the Dao which advocates for a solitary life gives governing advice. That is all to say that the Chinese had a rich history of political philosophy as well as great respect for good statesmen. There was a very different, service oriented, attitude which contrasts with the European binary of government by tyrant or republic.
That is to say, that there is in him, like the rest of us, both good and bad, andthat the innate good is capable of being developed by culture.7 Henry Wadsworth Longfellow from “The Song of Hiawatha,” an 1855 epic poem basedon Native American oral traditions. The poem is set in Michigan and concerns the fictionalNative American character Hiawatha, an Ojibwe warrior, and his tragic love forMinnehaha, a Dakota woman.
Wow, what an absolute genius. Its so funny to me how dudes like this thought that they were hitting a mic-drop moment. This reading is sort of what I expected from a planner of colonial policy. You can really see the blueprints of colonialism here, both in terms of literal strategy as well as ideology.
He is neither theintelligent ideal crying out for instruction, and capable of appreciating the subtlebeauties of Christian forbearance and self-sacrifice, which some well-meaningmissionary literature would lead us to suppose; nor yet, on the other hand, is heuniversally a rampant cannibal, predestined by Providence to the yoke of the slave,and fitted for nothing better,
The unwillingness to accept Africans as being capable of becoming equals, or at the very least close, is so telling of the European need to feel superior. Honestly it seems like their egos just would not let them accept the fact that if you took one of these people and raised them in a European context they would be mentally indistinguishable. Thus even though he says they're better than savages and slaves, he relegates them to some middle position because they can never be like the Europeans.
“turn the other cheek also to the smiter,” and to be “theservant of all men,” is to wholly misunderstand and misapply the teaching ofChrist.
Bro is just evil. He's just like, nah Jesus wasn't talking about Black people when he said this.
repel an insolentfamiliarity, which is a thing entirely apart from friendship born of respect andaffection.
That's pretty messed up. Its so odd to see the way that they explain away their ability to be friends with Africans. "Its not friendship its an insolent familiarity" like cope harder buddy.
for no one is more quick to recognise a real gentlemanthan the African savage
?
In my view, moreover, instruction (religious or secular) is largely wasted uponadults, who are wedded to custom and prejudice. It is the rising generation whoshould be educated to a higher plane, by the establishment of schools for children
As wicked as he might be this dude was clever and quite crafty.
greatercomforts in his social life.
You can totally get the image of this guy. Some stuffy British dude whose first example of of civility is eating with a fork and knife
him to purchase from the trader thecloth [to wear as clothing] which shall add to his decency
hahaha
But even the less advanced andmore primitive tribes may be equally benefited,
Hints of biological determinism
Aleading architect of colonial administrative policy, Lugard developed thesystem of Indirect Rule, whereby British colonial officials ruled through (andso hid behind) indigenous political leaders who were responsible for collectingtaxes from their people, supplying laborers when instructed, and maintaininglaw and order in their territories.
So basically the architect of wickedness and weakness.
As a result of this battle Menelik gained enormous local and international prestige. OnOctober 26, the Italians agreed to the Peace Treaty of Addis Ababa, whereby they acceptedthe annulment of the Treaty of Ucciali and recognized the absolute and completeindependence of Ethiopia. Menelik, on the other hand, did not consider himself in positionto insist on an Italian withdrawal from Eritrea though he had often expressed a desire ofobtaining access to the sea. In the months which followed, the French and Britishgovernments sent diplomatic missions to sign treaties of friendship with Menelik; othermissions came from the Sudanese Mahdists, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire; and theTsar of Russia. Addis Ababa thus emerged as a regular diplomatic center where severalimportant foreign powers had legations [ministers and their staff].
Menelik finally got the aura he deserved. Seriously though it is a pretty straightforward story which really only tells us about the great leadership of Menelik. I wonder if no other African state was in a position as advantageous and Ethiopia at this point. What really made them succeed was Menelik's decision to acquire as many rifles as he could - did no one else have this idea? What I imagine is more likely is that most African states were highly fractionalized and those in no position to engage in such strategic moves.
r nearly 43 percent of the original fightingforce of 10,596 Italian and about 7,100 [African] troops. The Italians also abandoned alltheir cannon, as well as about 11,000 out of the 14,519 rifles with which they started thebattle
Extreme L
The Ethiopian army moreover was much larger than that of the Italians. Not countingsoldiers with spears, he had well over 100,000 men with modern rifles. The Italians fortheir part had somewhat more cannon—56 as against Menelik’s 40—but only about17,000 men, of whom 10,596 were Italian and the rest Eritrean levies [draftees orconscripts
Damn they were severely outnumbered. Is this just European hubris? How could they have expected to possibly defeat him with such a weak army?
After a delay of over two years, which he turned to good advantage by importing verylarge quantities of fire-arms especially from France and Russia, Menelik at lengthdenounced the Treaty of Ucciali on February 12, 1893; a week or so later, on February 27,he informed the European Powers of his decision, declaring: “Ethiopia has need of no one;she stretches out-her hands unto God.
Menelik was pretty goated. Pretty fire way to declare war
I said that because of our friendship, our affairs in Europe might be carriedon with the aid of the sovereign of Italy, but I have not made any treaty which obliges meto do so. I am not the man to employ the aid of another to carry on my affairs your Majestyunderstands very well.
He flamed him basically
The Italian text, however, made it obligatory for theEmperor to conduct all his transactions with the other powers through the Italiangovernment. Though the Italian formula was soon used by the Italian government to claimthat it had established a protectorate over Ethiopia, the time was not yet ripe for an openconflict.
Very interesting. I wonder if this apparent miscommunication was intentional.
To avoid disputes among themselves the European Powers had devised the GeneralAct of Berlin which was signed on February 26 that yea
This is so goofy. The Europeans finally sort of realized they should stop fighting constantly but then then in like 20 years they immediately start fighting one of the most horrific wars ever.
Further sales and gifts followed with the result that Menelik soonhad by far the best equipped army of any independent African state
This is important context. Menelik understood that he needed to match the power of other states.
Menelik to bring this work to fruition, as well as to withstand the pressureof the European powers in the scramble for Africa, and to lay the foundations of a modernstate.
That is a tough list of tasks.
The powers of the monarchs had been usurpedby the feudal lords and centralized government had been replaced by the autonomy of thevarious provinces whose rulers warred among themselves
A warring states period you might say.
looted in 1868 from Ethiopia by British troops and housed today in the BritishMuseum and the British Library.
Classic
What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a fewthousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, andprosperous farms embellished with all the improvements which art can devise orindustry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled withall the blessings of liberty, civilization and religion?
Honestly this is a very interesting argument. We can all sit here hundreds of years later and say that this was all wrong but then the world we know would not exist. This brings up so many unanswerable questions about morality, history, and philosophy. What is even the point of discussing such things? The only reason I see for judging the morality of historical actions is so that we can make better decisions in the present. So yes, the vast majority of Americans benefit from this genocide, but that does not make criticism of it irrelevant. What it does mean is that we should take no satisfaction or moral victory from criticizing history. As for Jackson's point in his own time, it isn't really asking this question. The point is actually to argue that this genocide has been and will continue to be worth it. Jackson is saying that if he was sent back 150 years he would do the same thing as the forefathers. It is worth noting that this argument reframes the conflict, shifting attention from the possibility of better treatment in the future to justifying past sins. It thus implicitly argues that destroying the natives is fine.
How many thousands of ourown people would gladly embrace the opportunity of removing to the West onsuch conditions! If the offers made to the Indians were extended to them, theywould be hailed with gratitude and joy.
Jackson is actually kind of a beast of rhetoric. There are very obvious flaws in his arguments but it is apparent that they would work and are really meant more to energize people who agree then to change minds. Kinda reminds me of somebody.
none more zealouslythan those who think the Indians [are] oppressed by subjection to the laws
If you like natives so much why don't you help us kick them off the land. Honestly though this kind of rhetoric would work. Sympathy for oppressed racial groups was very complicated back then and very different from how we see it now. I expect that a lot of people genuinely thought this would be best for the natives, just as they thought that it would be best for black people to be sent back to Africa or to create their own settlements on the frontier (Jefferson).
Our children by thousands yearly leave the land of their birth to seek newhomes in distant regions. Does Humanity weep at these painful separations fromeverything, animate and inanimate, with which the young heart has becomeentwined?
The difference is choice.
to send them to land where their existence may be prolonged and perhaps madeperpetual.
Canada? Heaven?
no one can indulge a more friendlyfeeling than myself,
This is very silly. Actually very Trumpian. "No one likes these guys more than me - nobody"
we have as little right to control them as we have to prescribelaws to foreign nations
What is even the point of pretending? Does it help their cognitive dissonance?
free them from the power of the States, enable them to pursue happiness intheir own way and under their own rude institutions; will retard the progress ofdecay, which is lessening their numbers, and perhaps cause them gradually, underthe protection of the Government and through the influence of good counsels, tocast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christiancommunity
Here we get the supposed positives. It will allow them to pursue happiness in their own way except they don't get to decide where they live or what we do with them. Also as we read in the intro, many of these natives had assimilated. We constantly see excuses like this, but I wonder to what extent those espousing such things actually believed them.
to advance rapidly in population, wealth, andpowe
The assumption that the simple presence of natives is holding these states back is kinda funny.
to the settlement of the whitesit will incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier and render the adjacentStates strong enough to repel future invasions without remote aid
He thinks of this in such a military way. The natives are presupposed to be enemies and thus the goal is never to figure out how to manage them in a political, societal sense but literally how to defend white society from them.
benevolent policy
mhmm
The wealthiest established plantations and even purchasedenslaved African Americans to work them.
Similar to Haiti. To succeed means to own slaves so even the oppressed will do it.
He againsaw action against Native Americans in Georgia and Florida in 1817, duringthe First Seminole War
Jackson is sort of the biggest hater of natives among presidents. I remember learning in high school about what occurred during his presidency. The context of him fighting them repeatedly gives a different coloring to his actions which betrays the fact that it was not entirely based on seizing land.
patriarchal family structures, and African slavery in an attempt topeacefully coexist with the whites
The attempt to replicate the actions of the powerful. Just like Haiti.
Agreeing not to fight each other
Greed is so powerful it made the French, English, and Spanish get along
homesteading,” “settling,” and“westward expansion,” in reality it was one of imperial conquest andconsolidation
This is a very particular kind of conquest, as the goal is to make it land for use by average people. It is also the only contemporary example I can think of where the imperialist and the conquered are in adjacent territories.
Indeed, an anti-imperialist movement within the US was very active inthe late 19th century;
I didn't know this.
On the heels of thisrebellion, the British government decided to take direct control of India in 1858,making Queen Victoria Empress of India. This, however, did not improveconditions for the Indian people.
This is more traditional colonialism
Forty years later, however, power hadshifted to Britain, whose possession of Industrial Revolution technology andweaponry enabled the British to easily defeat the Chinese in the first of two“Opium Wars,” and impose their will on that country, forcing the Chinese tocontinue to allow the importation of opium—grown in Britain’s colony ofIndia—into China.
This is very interesting because it isn't settler colonialism but rather the imposition of a one sided trading relationship through military force.
What divisions in Cherokee society are alluded to in the first petition?
Some Cherokees did in fact sell their land and move, which essentially weakened everyone else.
Our beloved Children and head men of the Cherokee Nation, we address youwarriors in council. We have raised all of you on the land which we now have,which God gave us to inhabit and raise provisions
I like how they establish their ethos here. They sort of speak for all mothers here, calling on the authority of those who raised the warriors that are now in charge. Its clear that there is still a remnant of the former respect for women.
Although it is not commonfor our sex to take part in public measures, we nevertheless feel justified inexpressing our sentiments on any subject where our interest is as much at stake asany other part of the community
They are now at the point where they have to justify their inclusion on the matter.
be brought to a savage state again, for we have,by the endeavor of our Father the President, become too much enlightened to throwaside the privileges of a civilized life
They seem to believe the rhetoric about them. Perhaps they actually were flourishing as farmers idk.
he land was given to us by the Great Spirit above as our commonright, to raise our children upon, & to make support for our rising generations. Wetherefore humbly petition our beloved children, the head men & warriors, to holdout to the last in support of our common rights, as the Cherokee nation have beenthe first settlers of this land; we therefore claim the right of the soi
This is a very cool debate to see. The mass scale, strictly defined individualism and liberalism vs. a smaller, more intimate and natural form of economy and governance based on solidarity and common belief.
Cultivate and raise corn & cotton and your mothers andsisters will make clothing for you which our father the president has recommendedto us all
True. Monroe did push for assimilation. Its very interesting that that call him "our father the president".
for it was the good will of our creator to place us here,and you know our father, the great president,3 will not allow his white children totake our country away
This is very interesting. I wonder why they believed in Monroe like this.
In 1835, a smallunauthorized faction of Cherokee men ignored the above resolutions andsigned the Treaty of New Echota, ceding the Cherokee lands in the southeastfor new territory in what today is the state of Oklahoma.
I never knew that this is what caused this event.
In 1830, the United States Congress passed the Indian Removal Act,
Jackson
men who engaged in commercial farming orpurchased enslaved Africans to do that work for them constituted the kernelof an emerging elite clas
Its so interesting how this happens. I guess ultimately no matter how successful you were as a non-white person, the shape of society was dictated by white people, and this is what success meant.
God-speed on her mission of “testifyin’ agin concerning the wickedness of this’ere people.”
This version is very different. I suppose the changes to the speech are for clarity as it is more or less the same. I wonder if her descriptions of the crowd are accurate though. Did Sojourner Truth really bring the house down?
But to go to nations with whom there is no war, who have no way provoked,without farther design of conquest, purely to catch inoffensive people like wildbeasts for slaves, is an height of outrage against Humanity and Justice, that seemsleft by Heathen nations to be practised by pretended Christians
Paine was kind of a beast. I like how he writes with such passion.
debauched them withliquors,
Its pretty sad how common this was with European colonization. Bringing liquor just degraded many cultures.
willfully sacrificeConscience, and the character of integrity to that golden Ido
money.
and commonly some of usused to get up a tree to look out for any assailant, or kidnapper, that might comeupon us; for they sometimes took those opportunities of our parents’ absence, toattack and carry off as many as they could seize
Growing up having to expect kidnappers constantly is crazy
having slightlyreprimanded me, ordered me to be taken care of, and not to be ill-treated
This punishment is so slight in comparison to those that come later.
even to the wretchedness of slavery.
This was a very powerful and engaging narrative. There isn't really much to say about it - it is simply a recounting of the horrors of the translatlantic slave trade. I think we all know that this stuff was horrible but reading a firsthand account makes it very real.
while it has no advantage to atone for it,
True. It is just cruelty for its own sake.
O, ye nominalChristians! Might not an African ask you: learned you this from your God?
For real. Nominal Christians is such a good way to describe it. There is no genuine belief amongst these people.
This produced copious perspirations, so thatthe air soon became unfit for respiration, from a variety of loathsome smells, andbrought on a sickness amongst the slaves, of which many died, thus fallingvictims to the improvident avarice [extravagant greed], as I may call it, of theirpurchasers
Isn't this so common from the greedy and wicked? Causing extensive harm to others but also to their own enterprise out of sheer greed and ignorance.
he white people looked and acted, as Ithought, in so savage a manner, for I had never seen among any people suchinstances of brutal cruelty; and this not only shown towards us blacks, but also tosome of the whites themselves. One white man in particular I saw, when we werepermitted to be on deck, [was whipped] so unmercifully with a large rope near theforemast, that he died in consequence of it; and they tossed him over the side asthey would have done a brute.
Isn't it ironic? But seriously imagine the absolute cruelty and barbarity of British sailors. The narrative of savagery or even demonic nature could much more easily be applied to white people. What made them not savages was their supposedly superior society and technology, not their behavior.
, lest we should leap into the water: and I haveseen some of these poor African prisoners most severely cut for attempting to doso, and hourly whipped for not eating.
The conditions of the slave ships were so unbelievable. I think that this is likely why banning the trade was often the first step taken in abolishing slavery.
As relations between the Powhatan and the English declined, Wahunsenacastopped allowing Pocahontas to go to the Jamestown fort. He no longer thoughtshe was safe among the English colonists.6 Pocahontas was growing up, she wasabout twelve years old. Soon she would be coming of age.
Very interesting reading. I don't really know the story as it has been told by Smith and Disney so I can't compare it well, but I know the broad strokes. Its crazy to make such a goofy and childlike story out of a real, complex, and gruesome history.
It is not until Smith’s“Generall Historie of Virginia,” published in 1624, that Pocahontas was creditedwith saving his life
So basically he just rewrote the story to make it cooler and make him seem like a badass
No one tried to prevent Smith and his men from leaving in the morning.Instead, the Powhatan carried loads of corn to their ship for them. As before, whenSmith was made a werowance by Wahunsenaca a year prior to this encounter,Smith’s own writings do not correspond to his own fears and claims of being savedby Pocahontas.
Smith was legit just a tweaker and a freak
Why do you take by force [that which] you may quickly have by love?
On god! This is a great quote in general
You callyourself a Christian, yet you leave us with no food for the winter!
Once again we have the hypocrisy of European christianity
When young people of thePowhatan nation reached puberty, they stopped cartwheeling.
This sentence is so funny
the English were lazy
I love that he throws shade on the English the whole time for being lazy, stupid, and deceptive.
Wahunsenaca wasletting the whole English settlement come in to be a part of Powhatan society. Hewas giving them a place to stay east of Werowocomoco on the eastern shore,possibly at the mouth of the Pamunkey (York) River. Wahunsenaca thought thatwith the English ships and ammunition in that area, the Spanish would not comeinto their territory. ... He viewed the English at that time as having come in peace.They were welcome to stay as long as they wished. “Stay here, make your homehere
This really echoes the sentiments Red Jacket references. The natives met the colonists with friendliness and aid.
The Spanish threat influenced Wahunsenaca to both build alliances with theregional tribes, enlarging the Powhatan nation, and to make friends with theEnglish when they arrived in 1607. ... [W]hen the English arrived with weaponryequivalent to the Spanish, which the Powhatan did not have, Wahunsenaca desiredto have them as an allied tribe within the Powhatan nation
The Spanish were literally so evil that he was willing to break bread with stinky Englishmen
When he was in close proximity to the chief of the village, he would puthis pistol to the chief’s head, demanding a ransom of food in exchange for thechief’s release.
What a tweaker. I keep having this same question: was this really the most optimal strategy? Since we know that the Powhatan wanted to include them then certainly not.
make them allies and part of the Powhatan nation.
Different way of seeing things, a different political imagination. The natives had a flexible imagination which could include the colonists. For the colonists, the natives could never be equal members of society with them.
Wahunsenaca was his personal name
Its funny how even something that simple gets misconstrued for 400 years
why do you white people differ so much about it? Whynot all agree, as you can all read the book?
If Christians can't even agree on their interpretation of the bible what makes the indigenous religion so wrong? I like how he equates God with the Great Spirit - he believes that they likely worship the same God but that they do it differently
“obviously ... spectacularbiogeographical phenomenon going on right under their noses,” they “did notunderstand it,” Crosby says, and certainly did not take the trouble to write aboutit
This is very interesting and indicative of the mindset. What does it matter if everything here is destroyed? It ought to look the way we want it.
A moderate Roman Catholic and advocate of religious andcultural toleration,
Interesting. He is a progressive of the time
All this does not sound very ill, and thelast was not at all amiss, for they wear no breeches.8 Charles IX was ten years old in 1560 when he ascended to the throne of France. Heruled from 1560-1574.
This was a very interesting reading. We often criticize the noble savage narrative today, and rightly so, but it is important to put this work and perspective. In comparison to many of the readings we have had so far this is a surprisingly tolerant piece. Furthermore, in comparison to Diderot's "Who are you then to make slaves?" this is much less ideological and angsty - Diderot legit wrote noble savage fan fiction. Although Montaigne is mistaken about many things and underestimates the complexity of their culture, he seems mostly to be curious of these people and is trying argue that we ought to give them and their way of life some credit and to reconsider ours. He in some places makes the very astute observation of noticing cultural centrism. Still, his points seems to be that European society is frivolous and violent, so we ought not judge to harshly.
to march at the head of them to war
Swag