Europe and the world… sins of the past… what could have we done to avoid our current situation?

[SeanF]

32 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

 

So yes, I agree that we should take into account the circumstances of past atrocities. But you know what? I don't think that makes the rich and powerful look any better. I don't think this is going to give a slaver merchant from 18th century Britain that much of a defense for instance...

.

Granted, I would not cut much slack to an 18th century slave merchant or sugar planter.

I certainly would cut a lot of slack to a group of Haitian slaves who tortured a group of slave masters and overseers to death.  In fact, I'm sure life was quite horrific for many such people when the slaves rose in 1791.  One can say that torturing even very bad people to death is wrong, at an intellectual level.  But, I can still understand why people who had suffered appallingly would take such cruel revenge.

Or to take a more recent example, I can’t say that everything the Allies did in WWII was good.  One can’t really rejoice over incendiary bombing or ethnic cleansing.  But I wouldn’t condemn them for it, given the nature of what they were fighting against.

[baxus]

I can understand why people had slaves in the first place. That does not mean I think it's a good thing.

Torturing anyone (especially to death) is wrong at every level, regardless if slaveowners are doing it to slaves or vice versa. We can understand the difference in circumstances between two cases and all that, but that doesn't make one less wrong than the other.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, baxus said:

I can understand why people had slaves in the first place. That does not mean I think it's a good thing.

Torturing anyone (especially to death) is wrong at every level, regardless if slaveowners are doing it to slaves or vice versa. We can understand the difference in circumstances between two cases and all that, but that doesn't make one less wrong than the other.

This is an instance where you need to walk in other peoples’ shoes.  If you’ve been kidnapped, raped, tortured, had your loved ones worked to death, it’s a very rare person who won’t take cruel revenge when given the chance.

[baxus]

That still doesn't make it right, does it?

[Which Tyler]

IMO, we should have rejected jealous monotheism and stuck with a more collaborative polytheism (or better yet atheism) at least then we wouldn't be killing in the name of God, or using divine rights to justify our based actions.

 

Further back, and more ideally, we should have rejected domestication and remained as hunter gatherers. Not because I have a romantic view of hunter-gatherers, but because population numbers would have been way way lower, which would be better for the planet, better for every species that isn't human, and even within humanoid species, the opportunities for genocide and idealism would have been way lower.

[rotting sea cow]

1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

IMO, we should have rejected jealous monotheism and stuck with a more collaborative polytheism (or better yet atheism) at least then we wouldn't be killing in the name of God, or using divine rights to justify our based actions.

Being an atheist myself I find that many fellow atheists are as dogmatic and intolerant as conservative Christians, hiding themselves behind the veil of rationality to justify their zeal.

 

[Which Tyler]

8 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

Being an atheist myself I find that many fellow atheists are as dogmatic and intolerant as conservative Christians, hiding themselves behind the veil of rationality to justify their zeal.

Absolutely - and it's the same "I know something that makes me better than you" - what it doesn't have is the written word of "and disagreeing with that makes you a commandment breaker, and we all know what happens to commandment breakers..." - however much some of the more radically atheist may think along those lines.