Mayans , Incas and the Aztecs

 

Originally posted by pinguin The conquistadors were truly Christians. Wherever they go they found churches and converted indigenous people. In fact, they are considered by some as the best example of a Christian!

Conversion doesn't equal faith, and founding churches is a lot less christian than being kind, loving, and understanding of others. Just erecting a building does not really show deep faith, and it doesn't help people or make the world a kinder place.

 

 

Originally posted by pinguin Defending Aztec brutality is illogical. Even more, considering they weren't the single people of Mexico, and most the people that surrounded were under the brutal domination of the Aztecs. Cortes conquested Mexico because he knew about the hate the rest of natives had for the Aztecs, so he made himself a "liberator" of the oppresed peoples.

Defending isn't what I'm going for here. I don't have a knee-jerk "oh yeah?! well the spanish were WORSE" sort of politically-correct reaction. I apologize, I should have referenced all the people of the area, but terminology isn't really the issue here. My point was less about defending them and more about reinforcing the fact that no one was really "better" than the other (assuming there IS such a thing as "better") and that saying the spanish were less sadistic or nasty (assuming you can even call an entire people "sadistic" in the first place, which you can't) requires an amazing ability to ignore historical facts. No one was any nicer than the other guys--conquerors are, as a rule, interested in themselves more than the subjects they just "liberated." Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss.

Originally posted by pinguin Europeans didn't have the right to invade the Americas, and the first that came were brutal private enterpreneurs. Perhaps that could give us a clue about capitalism.

Capitalism works, but totally unregulated capitalism is just as bad as totally stratified communism. You need some sort of regulations in place to make it work, just like you need some free enterprise for a people with a lot of government-controlled industry to work. the Inka were maybe an exception to the rule...probably the most economically successful government-controlled economy in history.

 

Originally posted by pinguin Capitalism works for the people that own the capital. Marx already noticed it cenuries ago. Today capitalism is still savage, as we notice when money goes from developed countries -where workers have rights and benefits- to poor countries where people can be exploit at will.   In fact, rather than blaming Spaniards, British et al for the destruction of the world and the crimes of the last five centuries, whe should better point to capitalism and excesive human ambitions as the source of the many ills that affect our societies.   What is the archetype of the capitalists? Of course the gangster and the drug lord. People that could send theirs mothers into prostitution for money. With that kind of people, it is no wonder the world is like today.

Capitalism is MEANT to be a system in which the hardest, most skillful workers rise to the top. A meritocratic system; success based on merit, if unofficially--an economic version of natural selection, if you will. The problem is that people assume that it means "do whatever you want economically." However, this isn't the case. Take this example. A truly meritocratic system is an ecosystem, with (for instance) a pride of lions, some crocodiles, a herd of water buffalo, etc. Now, the crocodiles and the lions are both big and strong, but neither really has a huge advantage over the other--the lions have more numbers, the crocodiles have tougher skin and stronger bite but don't work together. The water buffalo are biggest and strongest, but they can be killed with caution by either predator. The lions and crocodiles are each a danger to each other, but have different approaches and  methods and thus don't come into direct conflict too much. Everything has a place, more or less, and every species stays alive and (by and large) prospers.

What many people currently consider to be capitalism (wrongly) is a dying and unbalanced ecosystem. It's like an olympic event in which athletes are allowed to be genetically modified or doped as much as they can pay for--whoever has the most money wins, and wins more or less every time. Huge international corporations are not capitalist. They crush innovation, invention, hard and honest work, and intelligence as much as  an inefficient government bureaucracy would. That's because regulation is considered to be un-capitalist somehow--but a healthy ecosystem has rules, even if they're environmental as opposed to governmental. A truly capitalist system is one in which competition and success are encouraged, but there are strict limits on what can or cannot be done, and everyone receives some basics: education, food, health care.

...But not to be off-topic or anything.