Describing violence

Suppose someday, I thought I wanted to describe the tortures committed in history in the name of religion.

Like the Goa Inquisition

Or the crimes by Jihadis ,

If they included gross descriptions of violence,

Would that violate rules?

I say most wars happened because of various reasons like greed, if you were a king and wanted more lands for crops, for your people, for more and more things you would conquer won't you? And also if you wanted to sell that land's people into slavery? I say throughout the ancient world wars happened because of greed and power not religion. Religious wars happened when christianity and islam appeared, before that there were not much religious wars except maybe a little happened in the name of judaisim, but weren't much.
^that's my theory (:

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis As one of the senior remaining members of AE and as a Mod...the answer is simple. Review the Coc. If it is within so.... then you may post. Controversy We do not avoid here. What we do... is examples of subjective analysis of ethnic bias and inflammatory language and racial bigotry or nationalist fervor beyond a certain point. Again it's that simple. If you feel the need for further guidance...then you go, before you post, to the owner-admin Red Clay via Pm and query further.

Thanks a lot.

That scared the living  crap out of me .

I 'd rather not take chances.

Right?

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis ..but I am in the business of ensuring that those who make a practice of posting examples of subjective analysis of ethnic bias and inflammatory language and racial bigotry or nationalist fervor beyond a certain point and other Coc violations...are not here.... any longer then tail lights in the fog.

Alright then. The bottom line is:-See what RC thinks.

I had supposed that there wouldn't be any scope for nationalism or racism or  bias in describing the inquisition ! It was just to be a plain neutral description of  violence.


No !  I am not taking chances.

Like you seemed to imply, there are much better things to discuss than some nutcrack Vatican antics.


Edited by SuryaVajra - 12-Jul-2012 at 14:17

Personally i'd be interested in the antics of the nutcases from the Vatican, but it's best to wait and see what Red thinks

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis     Or the religious fanatics/cultists of or ascribed to Kali known as the Thuggee   "Bhowanee is happy and more so in proportion to the blood that is shed''

I must be pretty dumb. The sarcasm escaped me . I actually didn'`t even know of the "`Thuggee"`. Must be  some really famous guys !!!!~


Ouch .


Any way,  what would you choose?

A candy or a truck load of candy?


I would know my choice.

In conformity, I would easily dispose of the "`Thuggee"` for more appetizing guys , guys whose capacity for violence and cruelty far exceed normal peoples normal imagination.

~Guys, to study whom and whose atrocities, we wont have to scrupulously search the web for some never before heard of book and a never before heard of Author.

Why even our modern serial killers have better records than these pathetic "Thuggee"

How many did the "`Thugge"`(God knows who they were) actually kill?

One or two or three or a dozen a year ? A little more?

Yuck. They're no good , trust me.

HOW ABOUT PROS WHO CLAIMED TENS OF MILLIONS IN A FEW DECADES?

http://voiceofdharma.com/books/negaind/ch1.htm
http://www.operationmorningstar.org/genocide_of_native_americans.htm

Within one century after Columbus' arrival, the entire native American population of the Caribbean islands was exterminated, probably 8 million people. In continental Latin America, only 12 million people survived after a century of colonization - while the population in 1492 is estimated at up to 90 million.

In North America too, the 2 million native inhabitants of Patagonia (southern Chile and Argentina) were gradually but systematically killed to the last, as were all the inhabitants of Tasmania in a single campaign, and most of the aboriginals of Australia: in these cases, the genocide was entirely intentional.

By mass-execution prior to the arrival of Columbus the land defined as the 48 contiguous states of America numbered in excess of 12 million. Four centuries later, it had been reduced by 95% (237 thousand). How? When Columbus returned in 1493 he brought a force of 17 ships. He began to implement slavery and mass-extermination of the Taino population of the Caribbean. Within three years five million were dead. Fifty years later the Spanish census recorded only 200 living!

The number of Africans killed in the age of the slave trade and colonial conquest has been estimated at up to 50 million.

So please......dont start with the "Thuggee"` and caste system and Sati.These are little children in  comparison to the above deeds of valour , slavery, feudalism, inquisition, burning at stakes, racism and so on.
 
This does not inaugurate an East -`west dichotomy . I simply choose honesty.

It was the sarcasm you intended that forced me to reply so strongly.


Your profession has given you courage to be unimpressed by violence. I got that courage after studying the "uncensored" "un whitewashed"` version of Indian medieval history(the worst in human history, yet least known).The Native american genocide, the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust etc are feeble in comparison.

Originally posted by Nick1986 Surya, i've started a topic on the Goa Inquisition below. If you would be kind enough to tone down the nationalist bigotry I must warn you, however, that i will lock the topic if i see any personal attacks on other

There is no nationalism in putting the record straight. Nor is there bigotry in an unbiased comparison.

Hell, I am a rationalist. Patriotism is irrational.

Please dont accuse me of it, just because I find history to be heavily distorted and whitewashed.


Edited by SuryaVajra - 13-Jul-2012 at 14:15

This is a question and answer thread/subforum. I responded/quoted Nick's post with an alternative answer to the question. Where you take it is up to you...Iow. you responded as if it were addressed to you specifically... it was not. Nor am I responsible for what you might infer...so get over it. But where you wont take it is by posting/trolling, nationalistic fervor and a unwarranted personal attack on fellow members. Which is what 95% of your last response is in reference to the op. Who says or whose interpretation? Me and Mine as a Moderator. You don't like it. Appeal it to the owner Admin.