Shy China and India ?
By shogunly
@shogunly (1397)
Libya
February 4, 2007 4:09am CST
Chinese and Indian history appear peculiar to me in how there are hardly any major colonial or imperial activities(towards OTHER nations) . All civilisations have engaged at one point or another in history in INVASION and expanding their territories and scope of influence . I don't know that much about them , but with Nations so resourceful and powerful and ANCIENT ,one would expect famous colonization campaigns , like the well known instances of aggression by Romans ,Greeks ,Pheonicians ,Pharonic egyptians ,Spain and England and the other european colonial forces, the Ottomans,the Arabs ,the Moguls ,the Vikings and so on ,including almost all civilisations on the planet EXCEPT these two PILLARS of HUMANITY .I am an Arab myself , my interest in this is PURE curiosity .
.Ideas ??
1 response
@smrohitsm (231)
• India
4 Feb 07
This is a question that even the Indian President had asked to Indian historians.Ofcourse all historians were puzzled and clueless. I thnk u have answered ur own question here. One civilization invades other only when its need of some resource thats not available in its country. The British invaded India and China as they lacked natural resources. But as Both India and China r abundant in resources like food , mmetal and manpower, Then never had to look outsife. Also in the thounsands of years of co existance the 1962 short border conflit is the only conflict between the 2 civilization. Quite unbilievalb yeah!!
1 person likes this
@shogunly (1397)
• Libya
4 Feb 07
thank you for the excellent reply . Economy as the main driving force of history ? your explanation is frequently true , especially in the cases of such "island nations " as England or Japan , or desert people like Arabs . But there have been examples in the past of ALREADY rich cultures like Ancient Rome that had a colonial policy . Is there possibly some other underlying feature of these peoples that explains their behaviour throughout history ?
1 person likes this
@smrohitsm (231)
• India
4 Feb 07
Whats the root cause for conflict??
Its resources, religon or simple greed.
When theres much much more than what people can possibly use, then conflict for resources and greed wont arise in first place.
It also has to do with the culture.If u see what has been coming out of these countries, u will notice almost everything is for peace. The biggest example is Buddhism. There was no need to invade anyone to spread buddhism. people accepted it gracefully. And Hinduism is not a religon, its just a way of life. You wont beleive none of the Indian languages have an exact synonym for religon!!
Then theres yoga, pranayama,ayurveda, Astronomy, Music and mathematics etc.
Also people here wont react violently unless provoked. We would love to mind r own business :).
@shogunly (1397)
• Libya
4 Feb 07
That's exactly what Im talking about . It is as if there was something inherently different about the Indian as a race that makes them likely to respond mildly to most adversities . I once was explaining this theory or observation to a friend of mine while we were in Eastham,London (a part of London where white or european people are actually the exception and Indians ,Pakistanis ,Sri Lankans are the norm) , I mentioned what I understood to be a FACT that although Indians are about a whole FIFTH of the population on this planet , it is rare to see an Indian WIN a medal in the Olympic games ,I mentioned this as proof of a lack of Competing Spirit(vital for all competitive sports) in Indians .That was not necessarily correct ,but it shows how much I was intrigued that a group of humans might actually be DIFFERENT ANTHROPOLOGICALLY , as opposed to culturally .
1 person likes this
