How does conflict shape/change the world?
Every major conflict spanning human history has premised upon one fundamental issue: our inability to share. For example, Europe during the middle ages was a warring society of meager nobility. This pushed them to pursue stronger military technologies to gain an advantage over their neighbors. It was here that first see broad applications of gunpowder, and its greater refinement into warfare applications; even though gunpowder was invented centuries prior in China. The Chinese political landscape was less competitive regarding space and resources (largely by way of culture) and there existed no drive to push the technological frontier. As all parties on the European continent got their hands on gunpowder, it then became a competition concerning military tactics. From there, the efficiency evolution progressed into social reforms: political and social changes. As technology and societies grew, Europe was forced to export this competition to new territories, as a full scale war was "unimaginable" (at the time of course, as we see with two world wars). This brought in imperialism, and pushed the competition for resources into a global arena. And now...when you look at the world today...can you honestly see any conflict not based on resources of some kind?
How is history interesting when it is nothing but war and conflict?
History does not equate to stories of war and conflict. History just means study of the past. This can mean, not just the history of warring countries, but also studying art history, history of the various religions of the world, biographies of scientists/inventors/artists/engineers, history of the engineering aspects of the old civilizations, I can go on as these are only a few of what I’ve studied or read books on because they are “fun” to me.Here’s another history that a lot of people are getting into and I think you should too: Genealogy - you can study the history of your ancestral line. I know people from Africa, Asia, US, all over the world, who are collecting love letters, magazine clippings, tombstone pictures, oral traditions, etc. of their ancestors. They are looking for the life of their ancestors, their struggles, victories, love stories, etc.THIS history, the history of your ancestors, is closest to YOU. As far as I’m concerned, should emotionally matter more to you than whether or not one country at a moment in time was at war with another. THIS is also why history is “fun” to me.
In which way did the victors shape history after a war?
So in my opinion there are two main ways the winners shape the future after a conflict I will use WW2 as an example. Well i'm from the west and I read about WW2 a lot and I always noticed that there aren't many texts on the Russians aillied contribution. So I thought why that was as I learned about the Cold War and about the anti communist period of the west when the books were written. This was an aspect of how enemies both in the war and after the war were shaped to the public. This happens during and after the war in the form of propaganda. Another way the winners shape the future is for example the Space Race in which many German scientists contribution to the space programs made space travel a reality. There were so many technological advances due to the spoils of WW2. These are ways the victors shaped the future after WW2 from the public perception of the conflict to the rewards that they were granted that changed humanity's course throughout the 20th century. Keep in mind that this was only one major conflict through human history. This happens after every conflict and these were only two of the ways the future was altered after WW2. So keep looking for the other ways that history's message and course is changed by the victors.
Did the Falklands/Malvinas war shape future conflicts as it was the first modern conflict?
As others have pointed out, it certainly woke up the RN ( and other Navies ) to the shortcomings in their weapons and sensor systems and certainly forced changes in doctrine.But an area that has not been mentioned is the how the detail of actually fighting a war get lost with time.This was the first war the RN had fought since WW2 and it was the small things that caused concern.I had the pleasure of being instructed by the XO of HMS Broadsword on the lessons they had learnt in fire fighting and damage control…but it was other things that turned out to be more interesting.The task force only received their “ Dog Tags “ in the last couple of days before the deployment…no one had thought to have them made.Alcohol was removed from the officers mess but kept in the lower deck for moral purposes..the carpet was kept in the officers mess ( they are first aid stations ) but removed from anywhere else due to possible pumping issues.Dietitians had recommended a balanced whole food diet and the ships were loaded with all sorts of fruit and veg etc….only for it to become apparent that people only wanted “comfort food “ when they were under stress.It was found that people tasked with being lookouts, and there were lots of extra lookouts posted for obvious reasons, were becoming “burnt out” because while they were spotting the incoming aircraft easily enough, they were frustrated to the point of panic because they could not do anything about the incoming aircraft…the solution was to give the lookouts a GPMG and let them blaze away, the chances of hitting anything was remote, but they felt a hell of a lot better about their position.All these lessons and more were, learnt and disseminated amongst many different Navies, so yes, it has shaped any future conflicts
Need history help plz help?
1. Social issues have changed the attitudes of people and the laws that run our country. The civil rights movement was targeted not just the law books, but at the attitudes and perceptions of the American people. 2. Labour issues changed how businesses and companies treated their employees, they changed the rulings of the courts. These labour issues brought light to the fact that workers and laborers deserve just as much right and protection as their employers. 3. The great depression changed how people viewed the job of the government, it taught people a hard, cold lesson; that without some gov. protection they had no security, no stability. Banks were unregulated and consumers were left starving and frozen. 3. Our numerous military conflicts changed us from an isolated nation into a nation that feels we should be a global policeman with the greatest military the world has ever seen. 4. Technology has changed how we do business, how we interact with the entire world. It has advanced our foreign relations. It speeds up every part of our life.
Could History teaching trigger ethnic conflicts in a society?
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing....If history is thought with a bias then I believe it can have a negative impact. I don't think your Viking analogy works, the Vikings murdered, enslaved and robbed half of Ireland, but the modern Irish have no negative feelings towards modern Norwegians. More recent history is a different story. I come from an area where the war of Independence and the civil war were hard fought. Many families in my area had a tradition of involvement with the IRA back in the 20's. The result was that there would have been many teachers in the Republic of Ireland who would have taught Irish history with a notable IRA bias. Not only teachers, but Police officers, at least one Attorny General and probably more than one Politicans had a pro IRA bias. Giving the IRA safe zones in the Republic from which to train and organise their attacks and so extending the misery for the people of the North.I believe if we as Irish people had stood back and looked at the way we taught history we might have realised earlier, that the IRA were not freedom fighters but terrorists. And there were better ways to support Nationlists in Ulster than supporting the IRA.
To what extent are wars and conflicts due to poor leadership?
I’ve visited about 30 countries, but I ‘ve lived in 8 of them for an extended period of time. I’ve spent time in places as financially poor as refugees camps in South Sudan and as rich as Japan.In all of my international experiences the one thing I am absolutely confident about is on the impact that leadership has on a country’s development.It’s not about natural resources, culture, or military. At some point, the guiding principles and leadership of those in control determine the development and the path of that country.After the war, Japan was completely destroyed with exception of certain historical locations. Japan doesn't really have any natural resources, but at some point they set a goal to be a global leader in the production electronics.They realized that their greatest resource was the population.Like John Maxwell says,“It all comes down to leadership.”The more I travel and study the easier it is to make the connection between leadership and a country’s development in all areas.Leadership determines what priorities a country will follow. Motivational speaker Erick Thomas says,“Where your focus goes your energy flows.”This philosophy applies at the individual level, but also on a national level.Andres Valdes: Live | Love | Lead
Who’s the most influential person in history without whom the world would be massively different?
At first instance, two personalities have had a massive impact on the way the world has shaped itself - Jesus Christ, and Prophet Mohammad. Both of theirs ideologies have shaped a conflict that has gone on and on for thousands of years, with no end in sight. Right from the time of crusades, to the Great Game against Ottoman empire or now to the time of the middle east conflicts; the unending conflict of followers of these two religions has churned the world into multiple wars.On a closer look however, when we re-visit history, we see thatThere is no evidence of Christ having existed. Seemingly, there is no empirical historical evidence of him (like archaeological remains, or contemporary literature) ever having existed[1] ; especially going by the exacting standards that western historian apply while dismissing Indian heroes as mythical characters.Most of the conflicts started after the creation of Islam. The conflicts before the advent of Islam were more territorial in nature and did not have lasting impact.So, on second thoughts, I would say - Prophet Mohammad - was the one person who has influenced the world the most, especially after the advent of the Wahhabi thought.Considering a situation where Prophet Mohammad wasn’t born, or Islam wasn’t created; perhaps the world as we know it would have been a more peaceful place, with fewer theological wars.At third and fourth place, I think Buddha and Gandhi are strong candidates for changing directions of the world’s history.Footnotes[1] Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia