recentpopularlog in

aries1988 : warrior   6

Let a Thousand Mulans Bloom

The intention was apparently to create a mythic version of China, analogous to Black Panther’s Wakanda, but many fear a slurry of incongruous iconography devoid of meaning.

I’ve seen online criticism of this mythic approach that likens it to other examples of diaspora culture, like General Tso’s chicken, as well as jokes about how producers shouldn’t have hired set designers from Chinatown. But what underpins these quips is the idea that the diaspora has had its Chineseness corrupted by Western society, that diaspora cultures with their own real histories are no longer “authentic.”

The danger of a mythic mashup of Chinese culture is thus less that it is historically inaccurate and more that it reiterates the idea constantly pushed by the Chinese government—that there is an ancient and eternal Chinese nation-state. It turns the “One China” policy into mythology. It isn’t so much pandering that I fear but the idea of a flattering of very modern—and exclusive—ideas about Chinese identity rather than one that interrogates and reinvents them.

For all its songs and wise-cracking dragons, it also reframes Mulan’s story as one of struggling to meet parental expectations, a sense of alienation from one’s wider culture, and self-discovery in disguise, all of which resonated with the diaspora audience.

somewhere along the process the diaspora was cut out of the conversation. That’s visible in Mulan’s surname, which is now written and pronounced as Hua (Mandarin) and not Fa (Cantonese).
diaspora  chinese  american  entertainment  movie  classic  female  warrior  question  debate  disney  critic 
5 weeks ago by aries1988
《木兰诗》种种
(原载《文史知识》1998年11月号,中华书局出版。现略加修改定稿) 《木兰诗》种种 ·方舟子·…
classic  poem  analysis  history  tang  chinese  female  warrior  war  ethnic  research 
6 weeks ago by aries1988
內亞海洋與帝國秩序(一):豐饒之海 – Zhongjing Liu | 劉仲敬 – Medium
人类的文明,我把它解释成一个规则生成和演化的过程。

真正规则产生的地方,就是我发明了一个名词叫「原始丰饶」来称呼它,很大一部分,甚至大部分,都产生在人类文字和文明以前的时代。为什么会产生在这个时代?照列维·斯特劳斯的解释,恰好就是因为文字和文明的产生,导致了管制系统的加强,因此原先在无文时代,比较自由而多元化的演化,在文明和管制体系产生以后,反而变得缓慢和单一了。

文字产生以后,唯一产生的东西就是官僚制度和国家制度,而发明的速度反而是减慢了。

如果你把世界看成是一种达尔文式的生态演化产物,那你就可以看出,规则在什么情况下能够最大限度的产生和演化。它应该是多元的,应该存在着许多个彼此之间相对孤立的小生态环境,局部规则在这样的小生态环境中间,能够充分的产生,在它产生做大以前,不会受到太多的干涉。它要有一定流动性,但是流动速度是有限的和缓慢的,也就是说,不同的小生态环境,以及各种不同的局部规则,要通过相互渗透接触和碰撞,不断地深化和演进。但是,速度不能快到席卷一切的地步。

这种环境之是不利于规则复杂度的演化的。

文明的核心区,表面上看是最繁荣,光华最盛的地方,恰好是消耗得最厉害的地方。

分为三种在时间上有交错,但是先后顺序还是很明显的类型:高地型,湿地型和草原型。

回顾文明最初产生的状态

一般人理解的文明,就是第二种类型的文明,在湿地建立起来的文明。一般来说这种文明能够供最大量的人口,可能人类的80–90%以上,都是来自于这种湿地的人口,能够建立起大帝国和强大的官僚机构,能够供养大批知识分子,能够建立巨大的神庙和公共建筑物的文明

第三种文明是产生最晚、草原型的文明。

他们不能独立存在,他们的某些至关紧要的物质需要通过交易,从其他周围的文明中取得,而自己没办法产生。所以这种文明一定是次生型的文明。

退到一个更加边远的草原地带以后,更加依赖草原以后,寻求新的技术突破,然后产生新型的文明。

这个文明的重要性在哪呢?它产生了对后来全世界影响很大的突破。它突破了军事技术,通过军事技术产生了军事贵族。而在次生型的大多数文明当中,军事贵族制度是他们宪法制度的核心。

后来产生的文明,特别是雅利安人入侵以后的文明,完全不是这个样子。他们的军事色彩是异常突出的,军事贵族始终在统治权力中间处于核心地位。

极大地加快了传播的速度。加快传播的速度,也就是意味着缩短了孤立系统独立演化规则的时间

武士跟奴隶不一样,商王也用大量的奴隶来殉葬,但是武士恐怕是自愿殉葬的。因为你很难强迫他们殉葬,

为什么这个技术来自中亚?到底还是因为中亚是草原上是竞争最激烈的地方,它是军事演化速度最快的地方。

西亚这个地方,从加息特人(原居于札格罗斯山脉中部。公元前16世纪初占据巴比伦,建立加息特王朝)入侵到雅利安人入侵,基本上几十年就一波

五胡十六国的入侵肯定是扮演了类似的军事革命。而西魏北周,建立隋唐的过程,可以看成是新一波的入侵和革新,残唐五代,一直到辽金元这个系统,又可以看成是一批新的边区武士系统的入侵。每一次都伴随着军事制度的改变和政治制度的相应改变。
china  civ  concep  theory  east-asia  middle-asia  technology  warrior  military  empire  evolution 
september 2018 by aries1988
The True Believers: Sam Harris
# Instapaper (2017/02/24)
## Added on Saturday, February 24-25

What I’m arguing for in the piece is not to discard either type of explanation but to remember the latter one and take the words of these ISIS people seriously. Even though at various points in the past we’ve ignored political or material causes, this doesn’t mean that ideology plays no role, or that we should ignore the plain meaning of words.

that’s really one of the things that social sciences have triumphed in doing: explaining that within certain boundaries, rationalities lie behind what at first looks like mere craziness or barbarity. Just calling behavior craziness is a trap that a lot of ISIS-watchers have fallen into. If you see members of the Islamic State as thrill-kill nihilists, then you’re not giving them enough credit.

There’s also a deep urge to deny agency to the Islamic State, and I think it’s fundamentally connected to a reluctance to see non-Western people as fully developed and capable of having intelligent beliefs and enough self-knowledge to express them. These people articulate well-thought-out reasons for what they do. And yet ignoring what they say somehow gets camouflaged in the minds of liberals as speaking up for them. It’s delusional.

although the Islamic State wants a civilizational war, of Muslims versus Crusaders, I think they’re consciously avoiding terrorist attacks on Western targets that would provoke too strong a response too soon. If they bombed the Super Bowl, they’d probably be looking at a ground invasion within weeks. They want the invasion, but on their own schedule.

I think we might be in a situation analogous to seeing someone writhing around on the ground in front of us, showing every symptom of having appendicitis. But instead of being surgeons, armed with sterile scalpels, we are just laymen who once read a first aid manual and have no tools other than a rusty soup can. There’s no good option, even though we recognize the problem. The overwhelming probability is that the patient will die a terrible death, and we will have to watch.

it’s abundantly clear that we are not good at massive occupations of countries we poorly understand. Not only that, we just don’t have the appetite for it.

The point of all propaganda is to create narratives about the world. Their view—and the view of jihadis everywhere, really—is that Muslims are under attack by a Crusader West.

confirm their narrative for other Muslims who are already inclined to believe that the West is at war with Islam. That’s not a view I would like to encourage.

The idea is that if we don’t walk on eggshells until the end of history as we fight jihadis, taking great pains to deny any link between the chaos they cause and the doctrine of Islam, then we’re doomed to provoke more-mainstream Muslims into choosing the wrong side in this conflict.

One of the things that is so refreshing about your article is that you didn’t do that. But you now seem to be saying that we must be very careful not to do anything that could give fodder to a “clash of civilizations” narrative.

The Islamic State leader identifies as Salafi, which means that he takes as his sources of authority the Qur’an, the hadīth of the Prophet Muhammad, and the actions of the generations immediately succeeding Muhammad.

The percentage of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims who identify as Salafi—who subscribe to this literalist version of Islam—is quite small, probably single-digit. The percentage of Salafis who would identify as jihadis is vanishingly small. And then, of course, within that population a lot are going to be noncombatants because they’re too old, or too young, or whatever. So we’re still talking about large, but perhaps now manageable, numbers.

The point of bringing up this quietist group is to say that the problem isn’t Islam, or even Islamic literalism. Most literalist Muslims are essentially harmless, or even better than harmless—nice people you would like to have as neighbors. So the specificity of interpretation that leads to the Islamic State is really quite narrow.

What you seem to be expressing is a fear that there could be a mass changing of sides based on some secret sympathy, or some susceptibility to moral confusion, even in the face of the clearest case for a just war that may have ever existed. Whatever the underlying causes of this form of jihadism, at the end of the day we have pure, fanatical, implacable evil vs. basic human sanity.

in the face of the clearest case for a just war that may have ever existed. Whatever the underlying causes of this form of jihadism, at the end of the day we have pure, fanatical, implacable evil vs. basic human sanity.

The Salafi neighbor may not be the neighbor you’d choose, if you could pick from a menu of atheists and liberals and, more generally, people who didn’t care what you thought about god.

there are many religious people whose beliefs about a far-off apocalyptic battle, and mass conversion at the sword, do not affect their lives much at all. People are good at compartmentalizing, and if they weren’t, the world would hardly be livable.

it is a lack of meaning or fulfillment in their lives, related to deep malaise and feelings of rejection or dissatisfaction with the worlds where they live.

If you think the high point of your life in England is going to be eating KFC, the promise of joining the greatest battle the world has ever known might be pretty attractive.

many of us experience such existential concerns early in life.

Where are your scholars?

huge numbers of scholars have been co-opted by politics—either the politics of the Middle East or the politics of the United States.

These differences between the palace scholars and ISIS seem minor, but I would encourage you to see them as significant.

I try studiously not to take a position on which one of these views is correct. I just don’t have any credibility as a non-Muslim to say whether one scholar or another espouses the best form of Islam. However, if I were able to choose what people believed, I’d hope it was the caliphate-later view.

Of course, there are Christians who think about the end times, which are also not envisioned as very pleasant. If you ask them, “Is it happening now?” some of them will say yes. But very few of them will act as if they actually believe it’s happening now. If they’re envisioning a terrible bloodbath at some unimaginably distant time, I can live with that.
illusion  debate  to:marginnote  islam  warrior  middle-east  religion  war  crisis  terrorism  explained  interview  muslim 
february 2017 by aries1988
Searching for Signs of Hannibal’s Route in DNA from Horse Manure - The New Yorker

The ability to test soil directly for genetic material has extended archeology beyond the quest for the usual biological suspects, such as microscopic fossils. The whole business of looking at sediments is bubbling up now—it is taking off because of advances in DNA sequencing, Pallen said. There is a realization that the environment is full of DNA . . . and you can detect it in sediments even in the absence of fossil remains.
genetics  discovery  alpe  italia  spqr  war  warrior  antiquity  animal  archaeology 
may 2016 by aries1988

Copy this bookmark:





to read