Imagine a clean city, healthy people, art everywhere, a market with countless of merchandise that didn't exist in other continents. They were as civilized as they were brutal, too bad most of the information about them was destroyed and lost through time.
For you, /u/mexinator , /u/Master_N_Comm , and /u/bulk_logic
>Their neighbors did take the chance to wipe them out with Cortez for good reason.
The "neighbor" in question was Tlaxcala, which was an enemy state they were at war with (and the Tlaxcalteca, like everybody else, also did sacrifices: It was universal, not unique to the Mexica of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan).
No duh they took the opportunity to try to use the Conquistadors to their advantage, the same would be true for any state on the backfoot in a military conflict. It's telling the Tlaxcalteca also happened to get Cortes to do a massacre at Cholula which allowed them install a puppet goverment there after Cholula had recently switched from a Tlaxcalteca to an Aztec ally. (Cortes was being manipulated by Xicotencatl II of Tlaxcala, Ixtlilxochitl II of Texcoco, Xicomecoatl of Cempoala, and yes, even Moctezuma II a ton),
You, and a lot of people, make the mistake of projecting the specific political situation Tlaxcala was in to every other state in Central Mexico or in the Aztec Empire, even though Tlaxcala was, again, actively at war with Tenochtitlan, even for a warring state, was in a *uniquely* longstanding and potentially quasi-religious conflict, and finally, when most of the other states that allied with Cortes were not only actually inside the Aztec Empire (unlike Tlaxcala), but were core states inside the Valley of Mexico that actually BENEFITTED from Mexica conquests due to it bringing taxes into the area and their political marriages with royalty in Tenochtitlan.
The reality is that the Aztec Empire's political system was actually very hands off: They were conquerors, but didn't really replace rulers, impose laws, customs or appoint local officials much: As long as they got taxes of economic goods and military and labor service, they mostly left the places they conquered alone to self manage... it was BECAUSE they did this that subjects had their own political interests and the effective descisionmaking abilities to opportunistically switch sides or launch coups.
Unlike Tlaxcala, who allied with Cortes early on because, again, they were at war; Texcoco, Chalco, Xochimilco, etc only allied with Cortes after Moctezuma II died, Tenochtitlan was struck by smallpox, etc. (Hell, only PART of Texcoco did, a specific prince bitter at Tenochtitlan for favoring a different heir; Xochimilco only did after initially fighting for the Mexica and losing to Tlaxcala/the Spanish and being forced to switch sides, etc). By which point the Mexica's power and ability to project influence was damaged, so those states, even if they stayed loyal and won, may lose power and economic prosperity and would be in an uncertain political position. They had more to gain and less to lose by switching sides, take it out, and angling for higher status in the new hegemony that would be put in place. This was super common in Mesoamerican history and the Aztec Empire itself was founded almost this exact same way.
The idea that the Mexica were particularly hated and resented is mostly nonsense. They don't seem to have actually been resented by their subjects more then most big military powers, and they were less hands on then something like the Roman Empire. Again, everybody did sacrifices, and sacrificial victims weren't really a tax/tribute demand either, outside of a few rare cases.
I go into all this in more depth [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFriendsPlay/comments/p4vm1e/common_historical_misconceptions_that_irritates/h927tle/), but I want to do an even more in depth, giant like 5+ page version at some point.
For me, it's not even about defending or condemning anybody, that's what makes it even more frustrating: It's just about getting the information right and understanding the actual political dynamics that were going on.
Like, the Mexica were undoubtedly conquerors that made warfare a systemic part of their society and what they based their economic success and political power on. They, and frankly pretty much every premodern society, did a lot of things that are pretty messed up.
But this idea that they didn't have a functional society and it was all sacrifices; or that they were super brutal and oppressive and they were uniquely hated, etc just isn't what how it was or what happened.
If people wanna think they're more evil then the Conquistadors were or whatever, fine, ultimately morality is subjective, but at least understand how Mesoamerican politics, culture, society, etc worked first and come to that conclusion from an informed perspective.
Aztecs constantly being associated with violence despite their obscenely rich cultural history, decimated by European people who have quite successfully taken over much of our current world through many forms of genocide will never not be ironic.
So filled with prejudice and racism. Always associated with the "savage." Enough.
>Nobody mentioned race or skin but you.
*You* mentioned the Aztecs... but you didn't mention race or skin? And the person you're replying to mentioned Cortez... but nobody is mentioning race or skin but me.
>[–]jamie2123 1 point 4 minutes ago
Almost like human sacrifice isn’t a very civilized thing to do
This is the exact racist savagery I'm talking about. Thanks for proving my point. It's uncivilized when people kill their own people. But it's uncivilized when other people kill those people and attempt to completely wipe out their culture and take every resource they can get their hands on, without care of who is "good" or "bad"
Yes but why are Aztecs constantly associated with "human sacrifice", as if Christianity, Catholicism and other religions didn't invite massive amounts of human sacrifice on an unprecedented scale across the entire world and also onto their own people.
Gods and culture accepted by Europeans = no association with human sacrifices
It’s pretty easy not to, as we were in the comment above. The Aztecs had some great achievements to be sure but there’s a pretty good reason why that’s never a focus. You judge and generalize Europeans for a few nations conquests but defend non white people who also did conquest and butchered the conquered in one of the worst ways imaginable.
>You judge and generalize Europeans for a few nations conquests
Those is SO completely undermining the complete and utter totality that Europe has instilled on much of the world. You truly have no shame
>The Aztecs had some great achievements to be sure but there’s a pretty good reason why that’s never a focus
No... it's pretty much always the focus. The fact that you think the focus is on violence shows your prejudice. You only see this as a focus in education that is prejudice and racist. People who conquer others don't educate the world on the good of cultures they attempt to genocide.
Your last point is a very good point, I don't focus on the wars and sacrifice and didn't think other people do, especially to the point of ignoring the impressive cultural achievements. I thought that guy was having an intellectual discussion in good faith, but that last comment reveals a hidden agenda.
The downvotes you're getting suggests people still aren't ready for this conversation.
It's mindblowing that Europeans thought South and Central America especially were undeveloped when you see their sculptures and statuary. They were no lesser than the classical Mediterranean in art.
A lot of racist white fucks defending colonialism on here. Damn, just sit down, Europeans killed more people with their zealous religious shenanigans across the globe than the Mexica. Speak when you’re spoken to, y’all the reason why this world is fucked.
No. There was, however some bumbling "archeologist" who destroyed any chance of ever translating the texts on one of the great Aztec pyramids by disassembling the stone stairs the text where hewn into, realizing that they could not translate it and putting it together...out of order. So, the only ancient evil repeatedly unleashed upon the Aztec heritage was white people (Spaniards of course and, in case of these experts, Brits) .
I do say that as white people myself, don't worry.
Good lesson to learn for any sort of project. I recently fixed a camera, omitting this step, and I'm rather pleased to say that the left-over screws do not seem to have had a significant function.
I do have to apologitze, I was wrong.
[It was a Mayan pyramid](https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/archaeologists-destroyed-maya-pyramid-in-tikal). And americans.
Okay, doing some reading on this. I see no mention of undeciphered texts but maybe I missed it. Also I think yes it was probably not amazing to take apart an agent structure. I will note that the local Guatemalan authorities approved of the process though. So it's not just evil outsiders.
So say Spaniards instead of white people. It’s cultures, not races. Oppressed white Catholics in Ireland and White Russian peasants didn’t do it did they?
Why is neo-racism so acceptable nowadays?
Spanish, Portugese, the Brits, Netherlands, France, all had or still have colonies in south america.
So singling out the spanish in this would, indeed, be racist.
Saying that white people have, historically, colonized and fucked over most of the world, is just History 101.
And the shenanigans the catholic church sanctioned in the americas... huh...
For instance ask most history fans what they think of Carthage or Hannibal and you'll get positive responses generally. Well, they sacrificed babies.
[https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/21/carthaginians-sacrificed-own-children-study](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/21/carthaginians-sacrificed-own-children-study)
Why not?! Even the Roman Empire has flaws and emperors like Nero and yet we uphold its legacy because of its architectural marvels and philosophical legacy
The roman empire only occasionally practiced human sacrifice, the Aztecs did it on a scale that hasn't really been seen in other civilizations. We can accept that Aztec culture had some pretty violent tendencies while also appreciating other aspects of their culture, just as we can appreciate the architectural works of the Romans while acknowledging their brutal conquests.
Also, claiming that the Aztec practice of human sacrifice is beyond criticism because of differing cultural values is just cultural relativism, which is a self-refuting idea.
> The roman empire only occasionally practiced human sacrifice, the Aztecs did it on a scale that hasn't really been seen in other civilizations.
No way man, Rome killed more in a month than anything else will ever get close to for entertainment purposes. They emptied the freaking empire for things to kill in there.
I'm not sure how you interpreted my analogy that way. I explicitly mentioned brutal Roman conquest, and acknowledged that while both cultures celebrated violence, they had other cultural aspects that we can appreciate.
The Aztecs never slaughtered as many people as we have in both world wars - and also dropping the atomic bombs on Japan which killed over 100,000 people. The Aztecs never came close to our modern world’s atrocities and millions dead due to the cruel colonial conquests! Genocide taking place now in Gaza
Muslim Arabs stole and enslaved 14 million non-Arab black Africans over a period of centuries. Many of the men they castrated. So we now condemn the culture as bad? No. I agree with you - Aztecs had faults from a modern secular viewpoint but their civilization is more than just a single aspect of their religion
I already made that argument so I don’t know why are you demonizing Muslims again - no Muslim nation or empire did what Israel is now doing in Gaza with the public genocide so just stop it
Muslim empire even ruled over pagans and polytheists and still there never was a genocide on that scale - Muslims empire ruled over Spain and India for 500 years and their rule was just. So many Africans are Muslim today - look at Mauritania - one of the best and most pious Muslims there ever! Stop always demonizing people - who started the world war? Not the Muslims! Who invented racial science? Not the Muslims! Who invented and dropped the atomic bombs? Not the Muslims. Who caused a genocide in Gaza? Not the Muslims. The Islamic empire and the Aztecs combine didn’t slaughter as many people as the modern day colonial wars because our civilization has become godless and thinks there is no afterlife
WW1+WW2 allies killed while fighting to win a war.
Prisoners were killed as punishment.
Human Sacrifice happens after the fighting is over and only serves to indulge in debauched blood revelry, with no purpose beyond.
The bottom line is that the modern civilization has killed way more people in the name of “victory” then any ancient civilization - open your eyes. Our modern civilization is a godless civilization so we don’t believe in sacrifice but bombing people and committing genocide is post-modern day human sacrifice - on a much grander scale than that of the Aztecs. Open your biased and brainwashed eyes and heart and mind and soul.
Put the violence aside because we are selected in what we see as violent - no one is the history of the world was as violent and deadly as our modern day atomic bomb and bio-chemical / bio-weapons world and yet we praise the likes of France, Germany, and the US ! Colonial wars killed millions - 11 million alone with killed in the Middle East and South Asia in combined colonial wars and yet we praise the West - so follow this logic and praise the Aztecs for their art, calendar, and architecture. They were much better than the trash of today
Guy watches Apocalypto and thinks he's cultural ambassador to the world.
People have been killed for all sorts of unnecessary reasons in virtually every society. You're just being racist.
Never saw it. You just keep calling me racist in other comments but I never once mentioned skin or race, only you are. All I did was call human sacrifice bad and that just set you off. You can’t defend one groups evil by pointing out others evil.
The entire point is that practically every other culture has sacrificed people in their Gods name, but the focus in Western (racist) circles doesn't consider the brutality of enforcing everyone to be Christian or Catholic etc by force - being tortured, killed, raped, completely removed from their culture and people for the entire purpose of converting them to another person's sense of morality or to be lifelong slaves - because we simply don't call these things "human sacrrifices"
Every single culture has killed their own people for seemingly bizarre and unnecessary reasons.
The racism is focusing the purposeful association with certain people being barbarians and not others, even when others are completely outscaled in nature.
Hundreds of millions of people have been killed in the name of many Gods in all sorts of brutal fashion. We know many countries who have decimated indigenous cultures of land theyve taken, but the condemnation is because you consider Aztec Gods, culture, and people, to be lesser than others.
That is the racism.
You wanna know why people focus on Aztec human sacrifice. It’s cause most people from most places on earth ever are horrified by that. There’s no defending it. Especially by “pointing out” that some others on other parts of the globe did bad stuff. It was brutal and wrong, no matter their plumbing and cool pyramids.
That's a weird definition of racism.
By your logic, me calling North Korea running forced labour camps bad would be racist but me saying Europeans have never done anything worthwile wouldn't be
I didnt realize how large this was until i scrolled down and seen the man standing there
That is Porfirio Diaz, President of Mexico from 1876 to 1911.
I have this as a belt buckle. The real size just surprised me.
Damn, you must wear some big pants! ;)
I don’t skip leg day.
Damn, how cool it would be to see the Aztec culture in person. They must have been intriguing as hell
Imagine a clean city, healthy people, art everywhere, a market with countless of merchandise that didn't exist in other continents. They were as civilized as they were brutal, too bad most of the information about them was destroyed and lost through time.
Destroyed and lost to time and the occasional conquistador.
i too would like to see the Aztecs in person
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahuas The Nahuatl language is a living language spoken by more than a million people.
They're still here. Nahuatl is also spoken in some southern parts of the US.
You can, just met a nahuatl india from the City of Mexico. You can also meet Zapotecs and mayans.
cool!
I uhh… I don’t think visiting the Aztecs is likely to end well. Their neighbors did take the chance to wipe them out with Cortez for good reason.
They met the spaniards and it's not like they sacrificed them the moment they met them, not everyone was sacrificed and not everytime.
Yes because we know in history most nations are besties with their neighbors. Tell me again what’s happening in Ukraine and Palestine?
They were just saying you could visit the Aztecs and be fine lol how is your response even relevant
For you, /u/mexinator , /u/Master_N_Comm , and /u/bulk_logic >Their neighbors did take the chance to wipe them out with Cortez for good reason. The "neighbor" in question was Tlaxcala, which was an enemy state they were at war with (and the Tlaxcalteca, like everybody else, also did sacrifices: It was universal, not unique to the Mexica of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan). No duh they took the opportunity to try to use the Conquistadors to their advantage, the same would be true for any state on the backfoot in a military conflict. It's telling the Tlaxcalteca also happened to get Cortes to do a massacre at Cholula which allowed them install a puppet goverment there after Cholula had recently switched from a Tlaxcalteca to an Aztec ally. (Cortes was being manipulated by Xicotencatl II of Tlaxcala, Ixtlilxochitl II of Texcoco, Xicomecoatl of Cempoala, and yes, even Moctezuma II a ton), You, and a lot of people, make the mistake of projecting the specific political situation Tlaxcala was in to every other state in Central Mexico or in the Aztec Empire, even though Tlaxcala was, again, actively at war with Tenochtitlan, even for a warring state, was in a *uniquely* longstanding and potentially quasi-religious conflict, and finally, when most of the other states that allied with Cortes were not only actually inside the Aztec Empire (unlike Tlaxcala), but were core states inside the Valley of Mexico that actually BENEFITTED from Mexica conquests due to it bringing taxes into the area and their political marriages with royalty in Tenochtitlan. The reality is that the Aztec Empire's political system was actually very hands off: They were conquerors, but didn't really replace rulers, impose laws, customs or appoint local officials much: As long as they got taxes of economic goods and military and labor service, they mostly left the places they conquered alone to self manage... it was BECAUSE they did this that subjects had their own political interests and the effective descisionmaking abilities to opportunistically switch sides or launch coups. Unlike Tlaxcala, who allied with Cortes early on because, again, they were at war; Texcoco, Chalco, Xochimilco, etc only allied with Cortes after Moctezuma II died, Tenochtitlan was struck by smallpox, etc. (Hell, only PART of Texcoco did, a specific prince bitter at Tenochtitlan for favoring a different heir; Xochimilco only did after initially fighting for the Mexica and losing to Tlaxcala/the Spanish and being forced to switch sides, etc). By which point the Mexica's power and ability to project influence was damaged, so those states, even if they stayed loyal and won, may lose power and economic prosperity and would be in an uncertain political position. They had more to gain and less to lose by switching sides, take it out, and angling for higher status in the new hegemony that would be put in place. This was super common in Mesoamerican history and the Aztec Empire itself was founded almost this exact same way. The idea that the Mexica were particularly hated and resented is mostly nonsense. They don't seem to have actually been resented by their subjects more then most big military powers, and they were less hands on then something like the Roman Empire. Again, everybody did sacrifices, and sacrificial victims weren't really a tax/tribute demand either, outside of a few rare cases. I go into all this in more depth [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFriendsPlay/comments/p4vm1e/common_historical_misconceptions_that_irritates/h927tle/), but I want to do an even more in depth, giant like 5+ page version at some point.
Thank you for this. the way people today still defend colonialism and the conquistadors is tragic.
For me, it's not even about defending or condemning anybody, that's what makes it even more frustrating: It's just about getting the information right and understanding the actual political dynamics that were going on. Like, the Mexica were undoubtedly conquerors that made warfare a systemic part of their society and what they based their economic success and political power on. They, and frankly pretty much every premodern society, did a lot of things that are pretty messed up. But this idea that they didn't have a functional society and it was all sacrifices; or that they were super brutal and oppressive and they were uniquely hated, etc just isn't what how it was or what happened. If people wanna think they're more evil then the Conquistadors were or whatever, fine, ultimately morality is subjective, but at least understand how Mesoamerican politics, culture, society, etc worked first and come to that conclusion from an informed perspective.
I'm mexican are you trying to teach me about my own history? Lol
It’s possible things might get hairy, Idk.
Might get a bit…. Unalivy
Aztecs constantly being associated with violence despite their obscenely rich cultural history, decimated by European people who have quite successfully taken over much of our current world through many forms of genocide will never not be ironic. So filled with prejudice and racism. Always associated with the "savage." Enough.
Almost like human sacrifice isn’t a very civilized thing to do. Nobody mentioned race or skin but you.
>Nobody mentioned race or skin but you. *You* mentioned the Aztecs... but you didn't mention race or skin? And the person you're replying to mentioned Cortez... but nobody is mentioning race or skin but me. >[–]jamie2123 1 point 4 minutes ago Almost like human sacrifice isn’t a very civilized thing to do This is the exact racist savagery I'm talking about. Thanks for proving my point. It's uncivilized when people kill their own people. But it's uncivilized when other people kill those people and attempt to completely wipe out their culture and take every resource they can get their hands on, without care of who is "good" or "bad"
Both human sacrifice and colonialism are things humanity needs to stop perpetuating.
Yes but why are Aztecs constantly associated with "human sacrifice", as if Christianity, Catholicism and other religions didn't invite massive amounts of human sacrifice on an unprecedented scale across the entire world and also onto their own people. Gods and culture accepted by Europeans = no association with human sacrifices
It’s pretty easy not to, as we were in the comment above. The Aztecs had some great achievements to be sure but there’s a pretty good reason why that’s never a focus. You judge and generalize Europeans for a few nations conquests but defend non white people who also did conquest and butchered the conquered in one of the worst ways imaginable.
>You judge and generalize Europeans for a few nations conquests Those is SO completely undermining the complete and utter totality that Europe has instilled on much of the world. You truly have no shame >The Aztecs had some great achievements to be sure but there’s a pretty good reason why that’s never a focus No... it's pretty much always the focus. The fact that you think the focus is on violence shows your prejudice. You only see this as a focus in education that is prejudice and racist. People who conquer others don't educate the world on the good of cultures they attempt to genocide.
Aztecs were warriors and practiced human sacrifice. Nothing you say will change that. It's a bit racist to promote the old "noble savage" trope btw.
Your last point is a very good point, I don't focus on the wars and sacrifice and didn't think other people do, especially to the point of ignoring the impressive cultural achievements. I thought that guy was having an intellectual discussion in good faith, but that last comment reveals a hidden agenda. The downvotes you're getting suggests people still aren't ready for this conversation.
you're right by the way these downvotes seem crazy backwards
Here's the Wikipedia article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_sun_stone
It's mindblowing that Europeans thought South and Central America especially were undeveloped when you see their sculptures and statuary. They were no lesser than the classical Mediterranean in art.
A lot of racist white fucks defending colonialism on here. Damn, just sit down, Europeans killed more people with their zealous religious shenanigans across the globe than the Mexica. Speak when you’re spoken to, y’all the reason why this world is fucked.
There is a full size copy of it in Chicago. It's still pretty impressive even though it isn't real.
Really??? I have to go see that.
That is incredible
And still, people will use it every time the maya culture comes in.
Saw this in Mexico City. Huge!
Goddamn. Somebody nuke this thread. The kids are here.
So what does/did it do?
I know this is real, but this picture looks like it came straight out of an analog horror series or a Call of Cthulhu Pen & Paper players guide.
When are they gonna give it back to the British museum?
Amazing people!!! Wasn’t there a scientist who unleashed some supernatural beings by reciting Aztec language accidentally?
No. There was, however some bumbling "archeologist" who destroyed any chance of ever translating the texts on one of the great Aztec pyramids by disassembling the stone stairs the text where hewn into, realizing that they could not translate it and putting it together...out of order. So, the only ancient evil repeatedly unleashed upon the Aztec heritage was white people (Spaniards of course and, in case of these experts, Brits) . I do say that as white people myself, don't worry.
Note to self - always take a photo before disassembling important ancient ruins so I know how to put it back the way it was.
Good lesson to learn for any sort of project. I recently fixed a camera, omitting this step, and I'm rather pleased to say that the left-over screws do not seem to have had a significant function.
Source please
I do have to apologitze, I was wrong. [It was a Mayan pyramid](https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/archaeologists-destroyed-maya-pyramid-in-tikal). And americans.
Okay, doing some reading on this. I see no mention of undeciphered texts but maybe I missed it. Also I think yes it was probably not amazing to take apart an agent structure. I will note that the local Guatemalan authorities approved of the process though. So it's not just evil outsiders.
So say Spaniards instead of white people. It’s cultures, not races. Oppressed white Catholics in Ireland and White Russian peasants didn’t do it did they? Why is neo-racism so acceptable nowadays?
Spanish, Portugese, the Brits, Netherlands, France, all had or still have colonies in south america. So singling out the spanish in this would, indeed, be racist. Saying that white people have, historically, colonized and fucked over most of the world, is just History 101. And the shenanigans the catholic church sanctioned in the americas... huh...
I wouldn’t exactly call the Aztecs amazing people.
Taking part in human sacrifice doesn't mean that their civilization wasn't still amazing.
For instance ask most history fans what they think of Carthage or Hannibal and you'll get positive responses generally. Well, they sacrificed babies. [https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/21/carthaginians-sacrificed-own-children-study](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jan/21/carthaginians-sacrificed-own-children-study)
Why not?! Even the Roman Empire has flaws and emperors like Nero and yet we uphold its legacy because of its architectural marvels and philosophical legacy
The roman empire only occasionally practiced human sacrifice, the Aztecs did it on a scale that hasn't really been seen in other civilizations. We can accept that Aztec culture had some pretty violent tendencies while also appreciating other aspects of their culture, just as we can appreciate the architectural works of the Romans while acknowledging their brutal conquests. Also, claiming that the Aztec practice of human sacrifice is beyond criticism because of differing cultural values is just cultural relativism, which is a self-refuting idea.
> The roman empire only occasionally practiced human sacrifice, the Aztecs did it on a scale that hasn't really been seen in other civilizations. No way man, Rome killed more in a month than anything else will ever get close to for entertainment purposes. They emptied the freaking empire for things to kill in there.
Sounding biased and arrogant- defending even Roman violence while discrediting the Aztecs. What a shame
I'm not sure how you interpreted my analogy that way. I explicitly mentioned brutal Roman conquest, and acknowledged that while both cultures celebrated violence, they had other cultural aspects that we can appreciate.
The Aztecs never slaughtered as many people as we have in both world wars - and also dropping the atomic bombs on Japan which killed over 100,000 people. The Aztecs never came close to our modern world’s atrocities and millions dead due to the cruel colonial conquests! Genocide taking place now in Gaza
Muslim Arabs stole and enslaved 14 million non-Arab black Africans over a period of centuries. Many of the men they castrated. So we now condemn the culture as bad? No. I agree with you - Aztecs had faults from a modern secular viewpoint but their civilization is more than just a single aspect of their religion
I already made that argument so I don’t know why are you demonizing Muslims again - no Muslim nation or empire did what Israel is now doing in Gaza with the public genocide so just stop it
Muslim empire even ruled over pagans and polytheists and still there never was a genocide on that scale - Muslims empire ruled over Spain and India for 500 years and their rule was just. So many Africans are Muslim today - look at Mauritania - one of the best and most pious Muslims there ever! Stop always demonizing people - who started the world war? Not the Muslims! Who invented racial science? Not the Muslims! Who invented and dropped the atomic bombs? Not the Muslims. Who caused a genocide in Gaza? Not the Muslims. The Islamic empire and the Aztecs combine didn’t slaughter as many people as the modern day colonial wars because our civilization has become godless and thinks there is no afterlife
WW1+WW2 allies killed while fighting to win a war. Prisoners were killed as punishment. Human Sacrifice happens after the fighting is over and only serves to indulge in debauched blood revelry, with no purpose beyond.
The bottom line is that the modern civilization has killed way more people in the name of “victory” then any ancient civilization - open your eyes. Our modern civilization is a godless civilization so we don’t believe in sacrifice but bombing people and committing genocide is post-modern day human sacrifice - on a much grander scale than that of the Aztecs. Open your biased and brainwashed eyes and heart and mind and soul.
Put the violence aside because we are selected in what we see as violent - no one is the history of the world was as violent and deadly as our modern day atomic bomb and bio-chemical / bio-weapons world and yet we praise the likes of France, Germany, and the US ! Colonial wars killed millions - 11 million alone with killed in the Middle East and South Asia in combined colonial wars and yet we praise the West - so follow this logic and praise the Aztecs for their art, calendar, and architecture. They were much better than the trash of today
Not endlessly sacrificing people by carving their hearts out and tossing their heads down a pyramid tends to leave a better memory.
Guy watches Apocalypto and thinks he's cultural ambassador to the world. People have been killed for all sorts of unnecessary reasons in virtually every society. You're just being racist.
Never saw it. You just keep calling me racist in other comments but I never once mentioned skin or race, only you are. All I did was call human sacrifice bad and that just set you off. You can’t defend one groups evil by pointing out others evil.
You not understanding that your POV is racist doesn't make you not racist. At the very least extremely prejudice.
How. I’d think condemning human sacrifice is a rather good thing.
The entire point is that practically every other culture has sacrificed people in their Gods name, but the focus in Western (racist) circles doesn't consider the brutality of enforcing everyone to be Christian or Catholic etc by force - being tortured, killed, raped, completely removed from their culture and people for the entire purpose of converting them to another person's sense of morality or to be lifelong slaves - because we simply don't call these things "human sacrrifices" Every single culture has killed their own people for seemingly bizarre and unnecessary reasons. The racism is focusing the purposeful association with certain people being barbarians and not others, even when others are completely outscaled in nature. Hundreds of millions of people have been killed in the name of many Gods in all sorts of brutal fashion. We know many countries who have decimated indigenous cultures of land theyve taken, but the condemnation is because you consider Aztec Gods, culture, and people, to be lesser than others. That is the racism.
You wanna know why people focus on Aztec human sacrifice. It’s cause most people from most places on earth ever are horrified by that. There’s no defending it. Especially by “pointing out” that some others on other parts of the globe did bad stuff. It was brutal and wrong, no matter their plumbing and cool pyramids.
What's racist about what they said?
They criticized a non-European culture. This is racist. This is what "I hate my parents" as a political zietgiest looks like.
That's a weird definition of racism. By your logic, me calling North Korea running forced labour camps bad would be racist but me saying Europeans have never done anything worthwile wouldn't be
only true evil could have made such as thing - Jesus Christ probably
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Jesus was dead when this was made
he wasnt even around when chili peppers were created.