I
recently was directed towards this essay by
Sir John Glubb. It was a long read, but also a worth while one. And
very interesting, too. I believe it was written (or at least
published) in the late 1970's. Nevertheless, the information in it
seemed to apply to this very day and age.
Now,
the article is long (26 pages to be exact), but it's worth setting
the time aside to read. In fact I think YOU should read it. Lol. I
mean, it wasn't 100% good... but it was pretty good ;)
'The only thing we learn from history,' it has been said, ‘is that men never learn from history’ - Fate of an Empires by Sir John Glubb.
But for your
convenience, and just in case you decide not to go read it, I will
share with you some excerpts and some of my thoughts.
The
first thing Glubb does is to explain what an empire is, according to
his essay. This is vital for understanding the context of his whole
message.
The word
‘empire’, by association with the British Empire, is visualized
by some people as an organisation consisting of a home country in
Europe and ‘colonies’ in other continents. In this essay, the
term ‘empire’ is used to signify a great power, often called
today a superpower. Most of the empires in history have been large
land blocks, almost without overseas possessions.
The
summary is very neat, as it basically gives you all the hot spots of
what he touched on. In fact, this summary alone is almost enough ;)
The summary, according to the last part of the article, was as
follows;
(a) We
do not learn from history because our studies are brief and
prejudiced.
(b) In
a surprising manner, 250 years emerges as the average length of
national greatness.
(c) This
average has not varied for 3,000 years. Does it represent ten
generations?
(d) The
stages of the rise and fall of great nations seem to be:
The
Age of Pioneers (outburst)
The
Age of Conquests
The
Age of Commerce
The
Age of Affluence
The
Age of Intellect
The
Age of Decadence.
(e) Decadence
is marked by: Defensiveness Pessimism Materialism Frivolity An influx
of foreigners The Welfare State A weakening of religion.
(f) Decadence
is due to: Too long a period of wealth and power Selfishness Love of
money The loss of a sense of duty.
(g) The
life histories of great states are amazingly similar, and are due to
internal factors.
(h) Their falls
are diverse, because they are largely the result of external causes.
(i) History
should be taught as the history of the human race, though of course
with emphasis on the history of the student’s own country.
There
are a couple things in this summary I'd like to touch on. The first
being point (a).
I
love what he said about us not learning from history due to bias.
How
many of us truly know what happened in the past... or even today?
There are always so many prejudices that we have to put into the
picture, so many ideals that have warped histories. And we have to
remember that most histories were written by the person that won or
survived the conflict in question.
Of
course, the victor always makes himself look good.
And
then those that choose what is to be taught... their agendas and
beliefs largely affect what is being taught. So, it's safe to say
it's hard to know what you know is really what you should be knowing
:) Basically all your facts you've been taught may very well be
lies... or truths mixes with lies, which can be even worse.
He
also made a good point in the essay about how people are taught
history from the perspective of what they deem important. We don't
cover all of the world's history. We don't explain both sides. We
don't try to know what's happened or happening elsewhere in the world
unless we think it directly involves our
well fare.
And
his points on how most "empires" have followed the same
pattern of stages, all lasting for about 200-250 years was extremely
interesting to me.
Perhaps the
most dangerous by-product of the Age of Intellect is the unconscious
growth of the idea that the human brain can solve the problems of the
world…. The impression that the situation can be saved by mental
cleverness, without unselfishness or human self-dedication, can only
lead to collapse. - John Glubb.
Again,
focusing on one of his stages, this struck me as interesting. We are
all for education. It seems good and wise... but many things take
more than mere brains to solve. There's more to life-sustaining
empires than ourselves, basically.
When we read
the history of our own nation, we find the actions of our ancestors
described as glorious, while those of other peoples are depicted as
mean, tyrannical or cowardly. Thus our history is (intentionally) not
based on facts. We are emotionally unwilling to accept that our
forbears might have been mean or cowardly. Alternatively, there are
‘political’ schools of history, slanted to discredit the actions
of our past leaders, in order to support modern political movements.
In all these cases, history is not an attempt to ascertain the truth,
but a system of propaganda, devoted to the furtherance of modern
projects, or the gratification of national vanity.
Of
course, though, we would want to think ourselves best. That our
country does the most good and was always in the right. That we are
the "Land of the Free", "Home of the Brave", but
the sad truth is that it's just all lies for vanity's sake.
Are
we really free?
How
many of us our truly brave? Willing to stand up for truth? Neighbor?
God?
That's
right... God is a part of the past...
It's
all about what we need for our own comfort...
who really cares that we live by lies... especially when those lies
feel good...
Perhaps,
in fact, we may reach the conclusion that the successive rise and
fall of great nations is inevitable and, indeed, a system divinely
ordained. But even this would be an immense gain. For we should know
where we stand in relation to our human brothers and sisters. In our
present state of mental chaos on the subject, we divide ourselves
into nations, parties or communities and fight, hate and vilify one
another over developments which may perhaps be divinely ordained and
which seem to us, if we take a broader view, completely
uncontrollable and inevitable. If we could accept these great
movements as beyond our control, there would be no excuse for our
hating one another because of them. However varied, confusing and
contradictory the religious history of the world may appear, the
noblest and most spiritual of the devotees of all religions seem to
reach the conclusion that love is the key to human life. Any
expansion of our knowledge which may lead to a reduction in our
unjustified hates is therefore surely well worth while.
Of
course, the only thing we want to know after reading this essay is
can we escape this pending fall of our country? Or are all doomed at
the end of 250 years?
John
Glubb doesn't give a straight answer. He suggests that maybe this is
all arranged by the hand of divinity - I think he had more leniences
towards Islam than God, but we can still take this to mean God
doesn't want us becoming too powerful, so he only allows nations to
thrive for 250 years.
But
then Glubb goes on to say, either way, despite it being set by the
hand of God or not, shouldn't this give us more reason to love our
neighbors rather than hate?
Lol,
the classical final answer boils down to love.
And
sometimes, I'm like, "Enough of love, let's do something."
But
really, is it such a wrong idea? Didn't Jesus come because of love?
Aren't
we to love all?
Maybe
this classic answer is the correct one.
As
long as we are showing love in the correct way.
Because
love isn't necessarily tolerant. Or says what people want to hear. Or
makes one feel good.
Love
can still be hard.
Because
real love is giving, not receiving.
And
if a few more of us could learn to give more... maybe then our
country would really have a fighting chance to live.
