The Trial of Genghis Kahn is set. We can use this blog to continue/ expand the discussion. The Machiavellian treatise of "The ends justifies the means." may apply here. Does the overall development of trade networks and positive cultural exchange fostered by the 'Pax Mongolia' outweigh the obvious violations of human rights in Genghis Kahn's day? For that matter, were there such rights in the thirteenth century? Are we amiss in using today's standards to judge this great Mongol leader.
As always, intelligent responses will earn extra credit.
Peace,
Mr. Parker
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Since i'm not exactly sure yet...i'll just blog about what i know about mr Khan.
Genghis did unify the Silk road, therefore increasing communications with the West, thus advancing socieites forward. Which i would say is pretty darn important.
However, did he need to kill that many during his conquests? OR why kill at all? Alexander killed, and Khan killed. The underlying problem being that they commanded others to murder for their own selfish gains. Is it still selfish when it helps improve society? Yes, i believe it is wrong, human lives aren't meant for sacrifices like that!
Which brings us to how he would be viewed by different point of views. To Mongolians, he isn't a tyrant, far from it people in Mongolia would see him as one of histories most influencial people. Obviously because they were not always the ones who had to live under Khans harsh conditions.
Those who Khan did not like though, would have a different view of him. They would want him dead! But is killing to stop killing make much sense? What about Hammurabi's law code of an eye for an eye? In past history, killings weren't looked down upon if they were positive to the empire which did the killing.
Nowadays, we have the same thing, not much has changed now has it? We fight wars, we kill people, whether or not its for the good of mankind or not. If it was to stop someone who was a threat to mankind, others would agree to killing them. However, i would rather go for a life in prison type of sentence. In my eyes, every life is worth something.
Even now, some wonder whether or not a war was completely worth it or not. I bet in the future, people will wonder why we're at war now. There are millions who have died, surely our past has been regrettable.
Either way, the bottom line for me is, Genghis Khan is guilty, it might have been the end of his empire, but not of the human race, he has not been justified for anything.
Genghis khan..hmm
he was able to stregnthen the economic growth of the silk road.
when genghis conquered the majority of western asia, he was able to rule over the chinese without doing much harm to them.
infact, he evn made friends with the chinese and as an illeterate nomad, he was interested in literacy. he was friends with chinese scholars and he made them teach him chinese stuff..
such as the chinese religion.. which in that time was mainly about buddhism..genghis khan learned how to read and write.. and for a nomad, this is overwhelming!
the monggols had never ever touched a book before and then in an instant, there's this khan who was interested in these "books" and tried to learn these new ways that the monggols never learned..he proved us wrong about them monggols..
i, therefore thank him for making history like history had never been before..
-estanislao chupungco iv!
Gosh whoever painted that float did a goood job!!!
and yeah ghangis khan is amazing!
Well let's see genghis khan had many big achievements. But his ruling china was not so good, he did not need to kill so many. We don't kill people unless they have done a wrong doing, so why did Genhis khan kill so many?
I believe that there is some good in him even though i believe he ruled wrong!
But still like i said he accomplished a lot. Like unifying the silk road. Becuase he made friends with most chinese he was able to become more literate.
hmmmm well nothing else seems to come to mind ill write back later!!!!
The only real set opinion I have about Genghis Kahn is that it's amazing what one can accomplish while remaining illiterate. (or am I confusing him with someone else? I DID miss that day..)
whether he was "good" or "bad" is still yet to be decided upon in my mind.
can you even come close to imaginging the government being controlled by people who couldn't read or write? what about the poor deaf people!?!
xD
-ah, and in addition, I don't believe we should judge Genghis Kahn by today's moral standards because not only do those differ from time to time, but also from country to country, and killing people and such wasn't a horribly terrible crime for a very long time in human history. Just look at medieval kings, or, on a drastic level, Vlad the Impaler (the person who Dracula was based on) he killed hundreds of men, and most people shrugged it off as being his hobby. They didn't feel the empathy for aone another that most of us try to feel for each other today. Not so much personal connection....
i think its hard to judge genghis khan with todays standards. Even though he may have committed many crimes, he did create a great empire that influenced the world. and he helped roads which spread new ideas, trade, and culture. Roads were a way for different civilizations to interact in positive ways. If he would have never created his empire the world today could be different and his accomplishment advanced the world forever.
i agree with anna because i wrote that.
sorry anna, it was an accident.
EXTRA CREDIT FOR ELIZABETH !
kbye.
Well, in this society today, Genghis Khan would be given life in prison or the death sentence. Like in the Hammurabi's Law Code, an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.
But does taking someone's life away equal totaking the one who killed them? Like a quote I once read, "Why do we kill people, who kill people, to show that killing people is wrong?"
Although Genghis Khan had done many wrongs against society, he had done much to expand and help prosper his empire.
Genghis Khan was a well respected ruler and was a military and stratigic genius. He had a well trained army, which he promoted people on the babsis of achievement rather than within the family. Which meant that the warriors would always try their hardest in battle because no one knew who Genghis Khan would promote next.
He was also a pretty smart guy for being illiterate. He was the 1st to develop a Mongolian language. He made alliances and attacked anyone who posed as a threat. Genghis Khan aslo promoted growth of trade between China and Europe.
However, even though he did many great things, and no doubt was a great leader, Genghis Khan is guilty for taking innocent lives that could have been easily avoided.
Ghengis Khan was a great conquerer and leader in his time. He brought together many Mongolian tribes and China as well as unifying the silk road. However he was brutal when it came to war and conquering new land. He destroyed the cities and homes of many innocent citizens. He did bring the Mongols and China closer to each other and allow them to better communicate with the West, but he also killed a large number of people.
So, the question would be, would it be wrong to punish Ghengis Khan the way we would today for the things he did hundreds of years ago?
Personally, I don't see the logic in this. Why would you punish someone for a law made after they committed the crime? That isn't to say that he wasn't wrong in killing so many innocent people, but if a law is not set then how can they punish someone for it? Thats like claiming someone should have to pay the fines for talking on a cell phone while driving Before the law was passed. It just doesn't make any sense. So in my opinion he should not suffer the same punishment that someone who committed these crimes today would face.
Oh, and I will bring the Trombone one of these days at lunch or something. Just tell melissa and I when you want to do it....I need that extra credit >.<
~Alyssa Pierce
Genghis Khan...man!! I dunno where to start with my beloved self!!! (I love myself so much XDD)
okay okay, so back to Genghis Khan!
Hmm, he unified the silk road, embraced different cultures AND religions, a pretty tolerant ruler, a great ruler of a great GINORMOUS empire, but the down side is that he did kill a lot of people and I dont deny it. (Well, I don't deny it NOW, now that I'm no longer being tried *wink wink* lol XPP) Truth be told, I think that if I were to be tried in a real court trial playing the role as Genghis Khan, I would probably be dead right now. Mass murder is a big no no, no matter what happened. (at least according to the US) And killing someone elses family just cause they killed my ambassadors is not an excuse either. Because in now a days law, it is not OUR job to step in and say who dies and lives, its the GOVERNMENTS job to do that. So yah, it think my butt would be pretty much wooped by now.
Hey Parker, whats with the not giving me any points for my PERSIA? Thats not cool. You should fix that! Yeah, thats pretty much all.
~Alyssa Pierce
Ghengis Khan's character is a tough one to distinguish from good or evil. Especially when all the killing and crimes he committed while in command seems so horrible by today's standards. I personally think that the good he did for the world DID in fact, outweigh the bad & the crimes that he committed. He wanted peace and unification, and peace does not come in one day, with no action. Sometimes you have to make certain sacrifices in order to get what you need, or in this case, what the world needed.
He did a number of positive things for the world he was living in , including: unifying the feuding chinese tribes, making the first Monglolian languge [helping to advance the culture], strengthen the Silk Road, making trade more prosperous and helping to connect societies that wouldn't usually interact which helped spread different cultures throughout the world.
genghis khan unified the silk road and used his vast empire to create a melting pot for all the cultures he conquered. so pretty much that would have made him a pretty rad dude...except...........pardon my french but he was an asshole. he killed innocent civilians and burned down cities. had there not been such skimpy evidence against him(or her...sorry karen) i would have definitely voted guilty. plus, keith sucking up had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the verdict(can i help it if everyone wants to tell me i'm attractive all the time...WOW that sounded really conceited)
but moving on...genghis khan was the best and worst ruler the momgols...and the rest of the world...had experienced(before Hitler and Stalin of course)
i would guess that all the power of being a big bad ruler got to his head and he just took it and ran. becoming a selfish conquerer with no thoughts of the people he ruled...but seriously. what else is new. all rulers that contribute something great to society...in his case unifying the silk road once again...they have their good traits...and some REALLY bad traits.so ya.
bnut he really would have been guilty had there been evidence to back up the prosecutions terrifying claims against him.
p.s. this really is anna...elizabeth(whoever you are) i don't mind you accidentally logging in under me and getting me extra credit points...feel free to do it all the time
Post a Comment