On a Journey to Become Educated

I share what I find interesting in what I research.

One day, I'll have learnt enough to write a book. But, right now, I know that I know nothing.

Currently Reading: The Penguin History of the Twentieth Century by J M Roberts.

Recommend a book to me?

Non-fiction: Books that deal with how civilisation came to exist and function, so that I may plan out my own fictional world. Particularly interested in the 1900s, but also interested in the buildup there before.

Fiction: Alternate histories.

Share an interesting historical fact with me?

That's the whole purpose of this blog! Very much appreciated.

A Waiver On My Own Opinions

As learned from my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J. M. Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to find your own sources.

Science became incredibly important and influential in the twentieth century, and it was a culmination of works dating back hundreds of years.

In the nineteenth century, Charles Darwin set out with his publications: 'The Origin of Species' and 'The Descent of Man' and revolutionised our understanding of evolution, although not without strife. Darwin's theories undermined the underpinnings of Christianity, which had existed for a thousand years.

Furthermore, his works were widely misconstrued and co-opted for malicious purposes. His views on 'natural selection' were abstracted to produce the idea of 'survival of the fittest', which would then provide motive and justification for the white peoples of the West to dominate the rest of the world.

Meanwhile, physics experienced an almost complete overhaul as the understanding of the atom, electromagnetic fields, and other such world-view-altering theories came into play.

From my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J M Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to find your own sources.

In the nineteenth century and into the twentieth century, the world saw an unprecedented boom in population as economic growth allowed for such opportunity, primarily in Europe. Malthus proposed that the population may outstrip the resources available, but this was not a popular or much thought-upon stance.

The Great Resettlement began as Europeans moved en masse overseas, with particularly large numbers of Britons, Irish, and Italians doing so. This emigration further fueled population growth and provided economic and job opportunities never before seen. The term 'unemployment' was coined and then considered.

From my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J M Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to find your own sources.

The Enlightenment. For the first time, Westerners were seeing a progressive future in the tangible changes and improvements in their lives. Not only legislatively, with the abolition of slavery, but in ways both small and big such as modern conveniences and longer life expectancies. It was understood that the future was different from the recent past, and great change was afoot.

As learned from my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J. M. Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to find your own sources.

The Enlightenment. For the first time, Westerners were seeing a progressive future in the tangible changes and improvements in their lives. Not only legislatively, with the abolition of slavery, but in ways both small and big, such as modern conveniences and longer life expectancies. It was understood that the future was different from the recent past, and great change was afoot.

From my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J M Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to find your own sources.

Women were not served by their societies, but with the French Revolution and its political fecundity producing the Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Citizen, feminism and feminist were becoming accepted terms by the turn of the 20th century (also hailing from France).

However, this was mostly seen in places such as Europe and the USA. While Japan may have been ensuring its female children were receiving schooling, China opened its first female school in 1897 in Shanghai and closed it soon after. India began to see Hindu women graduating from university, but none of the graduating class included Muslim Indian women. Feminism was also, for the most part, a middle-class movement.

These feminist moves were not necessarily brought about by a feminist movement, but a general push for humanitarianism, human rights, fair treatments and other such agendas which Europe in part used to differentiate themselves as "civil" when compared to the "uncivilised" countries elsewhere.

noun Airship. A large aircraft without wings, consisting of a large bag filled with gas that is lighter than air and driven by engines. The pilot, passengers, etc., travel in a structure hanging below.

Here come western senses of superiority, the idea of continents existing at all, of the need to "civilise". But in that kernel of "goodness" where the West wished to liberate other countries from morally reprehensible activities, there also came a sense of division, and the idea that possessing X Y Z moral beliefs made one a better, superior person. A superior nation. One which should spread, dominate, and erase all other ways of living.

Is to be a good person to be a better person? I think most would say yes. To be a good person, is it your compulsion to then better others? To bend them to your moral standard? To enforce your ways upon them to end their own evil ways? To take away their agency to do "wrong", however "wrong" is defined in your own subjective eyes, and force upon them your "good" ways?

It is so interesting. One might want to strip down morality to its most basic principles to avoid the evils committed by the west in their pursuit of enforcing moral superiority (among other interests). Ideas like "don't have slaves" for instance. But the moment you wish to enforce such a rule, you require consequence, which requires system, and institutions, which come with culture, installing powers to enforce such systems, and maintaining hegemony.

And that's not even considering the variability of morality. How modern powers themselves are divided on the justice of the "death penalty" which proposes that murder is okay if state-sanctioned and determined deserved by the systems in place. But it is not okay if taken in revenge by an individual who is not endorsed by the state. That individual was not vetted by the system, and the just cause for the murder had not yet been determined by the system's criteria and opinion, as determined by the system's culture.

From my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J. M. Roberts with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to seek out a second source.

All different parts of the world were at very different stages

There were untouched Stone Age peoples in New Guinea

Russia still had the pre-Christian Julian calendar and was undergoing industrialisation 50-100 years after western Europe

The Ottoman Sultan had a harem, and dominion over many peoples including Europeans

Foot-binding was still common in upper-class China

Dirigibles were considered the future of travel by Europeans and were up in some major cities

Muslim Arabs from the Persian Gulf were curtailing the East-African slave trade

noun French for Old Order, originally in reference to the Kingdom of France which the French Revolution overturned (1790-1792). It has since been used more generally.

From my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J. M. Roberts, with a dash of my own thoughts. I always encourage you to do your own research and find a second source.

With the abolition of slavery in 1888 in Brazil, despite having profited for 300 or so years previous from the slave trade, Europe took a sense of superiority as the rest of the world had not yet also followed suit.

From the medieval ages, it was understood that Europe had always been in a state of advancement, regardless of under which school of thought that advancement was pursued. Emboldened by history, Europeans thought their future was bright, but at risk from other cultures they thought uncivilised.

As learned from my reading of The World of 1901: Inheritances by J. M. Roberts. I always advocate for doing your own research and finding a second source.

Roberts suggests that Nationhood or Nationality was a European idea, and that those in North America and Europe were much more aware of the continent they were living on as having part of naming it as such. Although others also had distinct ideas of ethnic and cultural distinction such as Han Chinese and Japanese.

In the early 1900s, few people in India thought of India as having that name and possibly becoming a country. Mostly, only white expatriates in Africa thought of Africa as such.