I'm under the impression that European colonization was much worse for the colonized territory than, eg being conquered by and becoming a province of the Roman empire.
Is that correct? If so, why was that?
I think I have this intuition because...well, it just seems like European colonization did wreak a lot of damage. It led to the abomination of black slavery in America, and The remnants of the natives of North America are, after many massacres, largely confined to reservations.
In my ignorance, this seems to me to be a different, more lasting kind of harm than your culture being a vassal state to the Romans or the Persians or Alexander, for a bit.
Those cultures didn't like it, but I don't think it was an existential catastrophe for them?
One exception might be the Babylonian Exile, which does seem to have been specifically designed to destroy a culture (which the Israelites only survived because of some kind of social magic that I don't understand?)
If things like the Babylonian exile were common, then maybe my sense of European colonization being much worse is just a matter of historical selection effect / recency bias. I just don't KNOW about the cultures that ancient empires destroyed and gutted.
ARE things in the class of the Babylonian exile common?
Running with the hypothesis that European colonization was worse for a moment (though don't forget that that might not be true), one reason why that might be is that a different kind of thing was expected from the two flavors of conquest.
My impression is that the Romans were basically happy to let you keep doing your thing, but they put a Roman governor over you, and demanded that you pay tribute back to Rome.
In contrast, my impression is that most colonization enterprises, especially in Africa and South America, were more extractive: The European powers didn't want tribute, they wanted raw materials?
Like, instead of letting the native economies run and putting a tax on them, the set up was closer to demolish the native economies, and set up a command economy instead, designed to extract resources for the colonizer.
Is this correct?
And if so, why the two different models of empire? Why did Europe do it differently?
What software do people use to add a wepage to their stack of things to read?
I'm looking for something that has the following features
1. Allows me to save pages with one click. 2. When reading (as opposed to collecting), has a button that randomizes the order of the somewhat so that I'm not just going in "order added" or "reverse order added"
3. Directs me to the original page, by default, instead of having me read inside the app. (Websites have unique formatting, and I want that formatting to be part of my reading experience.
One obvious thought is that in order to "do colonialism", you need to be powerful enough to dominate other cultures, and Europe got to a technological / military advantage first.
That is obviously part of the story: Many cultures couldn't have pulled of colonialism, even if they wanted to, because of technological limitations.
Question: How do I make it natural and yummy to sit down and do programming?
In the same way that it currently feels pretty natural to transition into writing "I have an idea, and I want to write an essay", it feels like it could be natural to "have an idea and transition into implementing it."
One thing is I don't think about "writing" as anything special. It's just a thing that I do sometimes. I think I would need to have a similar attitude to programming?
Even only two tweets in, this is SOOO much less stressful than using twitter directly. Twitter is slightly laggy on my machine, so there's a low grade frustration of typing with a delay + needing to go back and correct typos.
And writing threads this way is much much easier to edit.