62 richest people has as much money as poorest 3.5 billion humans

[Nirvana_Nut85]

NYCrysis said:

Nirvana_Nut85 said:

"In about 260 BCE, Ashoka waged a bitterly destructive war against the state of Kalinga (modern Odisha).^[6] He conquered Kalinga, which none of his ancestors had done.^[7] He embraced Buddhism after witnessing the mass deaths of the Kalinga War, which he himself had waged out of a desire for conquest. "Ashoka reflected on the war in Kalinga, which reportedly had resulted in more than 100,000.

Hmmm, doesn't sound too much like  trade and Education to me. It is irrelevant what change of heart took place after the destruction he caused. I cannot for the life of me understand why you continue to argue when you were proven wrong. You Are Wrong. You can try and divert the argument as much as possible but the facts remain the same. Your argument had nothing to do with Western Wealth and colonialism. You claimed that the region of India was this peacefull, non waring , non slavery area pre islamic/colonialism. I proved your statment to be false. It is black and white plain and simple. It's like someone being sentenced to jail for murder and making an excuse that the guy down the road was a serial killer. Completely and utterly irrelevant to the subject at hand.

To address your absurd statment regarding Communism. Japan was not a communist country and Communism in China had nothing to do with the Opium wars that had occurred a century prior. Please educate yourself before babbling nonsense https://www.quora.com/Why-did-China-adopt-communism
Not too mention the most "brutal" country was Russia ( which can be classified as East &West).

P.S Here's another fine example of your peaceful pre Islamic/colonial India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_invasion_of_Srivijaya 

Because they're definitely using Trade and Education as a means of conquest.

What you are showing me is peanuts compared to western conquest. I was saying in comparison to western conquest India has been historically far more peacefull and indian leaders DO NOT HAVE THE BLOOD OF MILLIONS. also from your own wiki page:

"Throughout most of their shared history, ancient India and Indonesia enjoyed friendly and peaceful relations, therefore this Indian invasion is a unique event in Asian history."

Like seriously get over yourself. India has been historically more peaceful and hinduism, buddhism jainism, and sikhism the most peaceful. Nirvana is a Sanskrit term maybe you shouldn't be using that as Sanskrit is Hindu and it seems you have ignorance towards it. You say india if having the oppertunity would do the same as european imperialists. Except due to historical religious texts christianity, and islam breed supremacy which leads to a holier than thou art attitude which allows for blind conquest and plunder.

Indian religions textually FORBID VIOLENCE unless self defense. And has historically shown the worst of indian conquest was pennies compared to western plunder. The numbers are there. Where are your numbers?

http://list25.com/25-of-historys-deadliest-dictators/5/

NOT ONE IS INDIAN. 

 

Im not trying to show, with black and white thinking, that india is totally peaceful or was historically. But that western wealth was largely derived from the plunder of asia. And that if in power Indians (Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs) would not have caused the same travesties as the western world if roles were to have changed due to historical evidence of Indian peace. Remember India had one of the first the first agricultural and societal creations. So in effect Indian culture and Ideologies are much more evolved than euro's hunter gatherer dynasty.

Get over myself? Ignorance?There you go again using adhominem to try and deflect from the fact that you are unable to provide a sound argument.  All land is aquired through conquest. Pre-Islamic India was not formed through handshakes and political treaties.  Everytime I refute what you claim as fact, instead of admitting that you were wrong, you respond with  "Well the West did this" "and it was so much worse than what India did and that makes me right" Well, reality check for you, it doesn't  as that was not the argument.

I've addressed your statement original statement of "Sorry, you should learn Indian history. India didn't have slavery, nor it's inhabitants ever wage a war on any other nation. Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism all gave birth in India while buddhism spread throught asia by trade and peaceful contact". I disproved that by providing historical facts. It really is that black and white.

You now claim that given the "apparent" peaceful texts of Indians, that here is the reality of your peaceful India. Your Hindu culture continues to live in the stoneage with it's abhorrent Caste system; the treatment of women is appaling to where they shove rice down children who are born as females and where your rape culture makes anything in any Western country look like a day at Disney World. There is "THE BLOOD OF MILLIONS" except committed against your own. Also who empowers the  West to benefit off the Asian countries like India....Your own people! Thank God India never had the technological capabilities of properly defending itself or being able to  gather enough resources for conquest because as I previously stated, we'd be living in an ideaological stoneage. 

India was also not one of the first to implement agriculture and society.You can look to the Middle East and Africa for that. Your culture clearly is not evolved in correlation with ideology which you can refer to my previous statement of caste system and rape culture. I don't know where you get your information from but try looking to a secular source and not a biased one.

As for the term Nirvana, I use it as a referal to the band. Nirvana is mainly associated with Buddhism, which predates Hinduism. It is a state of "happiness and peace" somewhere you are clearly not as the Butthurt is strong with you :)