Why Don't Others Try To Conquer The World?

[Nietzsche]

If buddhists or lhpers or pagans did try to conquer world i would fund them , i would even consider joining them.But it seems that only the most boring and dull religions try to counquer the world.I think that's because they are the least intelligence for that reason they strike the simple minded man's intelligence most.So why don't other religions try to conquer the world?They would surely make the world a better , or more fun place.Are the cowards or what?They owe that to humanity , they have to rid world of inferior religions.Otherwise the scum shall inherit the world.

Because victory is boring as hell.

 

[Augustus]

Yes Homo sapiens lived the earth for 200,000 years,all were useless except the last few hundred of years.

Nah, lots of them were great which is why boasting about a single point in history as if it was the most remarkable era known to mankind is a bit silly.

 

[Quintessence]

Religions don't try to conquer the world...psychopaths do. Psychopaths who use religion to abuse others...try to 'conquer' the world. If you are at peace in your life, you have no need to conquer anyone, let alone the world.

I'd also add to that only arrogant, stupid, deluded, and ignorant try to conquer the world, because doing so is completely impossible and thus a monumental waste of time.

 

[FearGod]

As is the Middle East now, so I guess that gives Christians in Europe a right to invade the Muslim Middle East and drag it out of its current Dark Age?

Can't be because Muslims were the only world's superpower, today for example US can't fight in Syria except after
taking a permission from Russia.

 

[Rival]

Can't be because Muslims were the only world's superpower, today for example US can't fight in Syria except after
taking a permission from Russia.

Um.

 

[dust1n]

Yes i know, but my point was that Europe was lacking behind at that era.

That is true in many ways. But being behind culturally is one thing, and being conquered is another; thus my confusion. Also, that was like centuries ago....

 

[Augustus]

Can't be because Muslims were the only world's superpower,

China probably would have disagreed... Their Empire was probably 70% larger in terms of population after all...

 

[Lyndon]

Nobody thinks America is trying and succeeding at taking over the world???

 

[Nietzsche]

Nobody thinks America is trying and succeeding at taking over the world???

If what the US is doing counts as "world domination", the standards for conquest have dropped pitiably low. What happened to the Ceasars? The Alexanders? The Xerxes? The Napoleons? The Rhodes and Leopolds? Hell, I'd settle for a less neurotic Hitler or Stalin at this point.

Conquest used to mean something goddamnit!

 

[Lyndon]

Tell that to the starving refugees in Africa drinking Coca Cola.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'd take over the world but my robot army is on back order.

 

[Deidre]

I'd also add to that only arrogant, stupid, deluded, and ignorant try to conquer the world, because doing so is completely impossible and thus a monumental waste of time.

True!

I can't imagine what one would do if they conquered the world? There's a book, the title escapes me and it is sort of based on this premise...that the people in the book conquer everything they set out to, and then they turned on one another. I imagine that might happen, a lot of in-fighting when the out-fighting is through.

 

[Quintessence]

True!

I can't imagine what one would do if they conquered the world? There's a book, the title escapes me and it is sort of based on this premise...that the people in the book conquer everything they set out to, and then they turned on one another. I imagine that might happen, a lot of in-fighting when the out-fighting is through.

But it can't be done, so I see no need to imagine what can never be. Conquest can't even be done on any scale, really. What conquest is... is the illusion or delusion of having "power over" or dominance in a relationship. Except the thing is... it's a relationship. Meaning, there can be no "dominance" without the power of what we call the "submissive" or "conquered." So who is really "dominant" here, when there can be no such thing as a "conquerer" without "conquered?" When there can be no CEO without the company's workers?

Folks in my culture tend towards hierarchical thinking, so they believe there is such a thing as "conquest" and "dominance." It's embedded in our cultural philosophies. As someone with a wee bit too much knowledge of ecology and global systems, I personally can't buy into that narrative.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Has anyone ever really tried to take over the globe? The only real example I can think of is the cold war.

Alexander the Great and a number of imitators (such as Mehmed II, who was actually an impressive conqueror), and while I don't know if any others have made it an expressed desire, many have been conquered massive areas of land such as Genghis Khan, the Roman Empire, and the British Empire at it's height was so vast that it was said that the sun never set on it.
Today, in many ways, you could say that America has conquered the world, as American social, economic, and political hegemony is vast, powerful, and has permeated all but a few areas of human society as a whole.

 

[Sees]

I'm a big fan of diversity, pluralism, multiculturalism.... Don't want all people to think, believe, live, etc. like I do. Neither see it as possible or ideal.

Exclusivism and excessive/forced uniformity have a bad stink and a lot of negative consequences.

 

[Father Heathen]

Nobody thinks America is trying and succeeding at taking over the world???

Nope.

 

[Nietzsche]

Tell that to the starving refugees in Africa drinking Coca Cola.

I don't happen to know any, but if you happen to meet some, could you do that for me?

 

[Mackerni]

The world has been conquered ... by diplomacy. Look at the United Nations. The vast majority of the world is part of the organization and their laws are consistently getting tighter. We have learned a long time ago though, that it's better to rule with diversity than to be opposed with adversity. Don't control the world; let the world control itself. The person who made this topic must be living in some questionable conditions.

 

[ScottySatan]

Alexander the Great and a number of imitators (such as Mehmed II, who was actually an impressive conqueror), and while I don't know if any others have made it an expressed desire, many have been conquered massive areas of land such as Genghis Khan, the Roman Empire, and the British Empire at it's height was so vast that it was said that the sun never set on it.
Today, in many ways, you could say that America has conquered the world, as American social, economic, and political hegemony is vast, powerful, and has permeated all but a few areas of human society as a whole.

I guess I was trying to say... Did any of those empires ever actually try to take all of everything? Why didn't Alex go out with a second army? Roman emperor Hadrian stopped expanding and fortified the borders; Scotland wasn't worth it. I thought the Mongols just kind of did things one step at a time, their last focus on getting european wealth. Did anyone actually try world domination? Would Alex and the Khans and Rome have thought themselves failures?

 

[Desert Snake]

Alexander the Great and a number of imitators (such as Mehmed II, who was actually an impressive conqueror), and while I don't know if any others have made it an expressed desire, many have been conquered massive areas of land such as Genghis Khan, the Roman Empire, and the British Empire at it's height was so vast that it was said that the sun never set on it.
Today, in many ways, you could say that America has conquered the world, as American social, economic, and political hegemony is vast, powerful, and has permeated all but a few areas of human society as a whole.

It isn't ''conquering'', it's just being so awesome that everyone wants to be us.

/U.S.A./