Skip to main content

The Most Evil Empire That Has Ever Existed

In the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (1911), the first paragraph for the article "British Empire" states:

"BRITISH EMPIRE, the name now loosely given to the whole aggregate of territory, the inhabitants of which, under various forms of government, ultimately look to the British crown as the supreme head. The term 'empire' is in this connexion obviously used rather for convenience than in any sense equivalent to that of the older or despotic empires of history."

Some might chuckle at this description while noting that the British had quite a high opinion of themselves.  Of course, in some sense, the empire was despotic...not in the sense that there was one tyrant in charge of it, but rather that only a minority of people in the empire were able to participate democratically in it.

Yet with a short memory, society has pretty much forgotten about the atrocities committed by the empires that the British encyclopedia writers might have been alluding to.  Of course, throughout the Empire, the British at least wanted to see themselves as the "good guys".  Many other empires had no such desire.  Some wanted to be so cruel as to strike fear into hear hearts of people just from hearing their name.  One comes to my mind, but it has somehow been forgotten in the course of history.

So, what do you think is the cruelest empire...the most evil empire that has ever existed?  Take a few seconds right now to think.  You might say that Nazi Germany was the most evil empire.  It is hard to disagree with that, yet I don't think that the Third Reich was the worst.  If you read or listen to history, you'll find worse ones...and horrifyingly, you'll find ones that WON, and had carte blanche to shape the world.  Of course, saying that one empire is the "most evil" is not meant to diminish the amount of suffering inflicted by other empires.  To be sure, if I were set to be exterminated in a Nazi death camp, I might not say, "Well, the Nazis aren't so bad comparatively."  No.  Of course not.  We know that every empire (and nation) has had atrocities committed by those working for it, and I can understand the opinion of anyone who has been on the receiving end.  Any empire can be the worst to someone.  But I want to talk about the most evil empire I know of.

Was it the Spanish Empire?  This was one of the original empires of the European "Age of Discovery".  Spain and Portugal got other countries like Britain and the Netherlands into the game.  These latecomers didn't want to lose out, because for a while, it seemed like Spain and Portugal had partitioned the world between them and were going to be the mightiest realms on earth if their expansion wasn't checked.  Christopher Columbus (a Genoan) explored the New World through Spanish financing.  Disease and slavery subsequently led to the deaths of millions of people.  Again, if I were on the receiving end, I would no doubt have said that the Spanish were the worst.  And unlike the Nazis, they won.

 However, the world today is too Eurocentric...not only with the good, but with the bad.  Some ignorant people's view of history is "In the beginning, Europeans did bad stuff to everyone else (and each other)."  When you think like that, you are not only throwing out thousands of years of history, but are also forgetting history contemporary with European expansion, that was happening elsewhere.

And so we come to the cruelest empire that has ever existed - the Mongols.  As far as we know, there was absolutely no pretension of benevolence.  Even most other horrible empires fought for something.  If we let empires speak for themselves, they will probably tell you what they were fighting for (even though these were often just excuses).  The British fought to enlighten the world.  The Spanish fought to spread Christianity.  The Caliphates fought to spread Islam.  The Nazis fought to destroy the plague of Bolshevism and rid the world of "Jewish influence".  Of course, vast riches and lands were always sought after by all of these empires, but it was hard for them to admit it to themselves.  The Mongols, on the other hand, didn't need to justify their expansion.  They expanded because they loved to kill and rape.  If there was a Mongol charter, it wouldn't say: "Our mission is to spread X Religion to the savage peoples."  Their mission would say: "We are a savage people who enjoy murder, and want loot.  It makes us happy to rape and murder people."  It was that simple.

You may think I'm overdoing it.  I'm not.  Without doubt, I'm not trying to cast aspersions at most people currently living in the nation of Mongolia.  I am only stating the truth of what the Mongol Empire(s) were like.

The Mongols were an empire more than a people.  They started out as Mongolians, but quickly incorporated Turkic tribes.  Genghis Khan was shamanistic (and might have thought of himself as a god or prophet).  Timur the Lame (Tamerlane), who was born over 100 years after Genghis Khan died, was a fierce Muslim.  (In fact, the "Mughals" are descended from the "Mongols" - and the names have the same origin.)  Yet there seems to have been very little in the way of personality differences between these men.  (Although the later Mughals had much more of a Persian culture than a Mongol culture.)

Now let me introduce what I think is the best historical rundown of the Mongols out there.  It's by Dan Carlin, who has two podcast shows - "Common Sense", and "Hardcore History".  Dan Carlin has a series of podcasts about the Mongol Empire.  If you're interested in learning more about this empire, you NEED to check out his podcasts.  They will inform you in an entertaining yet serious way like nothing else.  I have done (amateur) research on the Mongols (via Wikipedia and other sources), so I already knew about the Mongols, but this man sets everything out there and gives you the truth that many think is too hard to hear.  I have only listened to the first two parts so far, but I'll definitely continue the series.  These are perfect for when you just want to lie down and listen to something (like an audio book), or if you're exercising and want some interesting mental stimulation at the same time.  Check it out!  A link to the Hardcore History archive is below:

http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php/hharchive

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fighting Klanophobia I'm always hurt when I see bigots offend groups of people.  All too often, people paint a group, "the other" with a broad brush and stereotype them as being evil, even though the crimes that are associated with them are only committed by a tiny minority fringe element within the larger group. Such is the case with the Ku Klux Klan.  Most people don't like to associate with them.  There is a lot of prejudice directed towards that group, particularly among blacks and Jews, but this hate is widespread.  If you see a klansman wearing his cultural garb, how do you feel?  Do you become nervous?  Do you think that he'll do something violent?  If so, you're part of the problem. The KKK is an organization of peace.  Most of its members are peaceful and only want to go about their lives without being harmed...like most people in this world.  Sure, there are a few members who preach hate, but that's true in almost every grou...

The Islamic State has beheaded at least 21 Christians in Libya.

Whenever a Muslim brings up the Crusades, I have to laugh to myself.  Christians have done horrible things, including in later crusades against Constantinople and the Cathars in particular.  However, get this.  The Islamic State militants said, "Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for" right before butchering Egyptian Christians. It seems that many Muslims haven't taken a single history class.  If they had, they would have known that Christians existed in Egypt for 400 years before Islam.  (Heck, they were even around to murder Hypatia, perhaps the last major ancient female philosopher.)  It was the Muslims who were the "Crusaders"...yet almost nobody will admit to this.  Muslims instigated a merciless war against Christian Egyptians until they were overcome and under Islamic domination.  They did this to people across the world, from Spain to India...massacring any who resisted.  They tried to destroy the Byzaintine Em...
Sokal-style hoaxes work for religious postmodernists, but (post) modernism is the real hoax Modernism in art and architecture, and postmodernism in philosophy are, like religion, insults to human intelligence.  Unfortunately, many people fall for their hollow propaganda. The "Sokal Affair" was a hoax whereby a man called Alan Sokal submitted a postmodern-sounding article to a postmodern journal.  It turns out that the English you hear isn't just unintelligible to you, but it's unintelligible to the people at the journal as well.  But if it's unintelligible, it must be profound, right?  The journal quickly accepted it, not knowing that it was all fake B.S.  They then got embarrassed when they were told that it was pompous-sounding drivel. Religion has done the same thing.  When people can't understand something, they generally think it's much more profound than if they can understand it.  If a priest speaks Latin, wears some weird costume, and sp...