torsdag 24 juli 2008

Luthersk evangelisk tro i sv gl

Demokrati, vetenskap etc under 100 år = och inte avskaffat icke utvecklande, sanna, befriande och icke-oegennyttiga projekt (som kk).
Egenintresse (pedofili, fina byggnader, tjocka smackande magar och vindrickande som pisseriet i forntida kloster= fin rättfärdighet). Gamle Luther gav ju en känga och blev "jag protesterar" (protestant).

2000 år av skithistoria
Origier, superier, prostituerade kvinnor, släkten Boriga/Medicis inflytande kohandel, köpslående och mord och lögn och ränksmiderier kring denna helvetstron (jfr gamla bysantinska helvetet där bla kvinnor hade inflytande = kan ju ha varit en kvinnlig påve en gång)

Man kan själv söka info

Legend, profetia (utifrån mänsklig empiri och självklar prediktion och slutsats= ond helvetskyrka).
Det finns inget (tippar på lotto och kommer med slutsats om tex satan tar över den hästen pga allt jag upplevt).

Ställde sig på stranden som det står i johannes uppenbarelse
Ett genklonexperiment under katakomberna iscensatt av nazistpåven Råttan Benedict ("jag ska göra en ny värld")
Vilken värld blir det?

Man kan fråga sig vilka som är barbarerna?

På medeltiden (tex hängde ju denna kärleksreligion äggtjuv och fisketjuv i bla England och Frankrike).
Dom söp ner dom i bla Provence (och sålde skörden dyrt och levde loppan själva).
Exilen i Revenna.

En rättfärdig hämnd för all pedofili, grov prostitution (bla ryska klostren= inga sexuella behov kunde ju inte utföras där) och bla katolska småstaterna (Genua tex galärflotta som straff och legalisering av bordeller)
Man hängde upp dom i träden och tog rättfärdigt rov



Holy Roman Empire Report
The Holy Roman Empire (sacrum romanum imperium) was a European political society, lasting from 962-1806 A.D. The first actual crowned emperor was crowned in 800 A.D., on Christmas Day, but it wasn’t until 962 that a continuous line of emperors started, and it wasn’t until 1254 that the actual term ‘Holy Roman Empire’ was used; terms like Holy Empire/ Roman Empire were used instead for various reasons. The Holy Roman Empire, despite its name, never had Rome in its borders, and in fact, were Germans. The main reason for its name was because it was the geographic successor of the Western Roman Empire, and thoughts of having a religious empire was a dominant ideology at the time.
Internal Conflict
The main theory of what led to the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire was continuous internal conflict. There were many revolts and rebellions, caused by Nobles turning on each other, and going against the Emperor himself. The Holy Roman Empire was not a very conglomerate society, unlike others at that time, such as the French. Instead, the Holy Roman Empire was more of a collection of smaller internal powers, such as noble houses. Usually these houses would fight each other, and argue, for the place of Emperor, as if a family member got that position, the noble house would automatically gain power. For a while in the Empire’s history, the states in the Holy Roman Empire were fairly united, under the Emperor.
A major problem was that the Emperor was elected though votes, and when an Emperor was elected, the other houses usually disputed that the votes were rigged, miscounted, or had an error. These disputes led to something as bad as civil war. But from the 1200’s onwards, the Emperor had lost a lot of his holding and power in the Empire. Instead, from this time onwards, Princes of royal families had gradually gained more power, and independence. This was one of the major steps to the collapse of the Empire; it began the loss of cohesion within the empire.
Frederick II had probably made one of the largest mistakes in the Empire’s history; he gave each German Prince, and their houses, more power. Soon after he died, in the mid 1200’s most houses took this absence of emperor to expand their power, which gave them more political independence and two different princes had proclaimed themselves emperor. By this time the Holy Roman Empire began losing its power, and authority.
There were three major German dynasties were fighting for power, with the Habsburgs being the dominant power. But the Habsburg emperors were concerned with their own Prussia and Austria having a power struggle, and the towards the 17th century, The Holy Roman Empire had little central authority, and most of the empire were split into smaller states, principalities etc, usually lead by a Prince.
The French Revolution began in 1789, and under the leadership of Napoleon I, they attacked the Holy Roman Empire. The states of the Empire united together to fight a defensive war, but they still ended up losing. By 1804, Napoleon had already conquered quite a lot of land, and formed the Confederation of the Rhine, made up of the conquered people. They requested that Francis II, the last emperor to give up his title. In 1806, Francis II released his title of Holy Roman Emperor, and had officially dissolved the Empire.
The flaws about this theory, though it being the main one is that the Empire lasted too long; and in its history, it always tried to expand. There were many major civil wars and rebellions within the Empire, but it stood strong for such a long time, and even after almost all cohesion was lost in the empire, there were a few hundred different principality’s, houses etc, meaning the Empire would have had a humongous population; which it shouldn’t have due to the Black Plague and all the wars. Many emperors had also tried to expand in its history, and had almost expanded to a Mediterranean Empire; which would have been nearly impossible due to conflict in the homeland.
Internal conflict is a major part of the collapse, and not only the Holy Roman Empire. Other society’s such as the several of the Chinese dynasties, such as the Tang and Han dynasties had faced internal conflicts in their histories; ranging from argument between powers, all the way to rebellion and civil war. Both were also eventually invaded by hostile enemies, such as barbarians.
If using Jared Diamond’s 5-Point-Framework to assess this theory, then his theory can be shown to be similarly flawed. His framework concentrates on environmental issues, such as climate change, deforestation etc. There were no mentions of this whatsoever in this theory; his framework didn’t mention internal conflict. The closest thing in his framework would be ‘Hostile Neighbors’, in which would be the French, and Napoleon’s invasion. But the theory points that the internal conflict was what weakened the Empire, which caused its defeat against the French. While Jared Diamond also mentions society’s response to its problems, he means response to its environmental problems, which can’t be applied in this theory. Joseph Tainter also explained that society’s collapse was due to ‘energy’ use (as in money, and natural resources) and the inability to return that energy. The only energy in this theory would have probably been manpower, which in Tainter’s views, is not a valid source of energy. He also had a model, called the Runaway Train, which says that a society grows so large, and develops into such a complex ecosystem that they become unstable and collapse. While this model can be compared to this theory in a way, it can also be proven wrong. The Holy Roman Empire had internal conflict from near the beginning, and it never really grew more advanced. Internal conflict wasn’t brought from complex systems, and people fighting to control it, German princes, lords and armies fought for one thing. Their own personal greed and lust for more power. The Holy Roman Empire never had problems with resources, it could have expanded even more if it was more conglomerate, but internal conflict for more power stopped this.
Religion & Reformations
Another theory is that the Empires collapse was not brought mainly from internal conflict. Instead the eventual collapse was brought by external conflict with the Papal States and several major reformations in history. The Papal States was essentially the city of Rome, where the pope resided. Religion was a very important and powerful thing in medieval times. The pope was thought to be a messenger of god, and had humongous political power. All the reformations usually had something related to religion.
Papal Reformation
There were several emperors that had opposed the Papal States. Some had dismissed popes as subservient priests, doing as they liked. Others had directly conflicted for power; pope and emperor. This power struggle lasted a long time, early in the empire’s history. This power struggle ended with the first major reformation. In 1059, Pope Nicholas II reformed the papal election system; the pope was elected by a gathering of bishops and cardinals. This brought the Church to independence over the state, and more importantly, over the emperors. This reform took away corrupt popes, and being backed by the rest of the papacy, they had gained power.
Protestant Reformation
Around 1516, Martin Luther lead a very significant reformation; the Protestant Reformation. This is one of the most significant reformations in history, as it was one to try to modify the Catholic Church. Even today, the significant reason of why there are branches of Catholicism and Protestantism in Christianity today is because of this. Martin Luther was a German philosopher that highly disagreed with the Catholic Church at the time, and he and other followers unanimously declared that the church was antichrist and began the reformation. The reformation hit the Holy Roman Empire the hardest, as it first divided it into two; people that stayed Catholic, and others that converted to Protestant.
Counter Reformation
In 1560 the Catholic Reformation, also known as the Counter Reformation, was put into place. This was a movement to counteract the Protestant Reformation. The Counter Reformation was led by the head of the papacy, and involved several steps, such as reviving Inquisitors, and the end result was a massive increase in the power of the Papacy. The church created a society called The Society of Jesus to try to reinforce religion. Half a century later, in 1618 the continuous argument over Catholics and Protestants sparked the Thirty Year War. This brought catastrophic results to the empire, and the Habsburg houses decided to reinforce Catholicism, and started war on all Protestant German States. Germany had aid from various other European nations, but the Catholic side was winning. Soon, the French joined the war, and brought it to balance. The war ended with the Peace of Westphalia, with each prince able to decide the religion of his own state.
Crusades & War
Crusades were a major religious event in medieval times; they were a coalition of Christian forces to fight in the ‘Holy Land’ (Middle East). Because the several crusades in history were very important, the Holy Roman Empire had suffered from them. This was due to loss of military power, from combat with Turks/Muslims, disease, suicide, and routing.
There was a crusade where the Emperor, Frederick Barbarossa, had died in a river while marching to Jerusalem. This had led to wide panic among his gathered army of around 100,000 soldiers, and due to several reasons, only a few thousand had actually reached Acre. Frederick II, one of the emperors of HRE was also excommunicated twice for delays to joining crusades. Being excommunicated in those times was a horrendous thing, as it meant being abandoned by God, which could have been one of the worst punishments then.
There was even the very rare instance, where an official crusade was called against the Holy Roman Empire, to be specific, Emperor Frederick II. There was a brief war in Italy, where the Holy Roman Empire fought the Papal States, and intended to take over Italy. But after the death of Frederick and his illegitimate son, who died in battle, a peace treaty was secured.
This theory is actually pretty well done. As religion, in Europe at least, during medieval times, was an extremely significant thing, and influenced almost anything. This could be how people lived their lives (popes, bishops etc had powerful, rich lives; while most others suffered disease). The three religious reformations were very important, and didn’t just damage the Holy Roman Empire (though they were hit hardest), but most of the catholic factions of Europe. Religion leading to war (crusades and the Thirty Year War) were a very likely thing, and once again, usually involved other catholic factions. Furthermore, the French joining the Thirty Year War was probably a major reason, the French decided to invade The Holy Roman Empire, which brought its ultimate demise.
Using Jared Diamond’s or Joseph Tainter’s framework, same as the theory of internal conflict, both frameworks are invalid/flawed. Jared Diamond’s framework doesn’t even mention the fact that religion may have caused collapse. He makes examples of how religion can motivate environmental destruction. Such an example is the Easter Islands; they ran out of wood trying to move stone idols that represent their gods/ancestors. The Holy Roman Empire, and other catholic factions were affected by these religious reforms, because of its people’s life-long beliefs, and it split the society in two. They didn’t run out of any resources and blame it on God.
However, Joseph Tainter’s House of Cards can be used in a way in this situation. It says how society grows too big for it to be stable. That can be said for the church, and the catholic factions. Catholicism in Europe had grown immensely over the years, and eventually have massive influence on how society’s work. When the protestant reform started, which proved the fragility of the Catholic System; it brought humongous damage to any catholic faction. Also, as the Holy Roman Empire was such a large society, having it split into two was catastrophic.
Conclusive Theory
My theory on what caused the Holy Roman Empire’s eventual collapse was its ambition. The Holy Roman Empire had humongous military and political power, and it had abundant resources; so much that it never had environment problems (Other than Black Plague, which was a disease that covered all of Europe). It could have expanded into a Mediterranean Empire, if the emperors made the right moves, and the society was more cohesive as a whole. But there lied the problem; it’s internal leaders. There were multitudes of German houses in the Empire, with many princes and leaders. Anyone with power will always crave more power; they fought each other, because of their ambition and greed to grow into stronger entity within the world.
They fought over for rights of land, rights to being emperor; they did this for their own personal gain, which brought the Empire down. Some Emperors wanted more land, so they opposed the Papal States; head of religion itself in that time. They had almost taken all of Sicily; they had even gone against the Byzantine and were expanding; until the Emperor died. The moment the emperor died, the princes came out like insects and fought for more power, growing bit by bit more independent.
Soon enough, the Holy Roman Empire were basically independent states. This happened while the Emperors looked outside their own borders, and tried to conquer, the princes hated most emperors, and grew evermore independent, until the lost the ability to expand altogether. The French soon attacked the Empire, and due to its weakened state, the Holy Roman Empire had lost. Soon, the last emperor was forced to even rid of his title, and had dissolved the Empire, for he had no other choice. The empire lasted over a millennium, they were strong at the beginning, but they brought their own demise. The Empire was not Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire.

[Left: Map of the Holy Roman Empire in 1000 A.D., red line defines border, also had the two Sicilian Islands.]
[Right: Map of the Holy Roman Empire in around 1648 A.D., lost control of Italian states, and some European land.][Click on image for better view]
How Contemporary Society learn from the Holy Roman Empire
Modern society had actually much improved, and is currently much more cohesive on a global scale; thanks to the UN, and the fear brought from two world wars and a nuclear arms race. But that doesn’t mean the world is free from war. Fear of nuclear attacks (North Korea) and the war of terrorism, there is still conflict in the world, and it is internal in a UN/global sense. If a third world war did start, it is very possible internal conflicts, in terms of global, alliances etc may happen.
However, that only applies to most First World countries; it’s a different story for the rest of the planet. In Africa, and the Middle-East, there are numerous internal conflicts. There are rebels going around, raiding the government, violent mobs attacking each other, and even civil wars in some places, causing entire cities to evacuate. Iraq is a major example, there were numerous internal conflicts for oil, and earlier in history; there was the Gulf War. At this rate, many middle-eastern/African states do face collapse, which is evident even now (US soldiers aiding in middle-east, though will probably leave soon).
Mainly primary references were used, secondary were only used in brief to verify, or see different opinions on theories.
Primary References
Britannica Online
Secondary References
World Book
Posted by Genesis and Exile at 8:48 PM
Monday, February 11, 2008

My OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT CERTIFIED Worksafe Certificate.No, it is not photoshop, our new (yet horrible) Multimedia teacher made us take the test since we use computers...

Aztec;Derived from the word aztlan, meaning “white land”

Inkas söka själv (9/10 dog av pest)