Blood Is Payment, and Life

Occasionally, I write an essay for a friend in order to get them through a difficult course and charge a nominal fee. This is one of them. I risk posting it here but I feel I have to, for it did come from me and sums up what I feel about not only history but the institution of education as well. That institution is run by sour old bastards whose balls have dried up probably due to fear. I understand that. I sympathize with that. I try not to spend too much time thinking about what sort of damage I may have done to my own life by writing letters like this. I only hope that one day it amounts to something more that an afterthought skimmed by readers looking for a quick argument.

The world as we know it today was born during the 1300 C.E. period to the 1700 C.E. period. Before those times of black plague and the seesaw effect of declining China and rising Europe any student finds that the troubles of that day are not different from the troubles of now. The Christians and Muslims fought each other for not just land but followers, flexing muscle in order to sway the herd. A group of farmers believing in one god collided with a group of sailors believing in another god; they saw land and found it good, therefore they shed blood to control the lands. In gaining the lands they forced their morals upon the people, some of whom agreed and some of whom did not agree. Fighting ensued.


Same as it ever was. In history, fighting is always the deciding factor. It has little to do with who has the money or who has the goods or even who has the land. The end always goes to the one who has the will and the soldiers and the weapons. This has never proved wrong. There are no facts supporting the idea that the weaker muscle controls the stronger muscle in any case for the statement makes no sense. Hours of research are spent to create arguments supporting differing sides of the political science when all that really matters is who has the weapons. This is an ugly truth but it is nevertheless true. And it will not change.


In answering these questions this one came last. I realized something—historical examples and sufficient detail from the text must be used to support...what? Any new idea? Just reading the text and using the internet for research to write a run-of-the-mill essay explaining the same picture of brain fodder anyone else could describe with a thesaurus and wi-fi seems pointless to me, not to mention exhausting. History shows that the influence of trade over the course of years is controlled by the ones who are willing to shed the most blood. For all the banter and think-tanks this is now and will always remain the truth.

What is most sad is the fact that students who have read these facts and reported them with essays will not state this plainly. There is always the risk of a bad grade, and spreading truth is never worth that. Where history is concerned it is if only due to the simple fact that history is made through war, blood, drive, and the ability to suck down the fear of consequence when it comes to going off the beaten path and blazing a trail. Sometimes, however, that is what must be done.

In researching this time period one will find evidence of a world being born. Burma, the Jewish nations, India, China, Europe, even America—all of these nations struggled during this time period to make a name for themselves. They all made respective names the same way, through blood and the diplomacy that comes after the blood has been spilled. Those names have not fared well, so here we are today, still spilling blood in the hopes of creating newer, smaller names and keeping good the larger, more popular names. Rather than proving knowledge of the times, dates, and names important in these motions it is better to educate new minds in ways of repaving the way, not with blood, but with something else as yet unfound.