Fabian Fucan REJECTS Christianity.. Noo wayy

Fabian Fucan converted to Christianity at early age but later he considered it as his mistake! So, he condemns the Christian faith by supporting Buddhist ideas. He attacks Christianity by describing the Christian faith as barberic, evil thing! Culturally, he attacks Christianity by saying that its mission is to destroy Japanese cultural traditions and bring in "their traditions". Politically, he attacks Christianity by saying how "they have dispatched troops and usurped Luzon (the Philippines) and Nova Hispania (Mexico)". Historically, he describes how Japan was without Christianity before! And now Christian missionaries are here to destory the history as well as cultural traditions, the reason why he attacks Christianity politically as well. In social aspects, he pretty much describes Christianity as bad and 'evil' and he is trying to prevent people from converting to Christianity; according to him, Buddhism is the best!

Chapter 26 Project :)

So since we could not do showme all together, we divided up the sections of the chapter and everyone did their own! Here is the order it goes in:

Part 1 (696-700)
Part 2 (701-704)
Part 3 (705-710)
Part 4 (711-715)
Part 5 (715-718)

Capitalism.. Hmm i think i know now!

Alright, so capitalism is an economic system in which there is a competition between companies/businesses/merchants and they run the state. Due to growth in agriculture and new techniques of manufacturing, the competition increased. A technique known as supply and demand, in which a businessman would buy cheap goods from a place where it was easier to find and sell it somewhere else where the goods' prices would be high because it would be rare to find, was used in a capitalist system. Also, the private parties organized institutions and services, such as banks, to promote capitalism. This resulted in higher stock-exchange in Europe. The stock-exchanges created markets for investors to buy and sell shares in joint-stock companies. The trading companies took advantage of communications and transportation networks. So pretty much, capitalism  led the society into more economic and financial direction with 'cheapness'. 

Christianity splitting... Origin of dilemma!!

Hmm, Christianity keeps on splitting, because there were new ideas evolving due to Renaissance. It keeps on repeating in history; everytime there is a new idea or reform or something going on, the religion changes. May be people just like to see new things rather than sticking with their old ones! Nah, can't be true though! Anyways, what I believe is because of new ideas, the religion changes and keeps on splitting. I guess people started to have new ideas and may be it was hard to maintain the old belief with people who have new various ideas. Due to Renaissance, people started to think in different ways and their beliefs of 'what the religion should be' like changed.

Capitalism? I absolutely have no clue what is capitalism! Might have heard it last year or so but I clearly don't remember.

StOrYtIMe!!!!

Learning about history through Griots is definitely an interesting way of getting knowledge, but as always, there are pros and cons in almost everything in this world!
Pros: well, one good thing about learning history through music and dance is one would understand the culture aspects. The culture is and will be always be passed down to generations by this method of storytelling. Also, it is an interesting way of getting knowledge: looks fun to watch and definitely is better than reading texts!
Cons: I deal with trust issues! I don't trust people easily, so of course, it would be harder for me to trust whatever the griots are telling me! How can they be so sure? How do they know about it? What if they are favoring one side? What if they are adding their own thoughts into the history? What about their opinions? I already have so many questions and doubts in my head! I do not think a person like me would trust and choose this method of learning history :)
I would prefer textbooks over learning history by griots! The reason is, first of all, you cannot put your opinion in textbooks meaning the information cannot be altered. Secondly, I just think textbooks are better for storing history rather than keeping history in mind because you have chances of mixing up things as in dates or mix up part of history with the other part!

Mongols on TRIAL!! Not so sure if they would come after me if I charge them as guilty or even for putting them on a trial!!! :O

          The trial was an amazing experience, totally different from any other projects I have ever done! I don't think I have ever done a trial in any of my classes before, so it surely was a different experience. I did enjoy it; it definitely was easier than the last project I did on crusades. Well, for the last project, Xtranormal was being stupid, so it wasn't in my hands. Anyways, overall, I did enjoy the trial, and it was definitely more easier.
I was on the defense side, doing an opening statement. I think I did a descent job; my opening statement was completely different from the persecution's opening statement. I didn't have to do much of the research since I knew what I was talking about. Also, reading the chapter did help me with understanding and defending the Mongols. Public speaking is definitely not one of my thing, and I did get nervous standing in front of a class - everyone staring at me even though I had my ipad with me. I really need to work on being confident in front of the class :)

According to me, Mongols are bad and good at the same time. I wouldn't say that they were horrible monsters or even typical empire builders. Their strategies differed from any other great empires. Yes, I do believe that we should admire for what they built since they built one of the greatest empires known in the history, but their way of building that empire wasn't great. They could have expanded differently, I guess, in a more nicer way rather than killing a bunch of people. 
As a verdict, I would definitely charge Mongols guilty for terrorism and kidnapping. They did create fear in innocent people by killing and kidnapping. Kidnapping was very popular war tactic of the Mongols; they kidnapped people and took them to their empire. Even though I was on the defense side, I would definitely charge them guilty for kidnapping and terrorism, but I wouldn't charge them guilty of genocide. Mongols did not attack any specific group based on religion or region. They were not racist while expanding their empire. They pretty much killed those whom they were trying to take over, which proves them innocent of genocide.

Genghis Khan: psychopath or killer?

Genghis Khan! I don't think he's a popular guy; even if people know him, he is most likely known as 'serial' destroyer! Even though he was born in an environment around tribes attacking each other, he could have chosen to become a ruler, uniting those tribes but he chooses to become a dictatorial ruler by attacking a millions and killing thousands of people. Khan created large united empire, but was filled with blood after winning a landmass. Rather than winning his people in more nicer way, he chose to do it the harsh way! In fact, he also killed children and women which was completely unnecessary. He also abducted others' wives. Now days, I do not think it's humane to do a certain things which Genghis Khan did.