ITT: We talk about everything that's happened here from 0 CE to the present

>CE

>not starting at it from the year of the birth of our lord and savior Buddha
Buddha!

>CE

>Before jesus

>CE
Shame. We could've had a Taungoo thread. But you had to fuck it up, didn't you?

>CE

All these fucking crossboarder memelords sperging over the use CE because they don't actually read history books, and none of them apparently noticed that 0 CE doesn't exist.

don't be salty OP

Or they noticed but didn't mention it since it's common knowledge and only a simpleton like yourself would assume different?

>BJ

Sure they did.

>CE

>CE

>CE

>CE

>CE

>>>>CE

likely the worst offense

10/10 thread

Seriously guys? I wanted to talk about Burma history and tried for a NEUTRAL way of wording it. I myself am Christian.

chill

Maybe next time, OP. Maybe next time.

Until then,
>Common Era

this
the thread was nice though

the ancient capital of a thousand temples was the most important city for over a century.

That wasn't me. I'm

>CE

>C
>E

>CE

cuck

>Bulwark of South East Asia
>Every ethnic/religious/political minority is fucking rebelling and the government is pretty much spamming insta-autonomy to every new rebel group that shows up.

>CE

>See
>Ee

BCE and CE is perfect for non-Christfag countries.

I like to play as them in EU.

Their classical music is also great, look it up.

>CE

>0
>CE

No one even pointed out that 0 AD isn't even a real year.

Yes they did.

>CE

>CE

NEOLOGISMS CAN FUCK OFF

>CE

HEAR HEAR!

IMO it's far worse for non christians.
Using BC and AD is just referring to a specific calendar.
Using BCE and CE is basically admitting that the world turns around Europe and that christianity is the unifying element of human civilizations.
I mean /pol/ talks about jews coming up with it, but if they did they fucked up something fierce.

I suppose our culture does in fact revolve culturally around that

to say anything else is just dishonesty

>I suppose our culture does in fact revolve culturally around that
>to say anything else is just dishonesty
Then why bother with CE? Might as well keep BC and AD, which actually reflect the reason why the calendar starts when it does.
It's pretty much a catch 22 for people favouring the neologism.

you do know that the largest islamic populated country on esarth is located in SEA right

>they don't actually read history books
Most historians exclusively use AD, CE is just some shit you will find in politically correct encyclopedias for little kids.

>CE

Come on now OP

>CE

>0CE

>CE
What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?
Why does the common era start when it does?

Because conventionally it was supposed to be Jesus birthday, but modern scholarship places him around 7 to 3BC, which obviously breaks the whole system.

>CE

>Using BCE and CE is basically admitting that the world turns around Europe and that christianity is the unifying element of human civilizations.
But the world doesn't turn on Europe.
We're using the eurocentric more often now because this is an english website. for countries like china they'd use their own instead of a method that got popular in the past few centuries.

>CE

>mfw all the retards in thread don't realise that all recent historical scholarship in the west uses CE as the go-to term to date

Almost half of this board are obnoxious christians, and the other half of this board is butthurt diaspora, I would say the average age is somewhere around 17. So what did you expect?

I'm a phd canditate in history, in no way I think myself as an expert on my field, nor I expect graduate level conversaion to occur here, but boy the amount of basic ignorance and highschool history revisionism here is astounding. Most do not know basic concepts, what a language family is, what carbon dating is, what estimates mean, and so on.

again not saying that I'm a know it all, but you really should lover your expectations, I think it has to do with the age the average Veeky Forums user is far younger than you think, and it shows

>PhD candidate in history
Lol sure faggot keep bitching

>CE
Way to ruin a potentially interesting thread.

I don't get this meme. It is already known that Jesus was certainly not born on 1 AD so AD is arbitrary anyway.

>CE

>0 CE

Because it's only retroactive political correctness. They define the "common era" through the approximate birth of Jesus so why not just all bc and ad anyways.

>CE

>CE

Did the elephant duel really happen?

Or did the Burmese prince get BTFO by a mortar?

but think about it, if it is so arbitrary, doesn't that make your outrage arbitrary by extension of that?
CE is just recognizing that the date is arbitrary and we're not going to change it for practical reasons.

For posteriority

I could go for one right about now.

samfagging?

>Outrage
It's a completely unnecessary change that now makes the claim that Jesus brought about the common era as if there was one. If anything, it's more bigoted while trying to be snobbily politically correct.

It's dumb for two reasons, it's eurocentric (shits all over native calendars. Many muslim countries have their own for example, and Japan uses the traditional reign calendar in some contexts), and obfuscates the cultural origin of our calendar, as if us Western people aren't allowed to appreciate the origin of it.

>hat now makes the claim that Jesus brought about the common era as if there was one. If anything, it's more bigoted while trying to be snobbily politically correct.
I've always seen it as acknowledging the influence that Jesus had on human ethics, that it's not destroying western culture but merely acknowledging the importance of Christianity from a material standpoint, and leave the question of it's literalness open to interpretation, rather than implying it with Anno Domini.

Common era is subjective and only applies to the Western world. Common era could apply to the Renaissance, to the rise of the Roman empire, etc. Keep in mind this is all only considering Europe.

The use of bc and AD on the other hand is objective. It's based on the estimated birth and death of Jesus. It's not claiming Jesus brought some "common era". We just happen to use the Gregorian calenders system and they'd obviously based their system off of the burst of Christ or something else religious.

the point is to recognize that it is arbitrary while not changing anything for practical reasons
1) again, for practicality, the 'eurocentricness' is addressed by making it arbitrary
2)that's stupid and just causes confusion, 'yes the date is meaningless but it's cultural now' really? If you make it cultural you put it on the same level of all the other cultural calendars rather than it being standard which is something we do NOT want because the Gregorian calendar is so universally used and thus practical(European name, this is like that penny thing in the US, it is useless but some people want to keep it because lincoln is on it even though lincoln is on the five dollar bill too)
fuck off with this shit, none of these reasons are good/important enough to justify spamming this entire thread

>Common era is subjective and only applies to the Western world.
Well considering that the western world is the dominant world economic hegemony, I would imagine asking people to use it is like asking people to speak English when dealing with international trade. There's nothing stopping you from using your native tongue when dealing with locals, but when it comes to a rigorous, internationalist environment, some political correctness seems to be a necessary evil for the sake of standardization

> Common era could apply to the Renaissance, to the rise of the Roman empire, etc.
But none of those marked such a profound shift in western consciousness the way that the rise of the Christian religion completely turned millenia-old traditions firmly on their head, and things like vengeance slaying and homicide were simply no longer lauded as commendable behavior.

>The use of bc and AD on the other hand is objective.
What should westerners who don't believe that use? What should a western Jewish person use when using the Hebrew calendar would only cause confusion?

>What should westerners who don't believe that use
Non westerner here, I just use them as they are, like what do you expect? what's next? changing months names to non Roman gods? its really unnecessary

>the point is to recognize that it is arbitrary while not changing anything for practical reasons

Changing it to CE doesn't make it more practical. It just makes politically correct morons feel better about themselves while ironically being more bigoted.

>Well considering that the western world is the dominant world economic hegemony, I would imagine asking people to use it is like asking people to speak English when dealing with international trade. There's nothing stopping you from using your native tongue when dealing with locals, but when it comes to a rigorous, internationalist environment, some political correctness seems to be a necessary evil for the sake of standardization

This is not at all relatable. Your argument would only relate if English was being changed to "Common" or something stupid. Keeping it bc and AD makes a clear line that anybody even not Christian can recognize.

>But none of those marked such a profound shift in western consciousness the way that the rise of the Christian religion completely turned millenia-old traditions firmly on their head, and things like vengeance slaying and homicide were simply no longer lauded as commendable behavior.

You think Christianity brought some era of peace, wew. Homicide and vengeance slayings weren't accepted in many cultures before then. Laws existed before Jesus. Don't let monk propaganda fool you.

>What should westerners who don't believe that use? What should a western Jewish person use when using the Hebrew calendar would only cause confusion?

You don't need to believe Jesus is some Messiah bullshit to use a calenders that is based on his estimated birth. They can use whatever calenders they want, flipping ad to CE is just retarded. It changes absolutely nothing. It's based off of his birth but tries to not acknowledge that.

changing it to CE formally puts it above the other (cultural)calendars like it should be. That's the point.

>its really unnecessary
The argument is that BCE/CE is a commentary on the material circumstances of society which was fundamentally altered by the introduction of Christianity, and that BC/AD directly implies the divinity of Christ. Switching to the politically correct model gives people the choice to decide if Jesus was divine or not. Literally nobody is forcing you chose one or the other, so why can't you just accept that some people value detached professionalism over ideological tribalism?

>This is not at all relatable. Your argument would only relate if English was being changed to "Common" or something stupid. Keeping it bc and AD makes a clear line that anybody even not Christian can recognize.
But we use Latin for binomial nomenclature because when you make everything standardized you reduce the risk of confusion, while most people still just use the local name for a creature and don't mind what the rigorous academics are calling their favorite animals.

>You think Christianity brought some era of peace
Of course not. But what it did do was fundamentally change the way that humans think about ethics

> It's based off of his birth but tries to not acknowledge that.
That's not at all what it is doing, see above: it's commenting on the material circumstances changed by the introduction of the Christian religion. It's a stated commitment to analytics instead of a belief which is fundamentally unproveable.

meant to also quote:

No it doesn't. All you are doing is telling another culture that the common era (for whom?) started at that time. It's comparing some abstract concept to an objective event that the calenders is literally based off of. The only people "offended" are smug liberals. Nobody outside of the west except maybe butthurt Muslims care anyways.

I'd be totally down for greentexting ITT if this weren't a topic I'm actually interested in talking about.

Oh well.

>CE

>politically correct model
You know I still don't get how 'common era' is politically correct. It literally implies that the dawn of christianity meant the cultural unification of all human civilizations. It's so much more culturally imperialistic than AD it's not even funny. If you were really that butthurt about the year of our lord, you'd go with BC/AC (After Christ), which is actually the literal equivalent of BC/AD in many countries.

pedantry, shouldn't have expected more. All I fucking want is you to stop spamming threads with it. Any objection to it is a pet peeve and seeing AD and BC go shouldn't be a bother you.
Anyway
>>No it doesn't
>doesn't provide reasoning why not and skips to other point
what it does is recognize it as an universal calendar rather than a cultural one, it's literally in the name(Common). Because of the arbitrary nature of the date it was pretty much zero loss with a little gain(formally standing out from the cultural calendars).
That it isn't an attack on culture is deduced from the Gregorian Calendar not being forced to change name, it literally is just recognizing the date as arbitrary, and the actual date isn't changed for practicality.

>The argument is that BCE/CE is a commentary on the material circumstances of society which was fundamentally altered

This is garble

>by the introduction of Christianity, and that BC/AD directly implies the divinity of Christ. Switching to the politically correct model gives people the choice to decide if Jesus was divine or not. Literally nobody is forcing you chose one or the other, so why can't you just accept that some people value deta

You can decide if Jesus was divine or not using bc or ad. Fuck, it's questionable if he even existed. However, changing it to Common era is utterly retarded because that is claiming Jesus brought a common era.

>Literally nobody is forcing you chose one or the other, so why can't you just accept that some people value detached professionalism over ideological tribalism?

O hey, some smug asshat supporting the use of CE, go figure.

>But we use Latin for binomial nomenclature because when you make everything standardized you reduce the risk of confusion, while most people still just use the local name for a creature and don't mind what the rigorous academics are calling their favorite animals

This has literally nothing to do with the argument. Greek is also used in fields. It's not like they are using English then just claiming it to be "Common". This is just agreeing on the use of languages for standardization. The Gregorian calendar is already the standard calender, changing the names of periods is just useless.

>Of course not. But what it did do was fundamentally change the way that humans think about ethics

Lol, fuck no. Christianity just hopped on the neoplatonism/hellenistic philosophy train and took over. Read some ethics by the Greeks some time.

Fucking character limit

>pedantry,
Smug, asshole?

And I did provide reasoning. There is no such thing as some "common era". Imposing a common era on the world and basing it on the birth of Jesus is worse than just not changing a calender based on the birth of Jesus.

>what it does is recognize it as an universal calendar rather than a cultural one, it's literally in the name(Common). Because of the arbitrary nature of the date it was pretty much zero loss with a little gain(formally standing out from the cultural calendars).

The date isn't arbitrary, the Gregorian calender is based off an event. Saying that event brought the common era of the world is the retarded part.

>value detached professionalism over ideological tribalism
You do realize that people complaining about CE do it specifically because they see political correctness as the triumph of ideological tribalism over detached professionalism right?

No you didn't, you didn't state why it does explicitly not distinguish itself from cultural calendars by being arbitrary.
'Common era' is meaningless and that's the point.
The Gregorian calendar is based on a date on which they thought an event happened. It didn't. Therefore it is arbitrary. For practicality we won't change the date, but we will change the name to signify how arbitrary it is and to formally make it more of common calendar for all.

>This is garble
no, it's just a shift in priorities.
>You can decide if Jesus was divine or not using bc or ad. Fuck, it's questionable if he even existed. However, changing it to Common era is utterly retarded because that is claiming Jesus brought a common era.
No, "Anno Domini" is clearly a statement of submission, meaning "the year of our lord". And his historicity is irrelevant, the story of Christ existed and exerted influence on society and that's what we're talking about. And we call it the common era because as this user points out: it marks the beginning of standardized ethical structures. Before Christianity every temple had its own local flavor and oral tradition and it was a convoluted shitshow of bickering interests. After Christianity every church was using the same book to teach the same canon, inspiring people to organize in ways that they never even conceived of before hand.

>O hey, some smug asshat supporting the use of CE, go figure.
Oh hey, another snowflake who needs his safespace from those mean old professionals and their "logic"

>This has literally nothing to do with the argument.
It has everything to do with it: standardization makes life easier for people of far-flung cultural traditions who don't want to be forced to utter statements of submission to somebody else's god to just use a term which is totally neutral, and leave the religious questions for the proper channels. If you don't like it don't use it, it's that simple.

> Christianity just hopped on the
All human knowledge is a tapestry that builds off of itself. And neoplatonism/hellenistic philosophy was for cloistered academics and did not influence the lives of the common Greek or Roman, while Christianity has broad appeal and DID have that effect on people.

>t CE do it specifically because they see political correctness as the triumph of ideological tribalism over detached professionalism right?
Detached professionalism means if someone wants to use CE or AD, don't make an issue of it because you knew what they meant

Because you are just taking a cultural calender and calling it the common era for everybody. This isn't rocket god damn science.

Lol, so it makes sense to just hijack a calender based off an event, then claim that said event didn't happen, then declare that the turning point towards a world common era?.

Sounds completely sane and not just idiots trying to changes things for PC reasons.

>you knew what they meant
>don't make an issue of it
People expecting detached professionalism do make an issue because they do know what it likely means when someone uses a politically charged term when not called for.
Your definition of detached professionalism would mean accepting a feminist paper about filthy pigs because you know she's talking about white men.