Great you visited it. One reads all these cautionary notices about traveling to Peru. What was your experience? Did you visit on a group tour? Would love to know more.
Yes, Peru (and South America in general) can be fairly dangerous for people used to Europe or the US, but if you let you be guided by someone who knows where to go, it is a wonderful place. My wife herself is Peruvian but lived in Europe for her whole life so it was a new experience for her as well. We travelled on a tour planned by a travel agency ad-hoc for our honeymoon, so we were alone (not in a group) but we were escorted by private guides for all the travel, who organized both the transports and the touristic activities. Schedules were tight so it was challenging, but really rewarding! On top of the usual famous places like Machu Pichu I also greatly recommend the amazonian region. We went to a lodge on the Marañon river some kilometers from the source of the Amazon River and met local tribes (including one of the five last speakers of a disappearing local ancient language). Great memories for sure!
Peru has had a lot of bad press but if you use your common sense you’ll be fine. I live in Lima, for example the tourist areas here have a high police presence and are safe.
I felt kind of safe there, depends of a district. But I know personally a guy 1,9 meters, boxer, that got drunk and took a taxi, the guy drove him to darl alley where friends were waiting and took his stuff. So it is always about using your brain and a bit of luck. But that was more than 10 years ago. Maybe with uber, these situations are safer.
I went there with my younger kids a few years ago. It was like visiting the USA only fewer guns and authoritarian people in uniforms everywhere, and don't drink the water out of the tap. Also maybe pay in cash everywhere since no one takes cards. Lima is big and like big cities everywhere be on your guard in touristy areas because a lot of people make a living there and not always through legal means.
Hiking the Inca trail to Maccu Piccu and seeing the Nazca line in person though, worth it. Just stay in hostels and travel by bus. A bit of Spanish would help but we got by OK without it.
> Lima is big and like big cities everywhere be on your guard in touristy areas because a lot of people make a living there and not always through legal means.
Super weird to normalize urban violence.. as someone who lives in Asia.. this is a really messed up terrorized mindset. You don't need to walk around Shanghai, Singapore, Tokyo, Seoul or Bangkok and "be on your guard" .. ever.
Your government(s) have just failed you in providing a safe environment to live
It must be historical and also how cities are settled. South America has huge influx of uneducated, poor people into the cities. It is easy for them to get entangled in bad activities in the slums. Like Rio. Beautiful city and some government reforms pushed ex slaves into city with no prospect for life. and government forgot about them until there was a problem. And maybe there is different social net in Asia. Culture based on shame, more than power/status(?).
Honestly I felt more unsafe in certain touristy parts of Paris than anywhere I went in Lima. But not because of violence but because of pickpockets and scammers. I would chalk that up to the fact that most foreigners visiting the Plaza des Armas in Lima are probably an order of magnitude less wealthy than the busloads middle-class tourist crowding Montmartre in Paris.
I was there couple years ago. If you don't go to places you shouldn't, you are mostly Ok. I felt much safer in Peru than in Brazil for example. It is not europe or some parts of asia. But for central/south america it was farily safe. Not sure about some changes in the last years.
Very interesting article, especially if you interested in how societies become organized and urbanized. Two fundamental requirements for a city, is a source of water, a centralized economy, such as a palace, that stores food and artifacts, and lastly be enclosed in walls. I am surprised that no such perimeter walls existed, although the palaces were surrounded by walls.
It does have massive, and all encompassing walls. They aren't built like how we used to build defensive walls in history, those are obsolete. Instead they are lined with chainlink and razor wire, contain radar and other systems for across the horizon detection, have runways for aircraft, silos for ballistic missiles, magazines for gunships, missile carriers, submarines, satellites and other craft in outer space with classified capabilities, entire datacenters. It is one of the most well defended positions in human history.
Right, the silo fields in North Dakota are obviously part of the great wall of Los Angeles. Ask any citizen of Fargo and they will confirm that they are indeed proud bricks in the great Angelino wall and renounce any claim to living in a city themselves.
If there is a stable peace then walls aren't so necessary, like during the Pax Romana many cities in safe parts of the Empire didn't have walls, or they had old walls built in more dangerous times and the city then expanded outside of these.
This is mostly a Western-centric view, as there were lots and lots of cities in the Muslim/Ottoman world (just to give an example) with no walls encompassing them whatsoever.
Israelite is a historic term for a people from a long ago time, the term you were looking for is “Israelis”. “Globalist” is an anti-Semitic dog-whistle term.
