This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Please use /lit/ for discussions of literature. Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/./his/ is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character. When discussing history, please reference credible source material, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.
"18th of March ,1783:King Charles III is forced to promulgate a royal decree establishing that working is not an honor. Spanish society was imbued with the noble ideal of aspiring to idleness, which is why work is frowned upon."Why are they like this?
>>16404993>Greeks and RomansThere's Europe's issue: Meds
>>16405027The English gentry believed the same thing: that physical labor was beneath them and only certain jobs like military officer, government official or land owner were worthy of a gentleman.
>>16405039There's Europe's second issue: Anglos
>>16405041Because the peasants and bourgeois of the German and Nordic nations under the delusions of Lutheranism and Calvinism are the ideal European...>>16404993That said, Spain never really contributed anything besides slavery in the New World and decay at home like the Greeks, Romans, and British undeniably did to philosophy and culture.> Verification not required.
>>16404655bump
Was Bolshevism inherently Jewish? Is Judeo-Bolshevism simply a German propaganda myth or is there truth to it? If so, how much?Jews were over represented in the founding and early members of the Bolshevik party and Lenin was Jewish as well (or half at least)
>>16405053>It is particularly of note that Engels specifically said that Polish socialists shouldn't do this because he though Poland would need to achieve independence before it could become socialist. Rosa ended up debating with him over this in her own writings on the national question but he couldn't respond because he was dead.How the fuck did Engels knew that Socialism would only work in a state? Was he truly into the real meaning of it all? Al inversion of Hegel, an operating software for the mind, a perpetual revolution that becomes absolute, the State?
>>16405319Look, man, you may as well ask why did Stalin kill so many Ukrainians?Stalin was a tyrant who literally had quotas for death sentences.
no
>>16405889>attended guests
>>16402897This is debunked on a near-daily basis and you're not going to be receptive to an actual answer that isn't feeding your delusions
Only 100% Anglo-Saxons are White. The English are the greatest thing to come out of Europe in the past 400 years and no one is remotely close to us. Compared to us, you're not even a human, you're an animal that is barely above the nigger ape. Germans, Swedes, and other parts of central Europe are not considered White. Everyone else is considered Swarthy. Black hair, olive skin, and brown eyes weren't white. Imagine calling yourself white if you have brown eyes. Benjamin Franklin stated that.>AnglosWhites>IrishCunts>Spaniards, Italians, French, PortugueseNot white>NordsSwarthy. Finns and Swedes are Asiatic >MedsNot white>Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, and Slovenia)Not white>BalticsComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>16402851Wtf?Anglos are the worst race.Everyone minus them agrees on that.
>>16402851>Benjamin Franklin stated that.And he holds some especially high expertise in what constitutes whiteness because...? What, because he he fucked around with a kite during a thunderstorm or something?
The entire 20th Century alone proves that Anglos aren’t the best, but are in fact incompetent hotheads who can lose power very easily.
>>16402851>The English are the greatest thing to come out of Europe
>>16403081Dark brits/celtic
Everything can be explained through natural processes now. The Bible has no value anymore, it's just a terrorist's handbook, a burden on society that causes unnecessary suffering, full of lies and false hope that lead people to their demise. Prayer doesn't work, Jesus never returns, faith healing is a dead end. It's to embrace Science, which actually gives results. With a scientifically literate mind, I am more powerful than your desert sand-god.
>>16405931>Everything can be explained through natural processes now.Okay, then do it.
>>16405931I fully expect jews to jettison support for Christianity once whites revert to blod of the spirit faith. pushing atheism was always the plan once that happens because real Christianity is whites only and race conscious.
>joins a terrorist organization which is recognized as such by both the country he's in (UK) and the country he and his like-minded comrades claim to be fighting for (the Republic of Ireland)>ideals fly completely in the face of democracy as the majority of Northern Ireland's citizens want their country to remain a part of the UK (and still do today)>demands that he and his fellows be treated as political prisoners despite the fact that they are members of a recognized terrorist organization with fundamentally no legitimate political recognition anywhere in the world>starves himself to death in prison by choiceCan someone please explain to me why I am supposed to sympathize with this guy and his like-minded fellows?
>>16405945Seriously. That this goon is actually regurgitating that apocrhyal Ottoman story is beyond absurd. This shows you the level of intellect this retard is arguing with.>>16405953So now we're conflating the actions of Edward III's reign with James I's? Only - what - 300 years between them? Nah, fuck it. It's all the same! No room for nuance here!
>>16405957>You practically word for worded the Wikipedia article on Souperism,yeah because i'm tired, my point still stands> It blemished the relief work by Protestants who gave aid without proselytisinyeah i'm some of them might not have had that policy but most did, also my wider point was that it was private citizens who operated the kitchens not the british government
>>16405945>>16405969are you people schizophrenics? it has been noted by numerous historians that the british refused aid from the ottomans to the point that they had to provide aid in secretthis is literally saying ''nu uh'' as an argument
>>16405974>souperism did not occur frequently>my point still stands>souperism did not occur frequently>some of them might not have had that policy but most didFucking clown. You're completely in denial.
>>16405938>no anon the govt did not set these up,No retarded Taig the british government did set up it own soup kitchens and poorhouses and they also passed the Temporary Relief Act 1847 that allowed for more charities to open soup kitchens. the british state in the 19th century wasn't like the massively bureaucratic welfare state it is now, they didn't have the structure or manpower to set up that many soup kitchens quickly so they relied on the private charity sector, which is actually a quicker and more effective way of achieving the same aims. > nooooo the help has to come directly from a civil servant or it doesn't count reeeeeeeeeeesorry but that would have been slower and less efficient. >irish and welsh influenced city to the point where many liverpool residents hate the uk monarchy,it is true that the Liverpudlians have been unfortuntely fed lies by the nationalist movement. of course all intelligent people know that the monarchy donated lots of money to the famine victims and that a hatred of monarchy has nothing to do with pass oppression of Ireland since Cromwell was republican and the irish supported James II at the battle of the Boyne. >randomly brings up thatcher In your heeeaaaddd. in your heeeeaaddd.
Is environmental determinism completely unfalsifiable? All they do is point to challenges in the environment, and then assume that because people didn't overcome them, they couldn't be overcome. In an alternate timeline where Europe didn't succeed as it did, they would just say "it was too cold" or "they were too far from the trade routes".
>a male feminist?
>>16402822their draft notice i guessi fully endorse it. may all those latrino and maggotskin girls die valiantly in my stead
>>16402822Are you a masochist?
>>16402666What is this schizo thread even about?
>>16402987Not really, no.
>>16402666All made for me
Ancient greeks looked like THIS ?????
>>16405925Yes. And jist like ancient greeks she thinks you're a pasty savage
Ancient Greek women looked like this:
>>16405925Thats a turk.>>16405984Most of these are turks.
I'm having a little pseudo-intellectual debate with my Christian friend on objective vs subjective morality (he believes there is in fact an objective morality established by the transcendental surveillance camera in the sky) and I am ATTEMPTING (and failing) to dismantle his arguments because of my limited understanding in theology and morality (I identify as atheist? Agnostic? just generally against contemporary religion but accepting of the possibility of a Creator I guess). Please someone drop resources that would help me structure my arguments (still underconstruction. what am I arguing for? question mark.) better, I'm shitty at debating but would like to improve. If you're a hardcore Christian than maybe you can drop your most compelling arguments and possibly evangelize me. Also, thoughts on the scientific explanations for the creation of the universe? Big bang theory? Yaddah yaddah? I am fucked. Also kind of drunk and autistic but this will go swimmingly. Thank you in advance. TLDR Thoughts on objective and subjective morality. And resources. Yippie.
Please answer I am spiraling into back-to-back brain aneurysms, my neurons are disintegrating, I'm staring at this thread, developing finger fatigue from spam-clicking the Update button. This all seems so pointless. I need this to make sense. I will listen to MC Boing.
Zoomer (((historian))) has been completely BTFO'd.
>>16405553>then why is his debt relevant?Because it might relate to HIS own reasons to support the war?>But it's not exactly his fault for being electedHe was appointed, not elected. So much for understanding British parliamentarism.>Where is the criticism on Attlee?Nobody expects anything out of a labourite, unlike out of a britain-first Conservative.>Churchill objectively had no power.He had the power accorded to him by the King and the lack of an opposition resulting from a national unity government (which no party could individually leave without risking future electoral disaster). Nobody with no power gets chosen as leader by both main parties of the country.>Chamberlain and Attlee did.And? They decided to let Churchill lead the government. It's not like they could realistically walk back on it after his appointment anyway. Nobody ever accused Churchill of singlehandedly veering the country towards war, but he was the warmonger who was put in charge and remained the figurehead for the majority of it. More notably, during and after the Fall of France, when several peace attempts were made and the war was at its lowest point for the country.
>>16404692all that stopped long before the war
>>16405605Oh look, its /his/ most autistic chainposter here to quote every single line someone writes to break down every little word with his bullshit shitposting so the thread gets absolutely fucked up.Churchill had no real power because if Chamberlain or Attlee said no then Churchill would have been forced to comply. Explain how he couldnt.Also explain how Churchill was able to steer British foreign policy against the will of the British parlament based on his jewish masters, which is what Zoomer Historian argues.Why is all the focus on Churchill and not virtually everyone everyone else who wanted war with Germany.
>>16404351They are not Nahtzees but Nahtzee is the word used for anything that threatens Jewish interests. It's a way of discrediting your enemy by acting like a crybully. People are caring less and less about this watered down label and children are often rebellious against whatever you try to force on them.
>>16405605Lmao its this guy. HAHAHA this is literally his job to lurk on /his/ and searchlight any thread related to ww2 so he can chainpost like a moron.LETS FUCKING GOOO>Because it might relate to HIS own reasons to support the war?His reasons were irrelevant because Churchill isnt a dictator and cant do what he pleases.>He was appointed, not elected. So much for understanding British parliamentarism.Nope the parlament decided on Churchill hence he was elected.>Nobody expects anything out of a labourite, unlike out of a britain-first Conservative.So you admit that Churchill wasnt special in the British parlament. You're just coping hard that your bullshit Churchill controlled by jews narrative doesnt add up so now you're moving the goalpost about "no one cares about the second most biggest party in the parlament". Patheitc.>He had the power accorded to him by the KingNope the king also cant overrule the parlament. Chamberlain was still the party leader and had objectively more power than Churchill even when Churchill was PM.>It's not like they could realistically walk back on it after his appointment anyway.LMAO why not? If your PM does the exact opposite of what you want, why not get rif of him? Are you retarded?>Nobody ever accused Churchill of singlehandedly veering the country towards war,Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
They speak a latin language, draw a large part of their culture and habits from Rome, drink wine and more often than not are brown or dark haired except in some regionsEven the muh celts cope doesnt work because La Tene Celt where celtic gauls stemmed from clustered with southern french, north Italians and IberiansThe truth is that Gaul has always been part of the mediterranean world in fact even before the roman conquest.French who seethe on southern europeans at this point are no better than Mexican who do so except that at least the latter have the excuse of not looking entirely similar to the people that give them their culture and language
>>16404769Looks like an englishman with a wigMore proof french are nordic
Ethnic french are white
>>16405077And these are pure Gauls, not even Celto-Germanic northerners.
>>16403395Bilal sidi djamel is just greaco moor narbonoide from the french riviera
>>16403530Handsome men are faggots most of the time tho you estrogenic fag
Who would win?
>>16405450Because they would get outflanked and scorched earth/Supply raided along the way. The area they raided from in N Mexico was itself nearly as big as Germany, the Comancheria core territories of an equal size. A Tercio will flat out starve to death before it so much as sees a single Comanche, and in the meantime the Comanche will raid multiple farmsteads, kidnap a few dozen kids to raise as comanche and drive off several herds of horses and cattle.You had to fight infinitely skirmishing light cavalry like that with either intercepting cavalry or at least mounted infantry of your own or everybody in an area having a shit ton of guns so that raiding farms becomes an impossible exchange. Spain and later Mexico failed to adequately deploy cavalry on that frontier, meaning that their greater fire arm access to the comanche meant very little, and they were very hesitant to want to have a heavily armed peasantry because that would be harder to exploit. Fighting in the boonies was a big old game of ambush & pursuit and the tribes who were good at it were cleaving everyone else something fierce. That cliche of how every feather on an Indian is a tally mark of some kill is not so far of an exaggeration.
>>16400051>Mamluks under SaladinRIP Saladin lolAlso 1 billion lions would def beat the sun
>>16405302an exception rather rather than the rule, look at history outside of just one battle
Goku, negative diff.
>>16400051Either the mongols or apaches, horses allow for rapid closure of distance between combatants and Mongol mastery of horseback archery is what allowed them to rapidly buck break a large chunk of Asia
Reminder that your little vahaduo charts are made upHow would DNA even be extracted? There is literally no living tissue left only calcified bone.
>>16405678the romans were baboons, the average roman lived like a modern somalian, we brought you guys into the modern world, you don't die at 40 thanks to the northern european manthe romans lost to germanics, and easily too, literally shitted all over their puny empire, something mixed mutts in the european side of the mediterranean will never be able to do, you will disappear due to low birthrates before the you will see the end of northern european domination of this world, you have been utterly defeated forever
some of the responses are straight from tel aviv
>>16404700Sounds like left wingers
some of the responses are straight from stockholm
>>16404602They take DNA from the hardest bones in the human skeleton that are so dense that they don’t completely calcify even after 50,000 years. Genetic material is extracted and then tested. These bones are the tip of the femur and tiny bone in the ear drum.
We mock the story of Jesus birth by saying Joseph was a cuck.But in the Samson story you have Manoah (which literally means impotent in hebrew and in context) getting cucked by an Angel that gets his wife pregant right in front of him and the same Angel instructs him to take care of the baby.