[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

[Advertise on 4chan]

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

Self-serve ads are available again! Check out our new advertising page here.

[Advertise on 4chan]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: Herodotus.jpg (2.58 MB, 1739x2100)
2.58 MB
2.58 MB JPG
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.

In hindsight, was post-industrialism a mistake?
7 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Ah yes, because factory work in communist countries was famously so great.
The same that happened in the US after the witch destroyed them? the UK has been in a path to become the USA in Europe for quite a while and it will accelerate with Brexit.
>the UK has been in a path to become the USA in Europe for quite
The UK is economically weaker than several other European countries, so this by itself disqualifies it from being the "USA in Europe".
It's almost like capitalism will destroy itself like Marx predicted more than 100 years ago
It wasnt a mistake the misery it has caused was deliberate

The Nazis weren't an accident, they were the product of Prussian Kultur, which had always been barbaric. You can see every single atrocity of the 20th century reflected in the writings of Prussians of the late 19th and early 20th. Did you know that Germany signed a treaty forbidding any aerial bombardments before WW1?
General Von Hœppner recalls that German command signed this treaty, and immediately went "well, that means no aerial bombardment, except against relevant military target" and then immediately proceeded to bomb civilians, causing the death of 11 children getting out from school. That was two weeks into the war, and long before they invented warcrime-to-be mustard gas. Did I mention that these champions of Kultur specifically targeted historical monuments when they violated the neutrality of Belgium the first time? They burned the modern library of Alexandria with Krupp artillery cannons.

Germany is great, it has fascinating history, beautiful landscapes, fantastic industry and artisanship. But the Prussians ? They should never have been given so much as one soldier to command
Prussians were evil sociopaths that should have been wiped from existence like Napoleon wanted.

File: 1618669317131.png (13 KB, 842x594)
13 KB
russia is just a greco-swedish colony

How and when was the myth of G*rman technological superiority created?
1 reply omitted. Click here to view.
After the war by Americans and Soviets.
Defeating a technologically superior enemy vs defeating an enemy without basic resources. Which one is a bigger achievement?
It's just a byproduct of all the weird secret experimentation they were doing.
>Sinks your uboat
Sure thing Hanz
Japan had one of the best navies in the wprld and germany had the best tech but they lost due to other factors
In the 50s and 60s when German products were substantially better than others.

File: !!!!.jpg (80 KB, 640x475)
80 KB
190 replies and 53 images omitted. Click here to view.
The Greeks knew they were gay. The Nazis were just LARPing
Nice cherry picking, now post a pic of the average German and the average med, dishonest moor.
File: germanic incel.jpg (29 KB, 720x540)
29 KB
>Nice cherry picking, now post a pic of the average German and the average med, dishonest moor.
Another outlier, I'll take that as your concession.
>there’s some respect afforded to undeniably serious movers of history
They don't joke about Hitler because of muh 6 billions, you delusional retard.

It it fair to say the ramping up the police state in the 1980s saw the birth of a fascist state in America? I’m not talking classical fascism, I’m talking technocratic fascism.
You're going to have to elaborate on this hypothesis, anon.
We have the largest most militarized police force on earth. The war on drugs, really ramped in the 1980s, was a soft genocide of minority communities. Around 2010s, white communities have felt the wrath of the cops.
I agree that there are serious problems with American law enforcement, but the claim of "Fascism" implies an authoritarian political system that suppresses free elections. That isn't the case with the US.

File: temp a.png (222 KB, 460x381)
222 KB
222 KB PNG
hardmode; no boats
62 replies and 11 images omitted. Click here to view.

>Subsequently, Gérard was fitted with shoes made of well-oiled, uncured dog skin; the shoes were two fingers shorter than his feet. In this state, he was put before a fire. When the shoes warmed up, they contracted, crushing the feet inside them to stumps. When the shoes were removed, his half-broiled skin was torn off. After his feet were damaged, his armpits were branded. He was then dressed in a shirt soaked in alcohol. Lastly, burning bacon fat was poured over him and sharp nails were stuck between the flesh and the nails of his hands and feet. On the 14th of July, four days after the assassination, the sentence declared at the trial was carried out and Gérard was tortured and executed in the market square of Delft. His severed head was then displayed on a pike behind the Prinsenhof, and his arms and legs displayed on four gates of the city.
One survivor was reportedly about to step inside the elevator with some others when she fell the thud of the torpedo and instinctively chose not to.
The guy that performed the torture, Henri Sanson, went on to become the executioner of the revolution, guillotining Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette and Robespierre amongst many others. He claims to have executed nearly 3,000 people.
What makes crucifixion such a terrible death is that it’s specifically designed to draw out the suffering for as long as possible. Getting your legs broken (or in the case of Jesus, being stuck with a spear) was letting the person off lightly. In most cases, they were left up there on the cross for days, making death a long, agonizingly slow crawl of incredible suffering
The metal rod was used to keep the urethra from closing up

File: homu suicide.jpg (114 KB, 565x589)
114 KB
114 KB JPG
>Holocaust deniers
>Holodomor deniers
>Soviet gulag deniers
>Nanking deniers
>Chicom gulag deniers
>Nork gulag deniers
>Armenian Genocide deniers
>Congo Freestateboos
What else are there? Aparthaboos? Idi Aminboos? Indian genocide deniers?
8 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
i dont know much but i do think pol pot was based
According to /his/ literally no genocide has ever occurred except the dreaded "white genocide conspiracy".
It was very much a deliberate effort to kill as evidenced by ever rising quotas in the middle of a famine and continued exports of grain abroad(even as communist officials themselves in Ukraine begged Stalin to ease up and send aid), NKVD search and execution squads with specific decrees which punished food storage by death and forbade internal migration to stop peasants moving away from famine areas(again, punishable by death); anyone who denies that is either a commie or a brainlet
The only controversy is whether the target was ethnicity(Ukrainians, to break the rising Ukrainian nationalism in 20s and 30s after a brief Ukrainian independence, and Lenin's korenization policy after), or a class(wealthy and hard to control peasants - 'kulaks', in order to force all the peasants to give up their property and either enter into state-controlled collective farms or move to cities as factory workforce, and it's just a coincidence that most of the 'kulaks' were concentrated in agricultural Ukraine)
Personally I think that it was a convenient 'kill 2 birds with one stone' type thing for Stalin
>Holocaust deniers
>Nanking deniers
>Congo Freestateboos
prove these happened
>lists actual atrocities
>then compares it to the apatheid which stopped SA from descending into the shithole status that it is today
what did he mean by this?

File: 26_theodore_roosevelt.jpg (263 KB, 1250x1250)
263 KB
263 KB JPG
I'm almost finished the final volume of Edmund Morris's three-volume history of Teddy's life, and what struck me was that his presidency wasn't anywhere near as significant or impactful as I was led to believe. Like, he was certainly a good president, and oversaw a period of unprecedented prosperity and peace, but the actual nitty-gritty details of his presidency aren't all that impressive compared to other presidents from that era. He:
>wasn't the first "trust-buster" president (both of his contemporaries had done this), and even then he only actually busted one trust (Northern Rail). His successor, Taft, would bust far more.
>did nothing to help disenfranchised and oppressed blacks (and actively supported a racially-biased campaign against black soldiers in Brownsville)
>did nothing in response to the demands for female suffrage
>did nothing to improve the lot of displaced natives
>prioritised funding more battleships over almost anything else
>refused to grant independence to the Philippines despite almost immediately granting it to Cuba. He also defended all the atrocities and war crimes committed by US troops during the Philippine rebellion.
>interfered in venezualan affairs by supporting a revolution against a democratic government
One of Teddy's only truly progressive and admirable achievements was his push for nation-wide conservation.
Ironically, Teddy was at his most progressive AFTER he left office; his new Progressive Party actually was genuinely progressive for the time, supporting things like female suffrage (he had several women in high positions in his party), equal pay for women, government oversight of private corporations, and inheritance taxes. It's a shame he lost the 1912 election.
What are your thoughts on Teddy as president?
16 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Certain elements in theory maybe, but the major elements were the exact problems that Wilson and FDR would use to ignore the Constitution. And like Wilson and FDR, the man who claimed to by a hero against the big corporations was in fact as indebted to them as any.
Remember to report and ignore /pol/tards with the racism outside /b/ on the drop down menu.
Yes, censorship is the life-blood of liberalism.
>His presidency and his short lived legacy was one of the few times in which the USA government held the welfare of the nation above all else (with some caveats like the ever present institutional racism) and not just the welfare of the very rich.
lol, his presidency involved draining Central California of its water to bribe Los Angeles officials in order to build bigger and better naval yards for his early military-industrial complex, alongside cush deals for US Steel. It involved destroying the political career of the one man who stood up for the 100+ innocent black soldiers in the Brownsville affair. Teddy wasn't purely monetarily greedy (in party because he was a wealthy elite who had no money concerns), but he was still extremely narcissistic and only cared about the downtrodden to the extent that it soothed his ego. If anything Lincon's homestead acts were the most progressive welfare system ever initiated in American history for common men, and Teddy represented the first substantial attacks on that system as the feds began seizing land and priming independent businesses for feed into the corporate system. Not surprising considering that he tried becoming a homesteader on a whim in his youth and immediately gave up after experiencing failure.
>He saw things that needed to be done for the welfare of society and acted upon that

would the Japs have been able to eventually win in China if the other Allies didn't get involved? on one hand, Japan btfo China in most major battles it fought because China was a loose confederation of undisciplined retarded warlords with no industrial capacity, but on the other, China was a massive beast that could potentially suffer ten times more casualties than Japan in every battle yet still win a war of attrition
43 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
China kept over half a million troops bogged down in China. That alone is more than enough help for the very limited lend-lease that the KMT got.
it would have completely dominated china, nanking was just an example, chinese technology up until like practically the 1960's or 70's was less advanced than africa, china literally didnt even get guns until the 1900's, while japan went through rigorous modernization canpaigns in the 1870's and was on par with the west technologically by the early 1900's. Japan would have colonized all of east asia, it would have been similar to Americans or Spanish colonizing huge expanses of native land because chinese were literally riding horses and using swords while japan had planes and bombs, and one of the biggest navies in the world at that
>They did virtually nothing
are you retarded? the war in China bogged down and eliminated huge numbers of Japanese troops
>it would have completely dominated china
it was ground down to a stalemate fighting against China by the time WWII looked like it was about to begin.
>chinese were literally riding horses and using swords
funnily enough, those swords proved to be effective. the night raid on Japanese camps by the 29th Chinese army, for example, forced them to withdraw, and that was done almost exclusively with the fuck huge machetes the Chinese were fond of using.
>and one of the biggest navies in the world at that
borderline useless when the majority of the fighting reaches several hundred miles inland.
This is assuming the Land Strategy group won over the Sea Power Group.

Then most likely yes, Japan has from 1930 to 1945 all the Pacific drafties, plus the KMT army which was in fact quite good and can field tanks , planes take peice by peice the larger chinese armies. The strategy would be be to inflict massive civillian casualties, just wreck the interior hinterland as much as possible. I don't see it past the Japs to blow up dams, using anthrax, biological warfare and mustard gass, to just kill as many as possible. Basically the Japanese would switch from the more carefull capture and hold strategy to just incuring as much damage as possible.

It would be actually a realistic war, nobody will bother to interfere even if the US has an oil embrago on them, the Soviet Union faces the battle for the eastern front, and Britain is fighting in N.Africa.

Thankfully Tojo was dumb as fuck, and this strategy never prevailed as the human lives lost in China would have doubled.

File: europe19390916.png (234 KB, 600x350)
234 KB
234 KB PNG
Lets say the UK and France just cuck out and allow Poland to get partitioned, Hitler dies before he could unleash his sperg out on Russia. How does the world develop with a still-present Nazi Germany, although not one that has achieved its war goals and lebensraum? Does it eventually collapse due to Africa-tier economy? The USSR would also exist, at least as of 1940.
4 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
It becomes the North Korea of Europe.
Most likely this, it'd be ironically reliant on supplies from the Soviets to keep going. The USSR might end up the China of this timeline, since it'd avoid the devastation of WW2. Get an (economic) reformist like Beria in charge, who wanted to return to NEP, and they could easily dominate Eurasia.
>Get an (economic) reformist like Beria in charge, who wanted to return to NEP, and they could easily dominate Eurasia.
Are you forgetting that Beria was almost immediately overthrown and executed because his proposed reforms were too radical and pro-West?
germs wouldnt have accepted losing alsace-lorraine
literally everyone in europe

File: Kit-1.jpg (210 KB, 500x569)
210 KB
210 KB JPG
Was the Zulu war morally justifiable?
15 replies omitted. Click here to view.
They inhabited empty land because of tribal genocide before they went deeper inland
>The Zulus themselves invaded and killed off the tribes that had been living there in South Africa
Which tribes did they kill off?
>They inhabited empty land because of tribal genocide before they went deeper inland
Strange how the Boers kept encountering different black tribes as moved further into the supposedly ‘empty land. Starting with the Ndabele tribe.
yeah cuz black people have a lesser perception of reality
Men of Harlech, stop your dreaming
Can't you see their spearpoints gleaming

I’m going to post this every day until you remember it
4 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
The Queen is the only person in Britain with the power to declare war. She has declared war
on the Alamo, and the Alamo is ready for her attack. Remember Goliad and the Beanfield.
>We warned you 'she' is the clandestine Santa Anna undercover
>as spotted in disguise (us texians are wise to 'her' mask), pic
>related, but anons here at /his/ did not heed our warning.
Full name Antonio de Padua María Severino López de
Santa Anna y Perez de Lebron, the Alamo's enemy.
>Along with the Alamo, we should also remember the USS Liberty, which was treacherously attacked in international waters on June 8th, 1967, a day the SHOULD live in infamy, but sadly too few Americans know about. She was attacked by our so-called ally Israel and it was not a case of mistaken identity. It was intended to be a false-flag operation in which the Liberty would be sunk with no survivors and then blamed on Israel's enemy, Egypt, so that the United States would enter the war on Israel's side. But thanks to the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew, the ship was not sunk and most of her sailors survived. But afterwards, the Pentagon threatened the sailors with court martial if they spoke of the incident. It took years, but the truth has finally come out.
when's the invasion to get even?

>pol:the japanese would be great allies for us! Heck they are technically honorary whites!!!
what's the thought process here? This would be like emancipation era blacks teaming up with the klan for black interests.
12 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
no idea. But Hitler certainly did not see the Asians, not even their most advanced nation-states and civilizations, of being near equal. In a world where the Reich won all of Asia would have been turned into a slaving camp.
File: 1558853920838.jpg (263 KB, 767x727)
263 KB
263 KB JPG
Can someone confirm the authenticity of this? I wanna know if it's real or /pol/ misinformation
i'll bet it was real. But in my eyes, it doesn't really negate Hitler's seething over Japan not being able to win anything, because these two contradictory views he expressed of admiring the gooks at first then hating him only solidifies him as an autistic tard that couldn't make up his mind
Japan, Germany and Italy all got their asses beat by the Allies, all fronts. Only Italy was smart enough to actually switch side to them and by consequence received the least amount of consequences it could get.

There is no winning anything when you're doomed to lose from the start
>Only Italy was smart enough to actually switch side to them
Switching sides wasn't really an option for the others, since the US demanded "unconditional surrender" of both Germany and Japan. Italy wasn't seen as important enough for such a demand.

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.