Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 325. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
What towering beasts were the most badass or metal things ever, that came from human history?
>>1202726
Jotmundgar, or however you spell the name of the Norse sea snake. I think anything that could be that large and come out of the blackness of the sea is pretty horrifying desu
Hydra, Bahamus
>>1202726
Balrog
>painfully erect
>>1202410
Literally the worst
>>1202410
it looks sort of like a prototype of the eu
with all it's retarded flaws
>>1202413
>>1202431
how else could you protect the german minorities spread accross europe from being homogenised or ethnic cleansing?
wtf is peronism? Third position quasi-socialism?
Also, if all of the Argies on 4chan hate it, then why are all of their presidents peronists?
>>1202031
Poverty,or as lefties like to call it progress
Why the fuck would you assume that people on 4chan are representative of a country's electorate?
It was basically just a cult of personality that appealed to the working class to stay in power after it seized power through force. There was some nationalism and anti-imperial sentiment, too, which played a big role.
Tbh I got most of my info about it from Evita.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI8i055X398
>>1204674
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tpvxsJAZPk&list=PL2yWTXQ4y8vkqHcDSTL00tNA2FRzW953g
Here's what I know about Peronist economics
>>My first course in philosophy was nothing less than a summary of the important systems of thought put forward in Western Europe during the last twenty-six hundred years. Perhaps that is a slight exaggeration--we did gloss over a few centuries in the Middle Ages. For the rest we touched upon all the historic names from Thales to Nietzsche. After about nine weeks of this bewildering transit a friend approached me with a sour look on his face. "You know," he said, "I can't make head or tail out of this business. I agree with each...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
They wouldn't be famous if what they said did not make sense.
Other than Rousseau and that Nietzsche cuck, that is.
>>1201952
Now you understand why Socrates hated sophistry so much
Now go find the truth and defend it
>>1201970
>They wouldn't be famous if what they said did not make sense.
What could have gone wrong but didn't?
>hey guys
>I'm gonna be president for life, hope you don't mind
>country descends into civil war
>Britain slowly regains control of the colonies by playing the different factions off against each other
>US ends up with revolutionary blue balls, like France, and ends up permafucked politically, like France
>>1201577
>Lets deconstruct the very building blocks of the universe, what could go wrong?
>It does nothing
>It destroys the entire desert
>It destroys the entire west
>It destroys the whole continent
>It destroys the whole atmosphere
>It destroys the whole world
>It destroys...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1201686
Atoms had been split before that though.
What would happen if a nuclear power attacked another one with conventional means? Would the defending nation retaliate with nukes (which would mean they're gonna get nuked themselves) or would both sides limit themselves to conventional warfare? Kinda like how both sides refrained from using poison gas during WWII. In other words, is a full-blown conventional war between two or more states who have nuclear weapons possible?
>>1201355
They might refrain from using nuclear weapons at first, however when one side starts losing they will turn to the nuclear option. They might either threaten to use nukes to force a peace, or actually deploy them if that fails.
>>1201377
The consequence would be the annihilation of the remaining territory of the losing side (and possibly also that of the occupied areas). This seems far worse than the consequences of losing a conventional war
>>1201355
You're probably looking at another cold war scenario. I seriously doubt any world leaders today would have the balls/stupidity to use nukes even on the losing end of a war.
I guess it depends more on who you're talking about, really. Anything first world would probably not use them.
Who was in the right here?
>>1201099
Both had persuasive points.
>>1201099
>>1201273
throwing in the wild card
I want to learn anything and everything about the Cold War.
How it got started.
Who it involved.
How long it lasted.
What it was over.
And why exactly it is the closest humanity has ever come to extinction; and the entire myriad of circumstances that came together to prevent that from happening (which has been said to be tantamount to playing Russian roulette 13 times in a row and winning).
Where do I get started?
It isn't over. Ask yourself, where are the Nuclear Weapons?
Extinction was never really plausible.
A billion or so deaths, more plausible.
>>1200980
>How it got started.
>Who it involved.
>How long it lasted.
>What it was over.
>And why exactly it is the closest humanity has ever come to extinction; and the entire myriad of circumstances that came together to prevent that from happening (which has been said to be tantamount to playing Russian roulette 13 times in a row and winning).
You can read...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
How different would the USSR have been had Trotsky came into power instead of Stalin?
>>1200957
More cucked and probably having Trotsky killed in a coup that installs someone else who's bloodthirsty.
How different would the USSR have been had Bukharin came into power instead of Trotsky or Stalin?
>>1200991
Richer.
>>1200716
5000 sounds low. Such are the heady joys of bureaucracy.
>that fb worthy meme
>having a picture make your point
I think this is bait, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt OP.
When a nation has about 4 million citizens, 13 states, and a developing economy, 4300 words of law is likely sufficient.
However, when a nation has 300 million citizens, 50 states, and the largest economy in the world, I think an increase in legislation is reasonable.
I love the good ol' days just as much as any American, but laws adapt to the circumstances of the nation.
>>1200762
I'd argue it is to the contrary.
A small nation can easily enact more laws since their scope of operations is so limited, there are not that many people to regulate and consider.
However, the more complex a society, the hardest it is for the legislator to effectively and accurately identify the issues which ought to be legislated, and then to craft the appropriate legal instruments to regulate them. It is much better in this case to make the law as general as possible, and to rely on the general principles...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
How accurate is this? Lloyd says that the Germans lost land on the Western Front so quickly because when the machine-gun was knocked out, the rest of the section would retreat.
Here's the link:
https://youtu.be/VXQygRVvEmM?t=7m15s
>>1200168
If you had experience in Infantry tactics you would understand that the Machine Gun is what you entire platoon is based around. And if the enemy has one and you don't you are fucked. The MG causes 70% of the causaulties your unit makes.
So yeah they would retreat once the opposing force had the only MG
>>1200984
>The MG causes 70% of the causaulties your unit makes.
That's not true, especially in WW2. The MG is meant to suppress the enemy while your infantry flank with rifles, grenades and SMGs to kill them. The MG providing 70% of sustained firepower is more realistic.
>Nationalism—that névrose nationale from which Europe is suffering acutely; that eternal subdivision of Europe into petty states with politics on a municipal scale: they have robbed Europe itself of its significance, of its reason—and have led it into a cul de sac. Is there anyone except me who knows the way out of this cul de sac? An aspiration which would be great enough to bind the people of Europe once more together?
Brexiters on suicide watch.
>>1200094
>Unironically takes Frederich, I swear I didnt plagiarize Stirner,Nietzsche seriously.
>Implying that division into smaller countries,was what prevented Europe from ending like China
Kek.
>>1200123
Federalism nigger.
>>1200094
Occidental humanism, aka the fantasy of the liberals and libertarians is nothing but the attempt to make HEDONISM the most moral and the most legal
What would Christopher Lasch say if he were alive today?
"My name is Christopher Lasch and I am not dead."
>>1199107
What is /his/'s opinion on Lasch btw?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Lasch
Here's an interview with him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRJl54Y_VCk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbJIULQouZk
>>1199244
DUBS
>Reality is but a creation of the mind
>You cannot prove that anything exists because your empirical senses are questionable
>The only thing that is proven to exist is your counsciousness, because you think
Sounds awesome, right? But thenl he jumps to
>God must exist otherwise everything would be depressive as fuck
What am I missing?
The part where denying god's existence would get you tried for treason and libel
>>1199058
So, he doesn't draw any logical line between his original prepositions and God himself?
>>1199064
No, I think he's suggesting that the whole god thing was an attempt to escape getting in legal shit.
Savior of Portugal?
>>1198815
Indeed
hardly the last leader of a global imperial power can be called a savior
The Calvin Coolidge of portugal
