The Massagetae shared their wives, the pre-islamic arabs used to let their wives get pregnant by a higher status male for eugenic reasons, assyrian women were obliged to prostitute themselves at least once in their lifetime and minoan women wore clothes that let their breasts visible.
What were the most sexually deviant cultures /his/ ?
In Tibet women marry their husband, but also their husband's father.
Literally getting cvcked by your father. But you get to have the sloppy seconds when pops kicks it and you marry your mom.
>>364858
>In Tibet women marry their husband, but also their husband's father.
They also could have multiple husbands.
Usually families with too many sons get one wife to share among their sons.
>>364848
>the pre-islamic arabs used to let their wives get pregnant by a higher status male for eugenic reasons
Sauce?
Didn't see a law thread so common law thread!
What are your favourite precedent setting cases?
Civil code welcome
I've been recently reading a lot about R v Buhay;
this is from wikipedia;
is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the Charter rights protecting against unreasonable search and seizure (section 8) and the criteria for the exclusion of evidence under section 24(2). The court held that for evidence to be excluded on the Collins test, the seriousness of the breach must be determined by looking at factors such as good faith and necessity. On the facts, marijuana found in a bus station locker was excluded from evidence because the police had insufficient reason to search it without a warrant.
>>355651
just wrote a paper on aboriginal fishing rights in BC. there are some interesting cases that pretty well forced the federal government to change its position on aboriginal and treaty rights - look at the transition from the White Paper in 1969 (advocated the end of legal recognition of Indian status) and the Constitution Act, 1982 (Section 35 "recognised and affirmed" aboriginal and treaty rights). In between there was Calder v. BC, where the SCC essentially essentially decided that aboriginal title existed
>>355690
I miss writing papers in school. I've written several on aboriginal affairs. Indian act never forget
The rules of evidence are convoluted everywhere it seems
Is it wrong to believe the western civilization is superior to the rest ?
Are civilizations equals ?
Apparently the latest trend is that civilisations don't even exist.
According to Spengler, each civilisation is the reflection of its particular world view (what he calls its soul). The first and most obvious such reflection is religion, but everything else is also a product of it, be it its art, its science, its philosophy, or its politics. All of those are always "true", for this particular civilisation, since they reflect its soul. They are often "false" for other civilisations, but they were never meant for those.
Our civilisation is no different. Our world view and its reflections like Catholicism or the scientific method are certainly true for us, but objectively they only reflect our specific world view. However the Western soul does have a certain characteristics that have made it extremely successful at producing technology and at massive expansion.
>>380885
>Is it wrong to believe the western civilization is superior to the rest ?
Yes, especially if you dont take the time to define what "western civilization" and "the rest" mean in this context.
>Are civilizations equals ?
No, they arent. Some are better suited for the time and some are more successful.
Why does /his/ hate this guy?
>>377777
Why do you care?
He has an agenda. He cares more about portraying information in a way that in his eyes will best benefit humanity instead of simply trying to communicate information as clearly and objectively as possible.
That said, I like his Crash Course series and the shit his brother does.
>>377777
>/his/ is one guy
I don't think most people care. I feel most people that mention him just want to start a fight or feel like they fit in.
Was he really a bad guy?
>>387054
Yeah he was pretty bad.
>inb4 deposing him led to ISIS
Allowing the complete disenfranchisement of sunni iraqis at the hands of the Maliki regime led to ISIS, as people won't fight for a government that treats them like shit.
>>387054
He was courageous, strong and indefatigable and I salute him.
Systematic genocide is generally viewed negatively, but many people claim it is worse now that ISIS has some power in the region and commits atrocities even though the numbers pale in comparison.
Honestly reading about and hearing other people talk about Mussolini - one would think he was a complete and total idiot. What were his strengths and virtues and are there any sources which describe him on a more personal level?
>>386521
>Honestly reading about and hearing other people talk about Mussolini - one would think he was a complete and total idiot
It sure sounds like that if you're reading the propaganda of both germs and yanks.
He managed to earn the admiration of Gandhi, of all fucking people:
http://www.ibtimes.com/mussolini-gandhi-strange-bedfellows-214200
The letter quoted was to Romain Rolland.
Speaking of letters, a young Hitler wrote one to Mussolini, asking for an authographed photo, the latter never replied, in other words, senpai didn't notice Hitler-chan that one time. Much of Hitler's fascism and party structure was modeled after its originator.
Half of /his/ seems to love this guy while the other half hate him, whats the real verdict?
>>386592
that's actually pretty neat
what do you imagine would have happened with italy if someone less unstable had been in power in germany?
why are all the famous Mesopotamians and Persians post-Islamic?
the ancient and classical dynasties never left any evidence of records of famous people (priests / philosophers / scientists / inventors)?
stuff like baghdad battery is pretty cool.
records from the Greeks indicate a rich academic culture in the east.
so what's the deal?
Did the babylonians and persians just not care enough to make records of who did what before completely uncultured peninsula arabs overran them? That seems incredibly suspicious.
Were all the records kept in one place, never replicated (seems a pretty foolish mistake), and incidentally destroyed?
>>386379
>allahu akbars invade
>burn everything in the name of allah
>s-see guys, we're supperior! There was nothing here before! :))))
It's not like it's happening again now
>>386379
>why are all the famous Mesopotamians and Persians post-Islamic?
I can't name any famous post-Islamic Persians and Mesopotamians
Gilgamesh, Sargon, Xerxes, Darius, Abraham, Yeshua, all pre-Islamic.
>>386437
This. Most records that did exist were probably destroyed hundreds of years ago either through malicious intent or benign neglect while Islam was in control.
So, during the 14 years Germany owned some of Samoa, did this colonization help both parties? Was is parasitic? Help a student out.
I can't find primary sources in English to save my life.
>>385981
Who is a party? Is a state a party? A nation a party? Classes of people a party? The Chiefs? The Kaiser? Die Krupps?
What is "help"?
>primary sources in English
Yeah good luck with that. Try the Samoan national library?
>>385981
Mixed German Samoan were quite well off because they often times were their fathers only heirs, can't say much else other than at its peak their were 600 Europeans on the island including mixed race children.
>>385990
NZ I think runs through a national museum rather than a library, but I think they have a decent oceanian collection. I think Australian National University has a library with a collection of oceanian stuff.
How were armies raised before modern times?
Peasants were forcibly conscripted and fought along with mercenaries and a small amount of professional household warriors.
>>385607
>lord goes to his village
>hey come fight in this war for me or I'm going to tax the fuck out of you
>okay
>>385619
I should also note that in many cases, conscripts weren't always just awfully trained rabble given a shoddy little spear and used as arrow fodder. Middle and upper class conscripts had pretty good equipment and tended to fight better as well. The Roman Republic is a good example of this.
Sup /his/, first time poster here, found something interesting you guys might enjoy. I just read some passages from a book titled "The People's Welfare: Law & Regulation in Nineteenth-Century America", by William J. Novak.
Basically, Novak argues that the modern perception of 19th century America as being totally laizze-faire is largely incorrect. While laizze-faire did show up in American political and legal thought, it didn't gain traction until the very late 19th century, like 1880s or so.
Before that, Novak argues, American political and legal thought molded society around a concept which Novak refers to as the Well-Regulated Society. The Well-Regulated Society was basically the total opposite of laizze-faire. Where laizze-faire called for a relatively inactive govt, almost a nightwatchmen state, and almost religious respect of individual rights, particularly property rights, the Well-Regulated Society called for local govts actively regulating the hell out of virtually every aspect of people's lives, from commerce to morality, all for the public good. Private interests were considered subservient to the public interest, and therefore could be regulated by the local govts accordingly. The ability of local govts to pretty much regulate anything in the name of the public good, in any way it saw fit, was referred to as the state police power. The courts upheld the legitimacy of this state police power numerous times.
By understanding the presence of the Well-Regulated Society in American legal thought, the emergence of laizze-faire in the late 19th century can thus be considered something of a backlash against some of the excesses of the Well-Regulated Society.
Novak gives a shit load of examples of local and municipal laws that seriously micromanaged people's lives to support his claims, as well as court cases upholding these local regs as perfectly legal. I can post them if you guys are interested.
>>385502
OP again.
The two places in which the Well-Regulated Society's regulations are most striking are commerce/property, and morality.
Commerce was seen as another space which could be regulated for the good of society. Local officials feared the evils of an unregulated market, such as profiteering, fraud, poor product quality, unsanitary conditions, etc. When it came to food and other essential goods, people thought the public's access to such things was simply too important to be trusted to a "free market".
Public morals was another space that the Well-Regulated Society held dominion over. Things like drinking, gambling, prostitution, sex for fun, interactions between people of different races, etc., were all regulated for the public benefit. This is where shit got ridiculous.
When it came to public morals, mob rule basically governed. When women were accused of prostitution or adultery, sufficient evidence for conviction could be as little as rumors, gossip, or the community's perception of the woman's character. Hard evidence of money changing hands, actual sex, or even the existence of a supposed client were all unnecessary.
People also weren't allowed to have fun in their own homes if the neighbors didn't approve. There was a case of a slaveowner in the South who had some friends over for music and dancing. His black slaves were there too, because of course they were, he fucking owned them. This slaveowner later got busted by the police for the insidious crime of having fun in the privacy of his own home in front of his own black slaves, who were his property at the time.
As you guys can see, the Well-Regulated Society was a far cry from the supposedly inactive govt which protected individual rights above all else.
>>385602
Anything we know about this Novak guy?
Honestly in your opinion, /his/torians, who was the greatest of pre-Islamic Persian rulers? Who is the most underrated? Who was in your opinion the best?
>>385403
>Greatest
Cyrus the Great, honestly. He really was that great.
>Underrated.
Darius. He did so much to build up the empire and continue what Cyrus started.
Well, Cyrus the Younger is underrated in that, although never and actual ruler himself, his story in trying to topple his brother as recounted in Xenophon's Anabasis is an amazing story.
>>385427
And no, he was not the younger brother of Cyrus the Great, he was the younger brother of Cyrus the Great's great-great-great-great-great-etc. grandson.
other than russia, what other places have never been successfully invaded via conventional means?
Are you suggesting russia has never been invaded successfully?
>>385135
The Norsemen were pretty successful.
America
You know, feminism, via Beauvoir, originally grew out of existentialism. And it is true that she advocated free love, but the thing is that today, feminism is almost exclusively about money and sex. How did feminism fall from "existentialism from women" to the capitalist level of defining freedom solely in terms of money and sex?
>>385043
>You know, feminism
FUCKING DROPPED
SORRY PAL, BUT THIS THREAD WAS RUINED FROM THE START.
You want real discussion? Well I'd look elsewhere, but for now, nice bait.
Originally Aryan supremacy was about being the smarter master race than the Jews. But then the Jews control everything and are smarter than white people. How did Aryan supremacy go from hating Jews because they were worse to hating Jews because they are better?
Was Ancient Mali ruled by Arabs? They seemed to have major influence.
>>384926
No /pol/ it wasn't
>Was Ancient Mali ruled by Arabs?
No. It was ruled by a native dynasty founded by Sundjata Keita, and no Islamic writer calls them Arabs. They adopted a small amount of Islamic culture under Mansa Musa which was mostly limited to a few towns while the vast majority of the population was pagan. The Arabs/Berbers in Mali were basically just merchants and maybe a few scholars or artisans brought in by the rulers.
>They seemed to have major influence.
They were rich but not very impressive.
>>384971
It was not found by them it was founded by Tebu people.
Has Germany, in it's history as a unified state, ever won a war?
>>384857
Technically they beat the Ruskis in World War 1.
Sacked Rome in 410
>N-nuh uh, everybody from that era was just mongol aliens that got on their spaceships and left and everybody now is just albino africans!
![1429493914150[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/GvvjmJh.jpg "1429493914150[1]")
