what could have happend?
could their regime have survived?
Most of Cambodia and Lao's today territory was part of Dai Viet Empire in the past . It's right for them to take those back anyway.
>>1199627
The Cambodian party would have had to not start a persecution campaign of ethnic Viets. This means they would have had to not start a persecution campaign of urban Cambodians, as this campaign necessarily extended to ethnic Viets.
The Cambodian partys' theory of revolution was based on mass extermination. This would have meant that a variant party in Cambodia would have needed to be in a place to take power. ie: That the Vietnamese had intervened yet earlier.
>>1199645
vietnam didn't care about viets in cambodia. they got mad when the khmers tried expanding into vietnamese territory
The facts;-
>Jugoslavija was borne of a legitimate resistance movement
>After WW2, a disparate nation was born
>Housing, healthcare and education was "free" to the point of use
>The people under Tito's rule were complicit and genuinely content
>Those who weren't (a veritable minority) either fled or went for an extensive holiday to Goli Otok
>Their healthcare was legit world class
>As were their education and engineering program
>Both Superpowers traded with them with impunity
>Under Tito
Jugoslavija was bang on the cotton of the Iron Curtain, yet it never aligned itself with either party.
Why not?
Stalin tried but was rebuked in no uncertain terms. The Americans threw money at them but Tito never capitulated.
What made Jugoslavija such an anomaly?
Was it a case of Jugoslavija being a good nation to deal with (on account of their cynical neutrality)?
Was Jugoslavija too liberal for the Ruskies and too socialist for the Yankees? Thus creating a perfect equilibrium?
Were both USSR and USA frightened of belligerently engaging with Jugoslavija given their conduct in WW2?
Was Tito god incarnate?
>Were both USSR and USA frightened of belligerently engaging with Jugoslavija given their conduct in WW2?
Predominantly this.
Julius Caesar wanted nothing to do with the Balkans. Genghis Khan, sick fuck that he was, gave the Balkans a very wide swerve.
You do not fuck with the Balkans
Especially a Balkans led by a narcissistic demigod like Tito.
If America went in, it would have made Vietnam or Korea look like a literal picnic. If USSR went in, the troops would pray for Stalingrad.
You can manipulate the Balkans (though that was impossible under Tito) but you can never fuck with them. Because they will kill you to death and not even think about it for a second.
Do not fuck with the Balkans.
>>1199564
spot the serb
>>1199564
You might capture and torture them, but you'll nearly die trying. Remember how good old Vlad used to kill muslims for fun?
> "The Urning you sent me is a very curious thing. These are extremely unnatural revelations. The paederasts [homosexual paedophiles] are beginning to count themselves, and discover that they are a power in the state. Only organisation was lacking, but according to this source it apparently already exists in secret. And since they have such important men in all the old parties and even in the new ones, from Rosing to Schweitzer, they cannot fail to triumph. Guerre aux cons, paix aus trous-de-cul will now be the slogan. It is a bit of luck that we, personally, are too old to have to fear that, when this party wins, we shall have to pay physical tribute to the victors. But the younger generation! Incidentally it is only in Germany that a fellow like this can possibly come forward, convert this smut into a theory, and offer the invitation: introite [enter], etc. Unfortunately, he has not yet got up the courage to acknowledge publicly that he is ‘that way’, and must still operate coram publico‘ from the front’, if not ‘going in from the front’ as he once said by mistake. But just wait until the new North German Penal Code recognises the droits du cul [rights of the arse-hole] then he will operate quite differently. Then things will go badly enough for poor frontside people like us, with our childish penchant for females. If Schweitzer could be made useful for anything, it would be to wheedle out of this peculiar honourable gentleman the particulars of the paederasts in high and top places, which would certainly not be difficult for him as a brother in spirit." (Letter from Engels to Marx, June 22, 1869)
What did he mean by that?
gommunism is not for fags
>>1199450
"Pederasts" are not "homosexual pedophiles". Pedophiles are pedophiles, sexually attracted to prepubescent androgynous forms. Most scientists on the matter agree that for most pedophiles, gender isn't an issue, but that specific form.
Pederasts are men with homosexual inclination, but are not attracted to fully adult males. This is not semantics, but the literal, scholastic definition. And here's the thing, we can not now, nor can we ever, get to the bottom of the issue, ever hope to cure or fix the pedophile, if we keep conflating the issue. One thing is one thing, the other is another thing.
An ephebophile is not a pedophile. Ephebophiles are people with sexual interests generally excluding the adult female form, but to them, there needs to be more than the form of androgyny, i.e. some development of breasts and hips. So neither can we say "ephebophiles are pederasts".
So, the guy simply wasn't as knowledgeable or insightful as you seem to think he was.
>>1199540
>as you seem to think he was.
>implying
How did working conditions in the USSR compare to those in the US?
Did Russian workers have more rights and bargaining power?
How did labor even work in the Soviet Union? How socialist was it?
Well it would depend on your class in this classless society
Serf- Legally tied to a collective farm, food restriction if quotas aren't met. Later lightened to be allowed out with nothing in return for your grand fathers land being stolen by the state
Lower class- No say in mandatory state unions designed to manage you so you don't slack off. Lower pay, low listing on lists for luxury items or any product with a waiting period
Middle class- Little management so you can just pretend to do work all day and pretend to believe in communism, still no bargaining power
Prominent CP member- You and your children get full rights at cozy universities and after wards employment pushing papers
>>1199422
>>1199422
>How did working conditions in the USSR compare to those in the US?
Faster promotion. Lower volume of material goods. Higher job security. Better rentals.
>Did Russian workers have more rights and bargaining power?
Yes, but they degraded significantly after 1941. From the 1950s a widespread go slow was put in place.
>How did labor even work in the Soviet Union?
You got a job for a wage in exchange for your labour and the factory/trust/bank extracted surplus value from you. Unemployment/sickness/age benefits were supplied through factories.
>How socialist was it?
Not at all.
(Pirani, Strauss, Andrle, Fitzpatrick)
>>1199440
Another anon here, but i'll add to this
Another thing to consider is the unofficial side of things. Black market was a thing and it was huge and ever-present. If you had access to some goods - whether produce grown by yourself, stolen from the state or acquired through contacts and by utilising bribes - then selling them might have earned you enough to make life livable. This is also how some lowtier occupations enjoys a rather prestigious position in Soviet society - doormen, barmen, taxidrivers had contacts and had small, ev3ryday bribes coming at them. Farmers - really small scale, like growing stuff in their gardens - had actual vegies to eat and sell since the stores were mostly empty, storage workers could steal stuff from the state. Skilled craftsmen and worked sold their services besides their mandatory state job. Coaches would 'smuggle' stuff from the big cities to the provinces. Etc.
Official bargaining power was non-existant - labour unions were state institutions - but blackmarket was accepted and taken for granted which could increase your 'power' unofficially. Of course a door would never make to the cadre.
Redpill me on Ceauşescua.
How does he compare to Tito and Stalin? Was he able to repel Soviet interference?
cute commie boyz
>>1199311
REMOVE
>>1199494
BOLSHEVIK
Were the nukings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a war crime? Were they a necessary evil? And if the casualties were still alive to this day, what would they do for a Klondike Bar?
>>1199209
who gives a shit?
we've had this thread so many times and its always the same thing, if you really wanted to know what people think of it you could easily look up "hiroshima nagasaki nuke warcrime" on the archive and find out.
Reminder that there are no rules in war. The single solitary objective any state-entity has during a war is doing anything and everything within their power to win that war in their favor using any means necessary and with as few casualties on their own side as possible, yes, even if that means using nukes.
>>1199227
bbut that's mean :(
>x is the opium of the masses
So, are the masses even capable of enlightenment? Not from one thing in particular but in a more general, philosophical sense. Shouldn't we leave the stupid and incapable on their drugs so more capable minds can helm society?
Is there anything wrong with being an elitist like this?
I doubt any one enlightened or even under the illusion of being so would be content to work the fields or a 9-5 job
>>1199204
"opium of the masses" doesn't mean it's like a drug clouding their mind, it means it's like a painkiller assuging their suffering.
Is this an inherently bad thing that must be removed? No.
the masses must be harnessed, like a brute beneath the yoke
What went wrong?
>>1199149
wealth brought by the industrial revolution led to decadence and a lack of incentive to participate in community activities like church
>>1199149
Nothing, it looks like a pretty well-constructed building to me
I agree, the building looks to be in excellent condition and has tasteful architecture. 9/10
It's been a while. We need another tank thread! Post tanks from any era, experimental ones, prototypes that were so stupid no one would ever use it ever, and what you think were the best tanks ever.
(Pic related, the best tank ever PzKfw VI Tiger Ausf. B)
Sounds like too much fun. We just argue about Jesus and race wars here
King Tigers were nice. Too bad that they had a shit ton of technical problems.
So, would the KT be able to penetrate the IS3 reliably?
Who is this guy?
Chesty Puller, the most decorated U.S. Marine in history
>>1198639
I think that was the badass from we were soldiers
>>1198798
What are you implying? That you interpreted the memetext confusing a male name for a female name is actually an attempt to degrade the physical capabilities of women in comparison to men, as a subject of the joke? Are you then implying that you yourself instantly consider the difference between a male and a female to be that the male is physically superior? That's pretty sexist, anon.
There's been a lot of debate over the effectiveness of plate armor, but what about other, earlier armors?
>>1198592
Couldn't stop an arrow, crossbow bolt, sword, really couldn't stop much, but it could soften the impact
>>1198595
bullshit.
>>1198603
No u
>"[43.1] On retiring to Capri he devised a pleasance for his secret orgies: teams of wantons of both sexes, selected as experts in deviant intercourse and dubbed analists, copulated before him in triple unions to excite his flagging passions."
Suetonius, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars
Which was worse /his/, hiring analists on the Imperial payroll, or
the Praetorian guard?
>>1198531
>believing half of what Suetonius wrote
>>1198531
>Believing half of what Suetonius wrote
> Believing half of what Suetonius wrote
Why is studying history from a Marxist perspective so widespread?
99% of the world doesn't give a shit what Marxists think about economics or human rights, so why should we care how they think historical study should be approached?
Because jews
>>1198509
>99% of the world doesn't give a shit what Marxists think about economics or human rights
That's frankly untrue, and this is coming from someone who is very right wing. Regardless of your political affiliation one should always study those who hold different convictions, especially if it goes against you. You can't safeguard yourself against Marxism if you don't understand it. Also there's nothing wrong with looking at History from different perspectives, same with literature/music/film/etc. It fosters a deeper understanding of the subject matter. Studying something from a Marxist perspective doesn't mean that you have to be a Marxist.
>>1198509
>Why is studying history from a Marxist perspective so widespread?
It isn't. Doing history using Marxist historiography is widespread. Probably because the Annales and CPGB Historians Group demonstrated that it produces superior social history.
>99% of the world
doesn't give a shit about the discipline of history. Argument from the people is a shitty fallacy mate.
>what Marxists think about economics or human rights
What connection does this have to quality of historiography?
>so why should we care how they think historical study should be approached?
Because it is a field dominant methodology which has wide spread acceptance amongst conservative historians of politics and war, and liberal historians of mentality and event and culture?
>"All I need is 5 good men."
t. Michel Ney
I'm pretty sure he was speaking of a person. His name was Twenty Goodmen.
>>1198483
Does that include himself?
If so wouldnt he need 4 good men?
>>1198483
>Michel Ney
"Soldiers, when I give the command to fire, fire straight at my heart. Wait for the order. It will be my last to you. I protest against my condemnation. I have fought a hundred battles for France, and not one against her ... Soldiers, fire"
Are there any schools of thought that addresses the inherent irony of death? Super underread and curious as to how spoonfeed friendly /his/ is.
>>1198285
Gas yourself you utter waste.
Go shoot a fucking arab.
>>1198285
>inherent irony of death
this sounds like something that some kind of first year philosophy student would say
