itt: People who literally did nothing wrong
>>1171614
>died like a bitch with the job half done
>did nothing wrong
Pick one
Other than creating one of the most violent and repressive states of all time and the Soviet Secret police and killing millions of people?
He was personally worse than Stalin, but in circumstances that didn't allow him to do as much.
>tfw end ruthless killings
>tfw end oppression
>tfw end serfdom
>tfw get painted as villain by imperialist, neo-colonialist racist capitalists
>tfw everyone buys it hook, line and sinker
>mfw I have no face for this
>muslims take over north africa
>after a maybe 400 years christianity disappears
>muslims take over the indian subcontinent
>after a few hundred years indians are still mostly hindu
Explain this pls
>>1167547
Too many Indians.
>>1167547
Arab rule vs. Turkic rule. Look at how the Balkans are still mostly christian despite everything.
>>1167563
Syria-Palestine and Egypt were mostly Christian until 12th century though, i.e. 500 years after the conquest.
What was the most powerful fighting force relative to it's time period?
pic related, i think they'd be pretty high on the list
The USA probably could conquer the entire world if it wanted to
>>1165349
Any reason as to why the Mongols didn't conquer the Byzantines? They were weak as fuck.
>>1165364
true, I wasn't thinking of modern militaries
Enlighten me about Anarcho-Feminism friends. In a classless society where the merits of the individual are key would women not have a severe disadvantage due to their physical inferiority? Let's say it blunty, what prevents men from overpowering women when they feel like it with little repercussions because they don't have the strenght to fight back.
To me it seems like women have more benefits living in a law state than an anarchist one. Atleast here their rights are protected by society and the law.
>>1163408
>what prevents men from overpowering women
A culture which shuns unnecessary violence, of course.
And don't expect women (or anyone who's in any way marginalized by the status quo) to be defended by the law; it's fairly obvious that laws have been selectively enforced for as long as there have been laws.
>>1163408
Anarchism isn't lawless chaos.
It's a responsibility for people to look out for each other, which includes protecting from rapists and such. And since in the absence of prisons or anything of the sort every crime would probably be met with the death penalty or other such street justice.
To give an example, if you rape someone then her friends and male relatives would probably murder you and this would be received as justified by the community thus protecting them from revenge killings.
ITT historical figures who you'd love to have as a friend
Pic related
Why did they prefer it thick in the past?
Were they all high test knights trained from infancy to lift heavy pieces of metal and swing them around?
>>1169529
they didn't prefer it thick. the women in your pic aren't that fat, they just aren't anorexic
>>1169529
>
>>1169571
and?
Why future doesn't exist but past does?
Because it hasn't happened yet.
We make our own destiny.
t. Sarah Connor
Unless you believe that time itself is illusory, the past doesn't "exist" either. It happened, but it no longer exists.
ITT: The greatest generals.
> Now, surviving for 40 years of constant warfare in the 15th century is a big enough deal by itself, but this guy went above and beyond – his biographer credits him with personally killing 3,000 men on the battlefield during his career.
>>1162223
If he was taking a selfie his phone wouldn't be in the picture. Fake as fuck.
The only correct answer is Subotai
>Communism doesn't work
>Actual communism hasn't ever been tried
Shut up. Functioning communism would be awesome. How could we MAKE it work?
Invent star trek style replicators.
>>1161224
Why don't you try living in a commune?
It's been tried and would surely work depending on your objetives
>>1161224
Achieving post scarcity without having Skynet kill us or dissolving into grey goo
The last mammoth probably died around the time the Code of Hammurabi was written.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/last-wooly-mammoths-died-isolated-and-alone-180955208/?no-ist
It really makes you think.
>>1150914
is there any chance whatsoever that a human from a civilization has ever encountered a mammoth?
>>1150921
They lived on Wrangel Island. Just Inuits.
>>1150936
please dont respond to trolls
>Holy
>Roman
>Empire
saw this was your striker in the babbys and had the greatest laugh. makes me very sad I kinda forgot about this board after it was introduced, all the threads here are pretty great, I feel like I've missed so much that was just so raw.
give me your juiciest /his/ memes pls
>>1170016
dumping my stuff
We hear a lot about German women being raped by Soviets in WW2...
But what about all those little Nordic boys taken prisoner by hot-blooded American soldiers and Russian freedom fighters, so far from their sweethearts with no other sexual outlet?
Would an Allied soldier be punished for having sex with a German prisoner? Did captured Nazi boys ever prostitute themselves for better treatment?
>having sex with a qt twink
That's a reward not a punishment
Americans just bought the local women.
Russians just took them.
Either way, plenty of pussy around.
>>1169933
I hate to meme but it's literally the Jews' fault that homosexuality is uncool
If the Greeks and Romans were allowed to determine Western morality, fucking cute twinks would be a perfectly respectable pastime
Sup /his/? Let's have a thread about the history - and extent of human self awareness.
Considering how humans are inherently selfish, yet we agree to work together towards common goals, it would be good to be more self aware. So what is "self" and how would you define it?
"I" and "me" and "you" are all concepts which represent our ego.
Ego is our center of conscious awareness.
Basically this means that "I" is an idea which represents our ego. What you define as "me" ("yourself "in the traditional sense) is a delusion, because most of the definition behind "me" and "I" = just a tiny fraction of what self truly is.
Have you ever thought about it - how you would define your "self"? What about at a cellular level? What about atomic? But even atoms aren't remotely close to what the most fundamental properties of matter are. Atoms are just part of a hierarchy of complexity. In fact, atoms are 99% empty space and are "made out of stuff" that isn't even tangible at all. This is all just for perspective though!
Human nature is something metaphysical, as well as the nature of reality. The nature of reality is both object in nature, and subjective... that's kind of a big deal! But it's evident and clear that the majority of our species doesn't spend much time investigating this, nor try to come to a better understanding of the fundamental aspects of the nature of reality. So let's talk about it!
What do you think about self awareness?
>>1169700
I think that percieving the paradox of a reality with no conceivable beginning is pretty interesting. I also find the idea of simulated reality to be fascinating.
>>1169700
99.99999% of humans are not self aware. They simply act on impulse. Even the people we rate as highly intelligent.
That said... Human nature is not magical. It can simply be broken down into predefined states. The human mind is made up of atoms (and are formed into chemicals) which obey the laws of physics etc.
Thereby we are defined by the universe. Anthromorphic principle and all that.
>>1169721
"Beginning" is essentially just point of view. Therein lies the sense to that paradox, I think.
>>1169725
What we think and believe to be our "self" is just baaarely the tip of the iceberg! After-all, we can only be aware of - and know so much at any given time. We can't be aware of ourselves as the whole universe because the nature of our awareness doesn't allow it. But that's why I brought up atoms for the sake of perspective! If we think about it as a matter of physics, even though it technically doesn't make sense (because naturally we aren't biologically built to perceive the most fundamental aspects of nature with our naked senses) "other" is a point of view. "Separation" is a point of view.
Think about outlines for example. An outline will change based on where and how you look at it. That's because the outline isn't really there, per say, it's just the noticeable limit of our perception.
Puyi dindu nuffin wrong, what is the consensus on this guy?
>be the up and coming emperor of the Qing dynasty
>some bitch named Sun Yatsen dethrones you and forms a republic
>You go into shameful hiding for years in Hong Kong, then Japan.
>The Japanese let you be the emperor you never were in Manchukuo
Where did it all go so wrong?
>being a puppet
>>1169609
He had no choice. There was either trusting the corrupt fucks who kicked you out and would treat you like a puppet anyway or trusting the not-so-corrupt-looking ones who offer you a chance to fulfill your destiny.
>>1169637
So muh destiny>national sovereignty?
Its time for a comfy risk thread. Unlike /pol/, /his/ is a board that is actually capable of intelligent historical discussions. I'd like to make a /risk/ game to commemorate that. Don't let me down /his/
>tripcode your nation name and bonus
>tell me what nation you're starting in and what color.
Let the games begin.
>>1169568
>/his/ is a board that is actually capable of intelligent historical discussions.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
*takes a deep breath*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>1169568
The whole point of 4chan RISK is fun and unrestricted shit-flinging though
>>1169581
*teleports behind you"
*unsheathes katana*
*cuts you in half*
pshhhh.... nothing personnel..... kid..................
