>If the majority agree then it is the right thing to do.
When did you realize democracy was flawed?
When did you realize being flawed does not prevent a concept from being useful?
Yes.
>>1128829
What do you propose to replace this system?
Tell me about the Dutch Golden Age, /his/.
What made them so successful? What caused them to be absorbed by the French Empire?
What was their most astounding feat?
I want to know!
>>1128676
Calvinism.
>What made them so successful?
The Dutch East India Company (VoC). Living in the Netherlands meant you pretty much had to deal with water, so the Dutch became adept at seafaring and building dykes and such. The VoC was the key behind the Dutch success in terms of spice trade.
>What caused them to be absorbed by the French Empire?
Napoleon. The Dutch were good at fighting at sea (See second and third Anglo-Dutch Wars, Dutch-Portuguese War), but at land they had no chance against the French.
>What was their most astounding feat?
That they were pretty damn successful as a tiny nation even though they had the French, the Germans and the English right next to them. At least the Portuguese had only one neighbor to worry about.
Also pretty impressive is the Franco-Dutch War. Read about it.
>>1128701
VOC, not VoC.
Reinhold Niebuhr wrote about the hypocrisy of such “dominant and privileged groups” and “the unconscious and conscious identification of their special interests with general interests and universal values”.
Let's discuss how the dominant groups make their values and interests seem dominant, and how we see it in the society.
One such case I think is how globalism works. The rich see a diverse, multicutural society without borders to be the optimal one. They themselves are protected by private security and political power from any and all negatives. The population of the rich countries has to compete with people who can work for pennies and the poor countries lose their best and the brightest. Crime is only an issue for the poor, and welfare state being destroyed is of course a positive for the rich.
>>1128467
Have you considered that globalization actually benefits the poor with raising wages in undeveloped countries and cheaper goods in developed ones?
>>1128495
>Have you considered that globalization actually benefits the poor with raising wages in undeveloped countries
Mostly a lie. In Chine, yes, wages went up, but this was paid by the destruction of the culture, public health and the environment. China is probably poorer now than during the 70s if you account for the loss of environmental and natural capital. Africa had rising living standards but now is ruled by what Fanon called compradoer elites who help the western financial elites rob Africa blind.
S-America has developed, but this has a lot to do with them allying against the US so they can develop their own ecnomies.
>and cheaper goods in developed ones?
>implying
Cheaper? Not really, the quality has gone down, and more importantly it has led to good manufacturing jobs leaving the country.
What you said was a perfect example of how dominant elites confound their interests with those of the general population.
>>1128852
not that anon but:
>destruction of the culture, public health and the environment.
that is capitalism in general though. Heck, it is both capitalism and communism.
>China is probably poorer now than during the 70s
lmao, no
> Africa had rising living standards but now is ruled by what Fanon called compradoer elites who help the western financial elites rob Africa blind.
Proofs? If anything it is China that is making deals with african leaders all across the continent
>Cheaper? Not really,
yes, they are cheaper
> more importantly it has led to good manufacturing jobs leaving the country.
It has done so exactly because they are cheaper to produce and therefore to sell. Not everything they produce in China is an overpriced smartphone, you know? Nice cognitive dissonance though
>What you said was a perfect example of how dominant elites confound their interests with those of the general population.
This sentence makes no sense, especially considering you were wrong about everything you said
Okay /his/ can we please settle this "there was no way they germans could have won against the SU" meme? I agree in OTL it is very unlikely that the Nazis win but there are several counterfactual ideas not completly in alien space bats territory in which germany most likely would have won. Muh industry and muh manpower are decisive factors but to outright dismiss any real danger of the soviets losing is unhistorical.
If usa didnt help at all and if Hitler didnt help at all.
Very possible then
>>1128439
Especially if Japan decides to attack the UDSSR too.
>>1128442
If the US doesn't support the US, Japanese attack on it is literally worthless. They'd take over 10000000 square kilometers of nothing and Vladovistok.
Oh wait, they wouldn't because the border was guarded by enough soldiers to BTFO the Japanese "the absolutely best army for fighting WW1 that fought during WW2" completely and take over Manchuria and Korea.
Instead I say it is rather precisely the opposite.
*sniff*
and so on and so forth
mein gott
Is there any truth to this statement?:
"Just because it is logical does not mean it's correct."
Define "logical."
>>1128126
False premises mean false conclusions even if the logic is sound
>>1128148
No.
Logic is necessarily valid. Sound premises imply that the premises are true. What you just said is a contradiction.
>>1128126
"Logos" mean 'word, speech, discourse'. A "logic" is a set of deductively valid rules and often times some metaphysical axioms (like the law of excluded middle).
A rule is valid if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If the premises are true then the conclusion must follow.
Most logics are valid but unsound (their premises are false.)
There are many "logics." Intuitionistic logic, dialethism, dialetheism, classical logic and so on. There are also older ways to use "logic." Kant had a logical system which incorporated subject/object-relationships, which is very rare in contemporary analytic logics.
Formal logics developed as very pretentious syllogisms, which people have understood for a long time to be flawed. Formal logics are often based in classical logic but not exclusively so.
Logics don't mean anything if they aren't given a metaphysical, mathematical or scientific interpretation. Here they can be shown to be absurd or simply wrong.
If the world is indeterministic and the logic is deterministic, then the logic is unsound in how it depicts the physical system of the world.
Is the United States of America the only nation stare explicitly founded upon leftist values?
>>1127992
>United States of America
>nation state
top kek
>why am I even posting in a bait thread
No.
Next question.
>>1127992
>leftist values
How about no, you dumb fucking nutter.
Has there ever been another leader in history that fucked up his country as hard as pic related?
When wasn't Cambodia fucked up?
Idi Amin and Bokassa come to mind but yeah, they get pale in comparision (no pun intended)
>>1127963
Mugabe
Watching this at the moment and having fun
What's /his/ opinion about the channel?
>>1127823
>tv
honestly it's fine. Nidel knows his stuff. posts very credible sources, and makes it entertaining to watch.
/his/ loves it. Nuff said.
Was Nixon really a bad president?
Why is he so hated?
>>1127711
Besides forming the EPA, his presidency was kind of unremarkable outside of the political scandles. But even then, those are dubious
>>1127720
He did wonders with our relationship with China. Not to mention he got us out of vietnam
He would have been great if he hadn't been anti drug and anti gun.
ITT: how to tell if someone is really a /his/torian or not
>they think the crusades were super evil christian imperialism
>they speak in memes and get hilariously angry at half the people in any thread involving commies or nazis or religion
>they post made up charts or several fabricated quotations when asked for evidence
>In b4 personal army
I'm in need of some help, /his/. My manager at work is involved with this club called the SCA. It's kind of like LARPing but it's all about historical accuracy. Anyways, he fights and I'm thinking about joining so I can beat the shit out of him without fear of repercussion.
The long and short of my supplication is I need help finding historical art or good modern replicas of clothes from Belgrade, Serbia in the 1490's. The problem I'm running into is that when I'm trying to research it, most of what I'm finding is Ottoman shit but Belgrade was still a Christian stronghold in the Ottoman Balkans. I'm not too worried about it being too complicated because my wife sews really well, but she needs a pattern. If I know what I'm looking for, I should be able to talk to one of the SCA people to help me get the pattern. I just need to know what they wore there (bonus for patterns though)
Anyone have anything they could share?
>>1127489
This might help, although most of the surviving Serbian art from that time period is unfortunately religious/iconographic and so not the most representative of contemporary dress.
http://www.monumentaserbica.com/mushushu/
Here you go
https://modanekadisad.wordpress.com/istorija-kostima-u-slikama/srednjovekovni-kostim/srpski-srednjovekovni-kostim/
You’re unlikely to find clothes from that exact time and place, but some of these are reasonably close, and the text describes the changing fashions.
Hello,
Let's have an official Karl Marx thread. All discussion of Marx should come under here, here is an interesting quote I have been mulling over lately:
"The obscure man falsely attributes to me the view that “the surplus-value produced by the workers alone remains, in an unwarranted manner, in the hands of the capitalist entrepreneurs” (Note 3, p. 114). In fact I say the exact opposite: that the production of commodities must necessarily become “capitalist” production of commodities at a certain point, and that according to the law of value governing it, the “surplus-value” rightfully belongs to the capitalist and not the worker." - Notes on Wagner
Marx here seems to be explicitly stating that the exploitation of the worker is not an injustice in any sense. It has intrigued me to ask, how important is morality in Marx's historical materialism? Just a starting point for discussion perhaps.
This board is for the discussion of history and the humanities. For conspiracy theories go to >>/pol/ or >>/x/
Stop with this Marx shit already. If /pol/faggotry is a bannable offense then so should be marxposting, enough is enough.
So how did the American natives figure out that you could dry tobacco and smoke it?
>>1127322
Someone tried it and didn't die. Same way everything else was figured out by anyone, anywhere.
>>1127327
...How was suicide bombing figured out?
>>1127331
Someone tried it and someone else watched. Same way everything else was figured out by others, anywhere.
Why did the Schlieffen plan fail?
>>1127232
Because it was never viable in the first place. The plan had been drafted as a thought-exercise, included armies that didn't exist in reality and handwaved away things like supply lines.
But all of it is just one part of the overall picture: no initial war plan worked out during WWI. The French attack against Alsace failed hilariously, Russia got wrecked in the battle of the Masurian lakes, Germnay failed to knock out France, and don't even get me started on Austria-Hungary.
>>1127265
What about Austria Hungary? What happened?
>>1127275
Attacks on all fronts with insufficient forces, because high command decided to mess with the mobilization plan in real time. The KuK army gets trashed so badly that it has to be propped up by Germany for the rest of the war.
