>United Kingdom-controlling half of the worlds resources via colonies and unrestricted acces to all trade routes.
>France-useful bunch of colonies and unrestricted access to treade routes.
>Russia-Enormous land mass with huge population and natural resources.
>Germany- Not enough natural resources, access to open seas always threatened by british and french,some poor ass colonies
Was it really a good idea try to contain Germany an expecting Germans obey it?
Were Germans really guilty for trying to brake this blockade?
>>1059915
>Russia-Enormous land mass with huge population and natural resources.
>natural resources.
HAH!
What is international trade.
>>1059915
>Was it really a good idea try to contain Germany an expecting Germans obey it?
In what way was Germany being contained?
There wasn't a blockade until they started chatting shit. Not to mention that they declared unrestricted submarine warfare
Have you noticed that whenever Zizek talks about politics in clear language, his reasoning is always, "I like this so the government should do it."? He's a perfect example of picrelated being true. You can wade about in the self referential circle jerk of Hegel and Kant etc for 40 years but in the end you won't have anything to show for it.
The pseudo intellectuals will claim otherwise. They need to jerk off over Plato and Aristotle ad Wittgenstein etc in order to fool others.
>>1059824
Stalin.
Examples?
>>1059829
His recent talks about his new book, against the double blackmail. You can Google them. One is at LSE, the other with the Guardian
What's your opinion on the effects the "great game" had on the world and the way history swiped both Russia and Great Britain under the rug for it.
Why were the brits so afraid of Russian expansion since there was a very small chance that they would ever be a threat to the empire
Also, do you think that if they would have realized that their rivalry would indirectly cause the destruction of european dominance over the world they would have accept more compromises
The Scramble for Africa and the Great Game are different things.
>>1059701
i personally find the sketch to be the best representation of british imperialism whatever the context
>>1059695
shout outs to Cecil Rhodes yo
I saw his statue in Oxford recently, ppl were campaigning for it to get removed but the Uni kept it in place.
Thoughts on Ike's presidency?
>>1059423
s'alirght I guess
I like it
>>1059435
I like Ike!
Could fellow /his/torian explain to me how nationhood was defined and what role it played in pre-modern societies?
I presume ethnic solidarity existed to a certain extent in the pre-modern era and people still defined nationhood as a layer of their identity(for example the Greek chauvinism in regards to non-Greek barbarbians).
I'd also be interested in any ancient or medieval works that deal with this subject from a more philosophical angle.
Generally the modern nation state starts to take shape after the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648
I don't really know a whole lot more about it than that but maybe some other anon can help you out.
>>1059247
If we're talking Europe, then there was no clear nationhood or statehood identity back then. Ruling body often had different culture and spoke different language from the majority of population, there were no borders (except customs because everyone likes shekels) to speak of and religious identity was in some cases more influential than "national" one.
This being said, I don't know much about perception of nationhood in pre-modern area, but I know that Romans, for example, equalized nationhood with citizenship.
>>1059285
This Anon is absolutely correct about peace of Westphalia, but I want to elaborate on it. Westphalia is a land in Germany, not a city. There were two separate peace treaties for Sweden and France which were signed in two different Westphalian towns: Munster and Osnabruck. That happened because Thirty Year War was the first case where two large nations of different religious beliefs decided to act according to their common national interests instead, but they still had to keep some distance from each other.
>>1059247
It's kind of like obscenity: you know it when you see it.
Do you guys think that if Hitler sided with the Chinese during WW2 that the korean or vietnamese war would have never happened
>>1058436
he did
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-German_cooperation_until_1941
its where you got your pic from
its why theyre wearing stahlhelms
>>1058451
I meant throughout ww2
>>1058436
It wouldn't change the outcome of the European theatre much. It would however put Japan in an interesting place. They would either be tolerated and supplied by the allies, who could've let them keep all territorial gain in China granted they stop taking Allied territory OR could've made Japan a wildcard fighting everyone.
Orthodox Christians, assemble! Post icons
Daily reminder that Nietzsche was a nihilist by his own definition
>Will to Power; 13 (Spring-Fall 1887)
> Nihilism represents a pathological transitional stage (what is pathological is the tremendous generalization, the inference that there is no meaning at all): whether the productive forces are not yet strong enough, or whether decadence still hesitates and has not yet invented its remedies. Presupposition of this hypothesis: that there is no truth, that there is no absolute nature of things nor a "thing-in-itself." This, too, is merely nihilism-even the most extreme nihilism. It places the value of things precisely in the lack of any reality corresponding to these values and in their being merely a symptom of strength on the part of the value-positers, a simplification for the sake of life.
I hate to single out Christianity in particular as just about every religion is guilty of it, but does it bother you that certain key elements of Christianity have roots in other religions?
From 'Zoroastrian Saviour Imagery and its Influence on the New Testament'
>"The title Sosyant can be translated Redeemer or Saviour, and the form of the word shows that the work of the figure lies in the future. The title is used both in the plural and singular forms in the Hymns of Zoroaster [...] Nevertheless in the singular it definitely refers to the eschatological saviour who will be born of a virgin at the end of the world, but who will also be a son of Zoroaster. His task is to restore the world, which involves defeat of the demons, raising the dead, assembling men for judgement, and the administration of the same. All this means a return to the primeval state which existed before the assault of Ahriman"
I also struggle with the history of the Devil. It's patently obvious he started out as a member of Yahweh's court and that his role as an adversary to God was a later innovation drawing from Babylonian influences. Am I really supposed to believe that centuries of religious syncretism and theological innovation somehow hit the nail on the head?
>>1090715
>Orthodox thread
what's the topic
>Being resentful toward Nietzsche!
Way to prove him right about your religion...
I think you need to look back and try to understand what these words meant to contexualize the quote.
> transitional stage
where
> productive forces are not yet strong enough
or
> still hesitates and has not yet invented its remedies
Could the USSR have managed without the West, or was the US and UK's efforts crucial for the tide of the war?
If so, what were the actions the West took that definitely helped the Allies win the war that the USSR couldn't have managed without?
Probably asked a bunch of times.
>>1087570
It was crucial, the USSR just won by the skin of their teeth even if they did the lions share of the fighting.
Were it not for the Nazis and the Japanese being tied up on other fronts by the British in particular the USSR are certain to have lost.
>OP asks about Western efforts against Germany
>posts pic of Okinawa
>>1087579
Fuck off, nit-picking sperglord.
I just choose it because it looks cool
Why don't Christians put more effort into refuting Hume's arguments? It seems to me they waste their time with Nietzsche when all he did was take the line of thought started by Hume to some of its logical conclusions.
Hume is the keystone of the entirety of Modern thought. He should be Public Enemy Number One for Christian thinkers.
>Why don't Christians put more effort into refuting Hume's arguments?
Because they can't
>>1081613
There to busy using him to attack new atheism. Which is really just atheists who have not read older atheists like Nietzsche and Hume
I have never heard of Hume. Why should I care about him?
/his/
Who were the biggest assholes in human history?
>>1085808
Rich people.
White people. Literally enslaved and colonized the entire world.
Women.
"WE WUZ FOUNDING FATHERS AND SHEEIT" aside, what do you guys think of the hottest musical on Broadway and also parts of mainstream media?
>>1066523
I don't.
>>1066561
You don't what?
>what do you guys think of the hottest musical on Broadway
Ew.
I was curious about religious extremism and found lots of examples in Western media about fairly obvious things - the Crusades, 9/11, etc, essentially all violent acts against others done in the name of religion.
This got me interested (since I just finished a course on Eastern Religions this semester) as to how extremism fits in an Eastern notion. I'm curious if you guys have any information/thoughts about groups such as Buddhists or Daoists (relatively thought of as peaceful) that use their religion as justification for violent acts.
Building off of this, I'm also kind of curious if using this (http://www.global-briefing.org/2012/01/the-mind-of-the-religious-extremist/) definition of extremists as "people who – for reasons they themselves deem religious – commit, promote or support purposely hurtful, violent or destructive acts against others." is really satisfactory. I would be inclined to think of groups such as the Peoples Temple as a group holding extreme views, shouldn't that be enough to be labeled extremists? This led me to Eastern religions, where many groups perform extreme actions, such as the marathon monks of mount Hiei (pictured) perform hundreds of marathons over the course of 12 years around this mountain in Japan, even though many of them will die. This is just one example of a what I think a reasonable person would consider an example of an extreme practice. Even the action of seppuku is a fairly extreme one, no?
tl;dr: Do you guys think that religious extremism is only religious violence on another group, or do you think that extreme actions can also be inflicted upon the self? Furthermore, can you guys think of any examples of religious extremism in Eastern religions such as Buddhism?
>>1087958
>do you think that extreme actions can also be inflicted upon the self?
Burning yourself alive as an act of protest is pretty extreme
IMO Western religion is usually just a social force that binds societies together, occasionally giving rise to bouts of violence based on theological disagreements or the dominance of one denomination over another politically. Eastern religion, on the other hand, is almost always extreme behavior. Confucianism motivated millions of chinks to die for le ebin dynasty. Buddhism has motivated millions of chinks to sit on their asses for years at a time in search of nothing. Taoism has motivated millions of chinks to try alchemy. Hinduism convinced Indians that the caste system was and is good. Maybe there aren't "crusades" in East Asia but there's definitely extreme religious behavior, probably more than there is in the West.
>>1087958
In Japan, monasteries and Shinto shrines were often autonomous landowners with their own bushi retainers and militia. The Buddhist temple milita were often referred to as akuso (evil monks) even though only a minority of them had taken tonsure.
the monks would also lead religious parades and make demands of the imperial court.
The shugendo sect was known for its martial practices, including a violent form of sumo. they also practiced long treks in the mountains, fasting, abstaining from water and other extreme rites. many died on theee entries into the mountains. At the same time these yamabushi were considered to hold magic powers and were often skilled marital artists
600 pages of proof the big guy never existed.
http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason-Doubt/dp/1909697494
So 600 pages of garbage, then. The historicity of Jesus isn't disputed but by erich von daniken tier historians that wear the fedora.
>>1081940
When will godless people tire of paying people who pander to their disbelief? I'll check it out, but I really can't imagine anyone spending good money on something like this.
Why do atheists hate Christianity but love Islam?
Who was right?
Both were right about some things and wrong about some things.
Burr
inb4 retarded Broadway fans with political agendas
Glorious Celts>Stupid Romans
>>1087275
Type that in your own alphabet you forest cuck.
>>1087277
>romans invented the phoenician alphabet
>>1087275
>amazing warriors
>lost to the Romans
>somehow still better warriors?
