What explains Poland's historical relative irrelevance and dearth of non-Jewish contributions and pre-communist lower wealth compared to Germany, despite their being next door neighbors with similar cultures?
Did the different states have very different institutions that promoted growth in one but not the other?
>>861353
are we talking just the interwar period or including pre-partition things?
>>861377
The whole period since late medieval/early modern times.
>>861400
The Commonwealth was a potent European power in the 16th and 17th centuries, both economically and militarily. I'd disagree that they were historically irrelevant.
How long till they'll be in full communion with each other again? My money is 200 years.
>Lutherans are in communion with Catholic Church
>>861057
It's happen before, but those goddman turks break them up.
I say 100 years.
>Lutherans are in communion with Catholic Church
Wut?
>>861072
Francis heavily implied that Lutherans can take Communion with Catholics back in November of last year
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/11/20/pope-francis-say-lutherans-can-take-communion-catholic-mass/
>pope hunchbacked
>mah nigga Barty rocking the angelic pimp cane
More precisely, I want to know on what pretenses countries that became independent of Spanish rule were formed. Was it cultural differences? Economic differences? If it was the latter, what are some examples of it?
For instance, what determined that Ecuador and Peru did not become one country or that Ecuador left Gran Colombia.
>>861051
By the way, I don't want to hear a "America Latina unida" commie kind of speech. Just historical insight into what I ask.
>>861051
Local Oligarchies' range of influence.
That simple.
>>861079
What kind of influence exactly?
Hey /his/, I was curious:
Are there any people/ethnic groups/tribes/etc. who do not use human language?
Turks
In a word: no
When did the Republican party--founded to end slavery, and the Democratic party--the party of the KKK, perceivably switch places as the racist and anti-racist parties and why?
>>860974
The southern democrats changed votes in the 60's.
>>860978
Explain?
>>860974
They didn't. Some elements of the Democratic Party defected after the whole Civil Rights thing, but the Democrats are still the racist party, they just hide it better now. They've almost unilaterally destroyed black people in America. It's actually a feat, historians will write books about this in the future.
Explain to me why this man wasn't right, why shouldn't we give more votes to those who are better educated and more capable of making decisions? Try to avoid cliche arguments void of substance like it preludes civil rights - if the wiser are able to better rule than the less wise than the less wise can rule themselves, then the problem is the ego of the less wise and nothing else.
I think it was Rawls that argued that a democracy is necessary because it justifies the state. So it isn't the most efficient rule but it's a fair rule. If you have a say in it you're helping to shape it and thus becomes part of it. Something like that, haven't read political philosophy in years.
It isn't the most efficient system, it's the safest system.
If you put more political power in the hands of a certain group, that group will only seek to increase its powers and the majority is now at risk of being suppressed.
>>861505
Aka what every mediocre state is.
tfw you remember belgium exists
>>860875
Brugge :-DDD
>>860875
Remind me why it hasnt been split between the french and dutch again?
In Bruges was a good movie
But...
Draw Americans as monsters like oni or tengu
And getting into fights with catfish
Dumb gaijin scum. Do not question us. You know nothing.
>War
What's the best way of stopping something that predates the history of humanity /his/?
>1974 predates human history
Chimpanzees aren't our ancestors.
>>860636
We share a common ancestor with chimps
>inb4 someone misinterprets your comment.
>>860636
They are a pretty good proof that war not only belongs to humanity though, aren't they?
Hey, I have no idea if this is the right place for this, but I figure I'd ask since it has been on my mind lately.
How does Buddhism, Eastern Religion/Spirituality, or anything of the sort deal with the fact that all around the world, children are starving to death, women are being raped, warlords are destroying villages, factory farms killing animals by the millions, ect...
I know this sound silly, but really, where does Eastern Philosophy fit into how cruel our world really is? I have recently taken up meditation as a hobby and all the research I have been doing says to "get in touch with the world" or "become one with your body and the earth" and all that kind of shit. It just seems silly to think these thoughts when there are untold amounts of death and suffering happening all of the time. Why am I so privileged (I hate to use this word) that I can potentially gain enlightenment through meditation and Eastern Philosophy, yet a child in Africa dying of some horrible disease will never know such peace.
How can Eastern Religions/Philosophies sit in their ivory towers and pretend that any of this is important when the world we live in is filled with atrocities?
Sorry if this is coming across as angsty. I am genuinely curious as it is something that I feel is preventing me from fully immersing myself in meditation and spirituality.
Before you save the world you gotta save yourself tbhfam
>>860484
Yeah, I think this and the highest form of Buddhism is self annihilation of the spirit, so you are not reincarnated into this world, this ball of dirt and shit we call earth, this thing called life. The dead only know one thing, it is better than life is the final transcendence.
I tend towards eastern philosophy more than western Abrahamics even tho I was born and raised in the west, the east has some good points.
>>860496
Close but more like annihilation of the samsaric element. But even that is a dialectic. Buddhism is transcendence of dualisms, to where you've been this whole time.
How can we finally achieve peace?
Is she right? Is the creation of a world state the only way? Or some form of worldwide shadow government?
How would you achieve peace, /his/?
Wasn't the point supposed to be that a world government wad the wrong interpretation of her ideas? Also this sounds more like /pol/ thread to me.
>Overthrow the international bourgeoisie and create an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the State
If the problem is War, and Peace is the alternative, then a world state is the only way to achieve that. Otherwise, states will always have War in their back pockets as an option.
If the problem is violence, and peace is the alternative, then there is no reason to think a world state would do any better or worse than any other states.
Ask a a guy who just wrote a 20 page paper on Edmund Burke anything.
What were his least favorite things about the French Revolution?
How did he feel about India?
What did he think about the Irish?
>>860375
>What were his least favorite things about the French Revolution?
He hated the whole thing so much it's hard to narrow it down.
He hated abstract reasoning in the first place, and to him the idea that you would base a revolution on "rights of man" derived purely from abstractions was satanic.
He hated people who thought inequality was a problem because he saw inequality as God's Will and simply human nature. Meddling with inequality was meddling with God's work.
His belief in prescription (supporting customs and institutions long-established) negates the entire concept of a revolution in the first place.
Burke hated the Jacobins so much that he started to look favourably on marie antoinette of all people, even though French Absolutism was absolutely not something he supported philosophically. But he thought French Absolutism was 10 trillion times better than the French Revolution.
>How did he feel about India?
He didn't think that a company, the East India Company, should be given a monopoly over India by the British government. He saw it has terribly corrupt and unjust. He defended the rights of Indians not to face tyranny. However he also believed in the goodness of the British Empire as a civilizing mission and saw Indians as inferior to the British.
Out of Africa theory is the theory that all humans originated in Africa and spread out from there.
But there's very clear evidence that proto-humans existed all around the world. There are even Homo Erectus bones in England.
How can humans have all come from Africa and spread out if protohumans were already in Europe and Asia?
That doesn't make sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_Africa_I
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans
There's two OOA's.
pic related is simplified, IIRC the earliest know fossil found outside of Africa is Homo erectus georgicus.
Maybe the specific Homo Sapiens just happened to mutate in Africa?
They then turned it to be better adjustable than everyone else.
>>860296
No one is denying that the very first protohuman evolved in Africa, but out of Africa likes to state that anatomically modern humans evolved only in Africa and spread out from there.
If Protohumans existed over the world, doesn't it make more sense that they all evolved into the different races?
What were the most objectively superior cultures in history relative to other cultures, and how were they destroyed?
What superior cultures of today have been or are being going to the shit bin?
>>860249
European (Faustian) culture
Cultural Marxism
Atlantis
Was destroyed by natural disaster
ITT post what you are currently reading and what you're planning on reading next
Currently:
Euclid - Elements
Thorstein Veblen- Theory of the Leisure Class
Going to:
The Works of Archimedes
Ludwig Von Mises - Theory of Money and Credit
now - just started a Thomas Paine reader, currently on Common Sense, Rights of Man is also included
next - Federalist Papers probably, though possibly Descartes depending on how I feel
A Clash of Kings by George RR Martin
Planning on buying Morning Star by Pierce Brown
Current: The Silmarillion, and Being and Time
Going to: The Idea of Phenomenology, and The 33 Strategies of War
