Why has protectionism never worked?
It didn't? How do you think Venice and Genoa got so filthy rich?
>>814004
Except when it has.
>>814004
It denies the increase in real wages, by driving up prices in home countries, and prevents increasing standards of living by stopping the setting up of jobs in foreign countries. It also stifles competition and prevents over all improvements in the economies.
Was he gay?
>>813939
Nope. He was not as you are, OP.
>>813939
Probably not but people who extremely lonely will do weird things to fight that loneliness so it wouldn't be impossible that he did some gay stuff
Was Booth a homophobe?
Can we talk about the Solutrean hypothesis?
I would love to but I dont know much about the theory itself, Isn't it about proto-indo Europeans migrating to north america?
>>813913
Yes
It's a hypothesis, end of discussion.
It's about on par with the black Olmec theory.
So what were you taught about Communism in school?
I remember quite clearly we got "Worked on paper, doesn't work in theory because they never took human nature into account" and then a overview of Stalins purges, Pol Pot's atrocities, How Reagan pulled down the Berlin Wall and Stalingrad.
I got A every year in History and literally didn't even know what the Russian Revolution was until several years after finishing High School.
Australia here.
>>813547
Philippines
>There were these bunch of countries that went commie.
>And then there were these that didn't.
>Commie countries fell because of shitloads of socio-economic factors and inability to handle them.
>China, Vietnam, NK, and Cuba are still here tho. Though the latter two adopted State Capitalism.
Not at once blamed gommienism. Just told it as it was.
Being from a Catholic school, Capitalism was just as much criticized as Communism was. Neither of these were Le Good/Bad Guys.
>>813547
>Australia here.
Australian history education is shit tier
Source: studied 7 years of it
muh kokoda track
muh stolen children
Fuck, at least they could teach the kids something relevant for once
Was the Catholic Church in the medieval era as 'No fun allowed' and dour as it's often portrayed as? Surely monks and priests didn't just depend on a community's piety to ensure their goodwill? What did the clergy contribute to a medieval community other than spiritual satisfaction and were they allowed to take part in and enjoy the various entertainments of the time?
Priests were probably even less restrained than today.
Medieval era was "no fun allowed" on fast days, but Sunday was a day to party, as well as feast days in general.
>>813214
What are you talking about? Back then they only had sex with consenting adults.
>>813210
Read the Canterbury Tales friendo
The clergy were pretty much normal people looking to make a buck, the clergyman who followed the rules and was holy and pious and whatnot was rare
Amuse me /his/, what are the dumbest the vilest and the most autistic religions that somehow got mass following?
My STEMpleb picks:
dumbest
>nation of islam
vilest
>aztec religion
autistic
>manicheanism
science
mormonism is pretty autistic
>Much of Johnson's scholarship is built on the foundation of the Second Vatican Council, which urged members of the Catholic Church to overcome "every type of discrimination, whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, color, social condition, language or religion."[4]
>"All-male images of God are hierarchical images rooted in the unequal relation between women and men," she writes. "Once women no longer relate to men as patriarchal fathers, lords, and kings in society, these images become religiously inadequate. Instead of evoking the reality of God, they block it."[8]
>She is a Distinguished Professor of Theology at Fordham University, a Jesuit institution in New York City. She is a member of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood. Johnson has served as president of the Catholic Theological Society of America and is "one of its most well known members."[3]
Also, the woman who popularized the modern use of the word "privilege" is Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, a Catholic theologian. look her up. She employs Vatican II theology
>Kyriarchy, pronounced /ˈkaJriɑːrki/, is a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. The word was coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza in 1992 to describe her theory of interconnected, interacting, and self-extending systems of domination and submission, in which a single individual might be oppressed in some relationships and privileged in others. It is an intersectional extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender.[1] Kyriarchy encompasses sexism, racism, homophobia, classism, economic injustice, colonialism, ethnocentrism, militarism, and other forms of dominating hierarchies in which the subordination of one person or group to another is internalized and institutionalized.[2][3]
>>813023
Can we fug nuns now?
>>813023
While the theory do sound a lot like SJWism, there is one big difference I get.
This Catholic theory seems to think that the oppressed in one situation can be an oppressor in another one as well as vice versa.
Modern SJWS seems to have taken the thought that it is always always the white man that is the bad, Asians unable to oppress niggers and so on.
This is all well and good but I'm going to be perfectly honest with you. I don't think there's any reason to incorporate feminism into Christianity. Christ told us to love our neighbor as yourself unconditionally. What can feminism give us to help us do that? If anything feminism has driven a wedge between myself and many of my friends, in many ways because my faith has led me to be more conservative than people I voted for Obama with 4 years ago. What happens when intersectional Catholic feminism further divides the body of Christ against itself? Will female catachumens in sub-Saharan Africa start telling priests they're wrong because they aren't women from sub-Saharan African communities that haven't been exposed to the Word of God as much as others have and therefore deserve really special treatment?
On top of that all of these notions are stale. I'm not saying she's wrong, but the Church is an ancient institution, why did this need to be articulated at all?
And can you please not make too many threads about this, OP? This is already the second. Did you make this as soon as the last 404d?
Why did no Revolutionary Terror take place after the American Revolution?
It seems to stand out from other Revolutions from the French, Roundheads, Russian, Chinese etc all where Revolutionary terror was implemented too solidify the position of the Revolutionaries.
>>812992
>Why did no Revolutionary Terror take place after the American Revolution?
There was revolutionary terror.
It was just taken out on the Native Americans instead of the Anglo colonists.
Because the US revolted from a "foreign" power. They saw themselves as something other than English and did not contest this with eachother. Considerably, arguably the most important reason, was the lack of an ingrained conservatism or nobility that was present in other major revolutions such as the French or Russian
>be 13
>I admire Robespierre so much
>I know all his quotes
>All evenings I pray to Robespierre
>I think him for the Republic that we've been given, by our Creator
>"Robespierre is love, Robespierre is the Revolution", I say
>My father gets mad and calls me a faggot
>He's jealous of my devotion to the Terror
>He slaps me and sends me to my room
>I cry because it hurts
>I lie on my bed
>A warmth is moving towards me
>It's Maximilien Marie Isidore de Robespierre
>I am so happy
>He whispers in to ear, "it's time for Terror"
>He makes me lie down on the bed
>I'm ready
>I spread my ass cheeks for the Revolution
>He penetrates me with his incorruptible dick
>It hurts, but I do it for la Republique
>I can feel my butt tearing as my eyes start to water
>He pushes farther
>I want to please Maximilien
>He roars "Despotism!" while he fills me with his fraternity
>My dad walks in
>Maximilien looks him in the eye and says "The Revolution is the war of liberty against its enemies."
>He leaves through my window
>Maximilien Robespierre is life, Maximilien Robespierre is the Revolution
>Next morning, I find my dad decapitated
The people in pic related have given me quite some trouble, they raise very significant yet contradicting points and arguments about the nature of life and as a consequence how we should live if we wish to be happy.
When I see discussion going on by people who appear to be knowledgeable whether her, on philsophyforum or in articles there is never any agreement by the parties who generally argue that the other party simply doesnt understand their position (and who often have vested interests in maintaining their own story). This becomes a big issue as given the complexity and breadth of the issues it means I am unable to access the validity of any conclusion and that it might take a decade to properly understand a single school of thought.
How do you respond or act in such a situation I have found it leaving me with a rather crippling skepticism and a lack of motivation to investigate philosophy fullstop.
For me it seems like a lot of people whether they are philosophers or theologians devote a huge amount of time to learning one school of thought and as a consequence develop a heavy emotional attachment to it and become bigots who no longer see any point in giving any other school of thought even close to a similar amount of attention.
>>812920
>tfw never read and fully comprehend all of European philosophy
why even bother
>>812929
Yeah only gets worse when you consider the Eastern Schools in China and India
You aren't supposed to agree with philosophers.
what the hell does that even mean?
Sounds like a Pyrrhic victory.
>>812897
another win for the eternal anglo
divid and conquer
>>812897
It means the Aztecs held the field but were unable to do anything that would stop the Spanish from coming back with overwhelming force.
Why have Muslims been unable to get their shit together for the past 3 centuries or so?
persistent lack of security preventing economic development
Colonialism, despotic secular leaders, Western foreign policy, etc.
Who is the worst ever president and why is it Reagan?
>Had 666 in his name
>Lived in 666 lane
>Wife wore red
The worst was Carter you dope. The 666 thing was Satan trying to make people think Reagan was Satan while he was actually a top-tier president.
>>812779
Lolwut
>>812779
>mccarthyite
How is that a bad thing?
>muh poor innocent communist spies
Remember when the History Channel used to be good? Back before all the reality shows and conspiracy theories. That was neat.
>>812725
>used to be good
When? it was never "good," it may have been history related, but it was almost always crap and poorly researched.
That said, I miss Mail Call
>>812725
Pawn Stars is fun.
Someone explain the history of croatia to a 1/4 blooded croat.
It got worse
>>812723
You spent a few hundreds of years together with your Non-Slavic Catholic Friends ((Aka Venice and Austria as well as Hungary))
Then some moron had the bright idea to make you enter the into a Union with a bunch of Slavic Orthodox.
Now, after two world wars, you are once again hanging out with your Catholic Nonslavic friends, aka Italy Austria + Germany and Hungary.
Is Croatia even a real country? I thought it was a myth, like giraffes.
How do I stop crying /his/? I miss her so much
That wasn't real communism.
It didn't follow the historical Marxist dialectic.
I miss her too.
>>812665
Feels so weird knowing she's gone
The chinks aren't the same, they don't even try to compete, just copy.
