I'm looking for a movie or series that is accurate yet is still has pleasing cinematography.
Some historic films just have terrible film-work or production value. Others are just so grossly incorrect is not fair to call them historic
The thin red line. Its not inaccurate but also not focused on conveying the history particularly. Very moving though.
>>684517
Do you consider Band of Brothers to be a accurate history?
Do they ever fight the Waffen SS Hitler Youth in BoB?
I have offers from the three in pic related.
I also have one from Manchester but I've grown up in the city and am frankly sick and tired of the place.
I know this is daft o'clock but I can always bump this in the afternoon if needs be. Indeed, if there are wide awake foreigners who are familiar with the relative merits of the relative history departments, I'd be happy to hear your opinion.
>Studying history
kek
>>684296
University of Bristol is the best uni there in terms of academic rigour. The rest are sad excuses for universities, especially Lancaster.
Was the OT always considered a meme book by early and medieval Christians?
>>683355
No, medieval kings mirrored themselves with the kings of the Old Testament like Saul, David and Solomon.
>>683388
They got ambushed by their oppressed victims while trying to take a shit, encouraged their children to commit incest, and worshiped idols?
>>683422
I'm sure you can find medieval monarchs who did this but I meant that they strived the follow the same ideals of monarchy than those three kings also were supposed to follow. These three kings may not be a paragon of decency, but the OT makes it clear when they're right and when they're wrong.
You guys got any examples of multicultural societies in historical times that was successful?
U.S. Is doing pretty well. Race relations aren't necessarily great; but it's pretty successful.
>>683248
The Roman Empire.
Is it just me, or is the overly critical, hyper historical autistic shtick starting to wear a bit thin?
>>683245
>le jumper dance instructor
doesn't he decide how a weapon is used based on what it feels like larping with it?
>>683275
Yes, most things are decided by what his experiences in a glorified acting troupe tell him.
How autistic and bitter do you have to be to not like lindy? So what if his videos aren't peer reviewed scholarly works? They're decent enough and plenty entertaining.
How accurate is this portrayal of the Maiden of Orleans? What aspects could be changed to make it more historically accurate while still being a good figure? What historical sources should have been taken into consideration by the illustrator when coming up with this design?
Pants. Are japs really that obsessed with knee socks that they couldn't add pants?
>>683026
>blonde
aaaaaAAAAAGH
>>683026
Pig disgusting
Gibbons once wrote, [A]s long as mankind shall continue to bestow more liberal applause on their destroyers than on their benefactors, the thirst of military glory will ever be the vice of the most exalted characters.'
Would you say this is true? Could we use this to trace the fall of the USSR, modern Europe and eventually the US?
>>682983
All Empires come and go, nothing is eternal American exceptional is american delusion.
That said I think its very dangerous to say that every fall is the same. There is a nice pamphlet, Fate of the Empires by John Glubb, which tries to find commonalities, I don't agree with him, but you should check it out, its a short read.
http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf
Gibbon is gay
>>682983
Is it worth feeling guilt because we perpetuate, in part, the celebration of military prowess over humanistic virtue?
4chan seems largely fixated on war and violence in general -- then again that's pretty ubiquitous when it comes ti humanity.
What was life like for the average citizen of the USSR in the Post-Stalin period? How did they get paid? How did they buy food and clothing? Who made such items, and how did one acquire luxury goods or appliances, cars, furniture? What about student life? University and education? Educate me plz
>>682295
>>682295
>What was life like for the average citizen of the USSR in the Post-Stalin period?
Variable, depending on many factors.
In general, the time since the death of Khushchev up to mid 1970s was a period of slowly rising living standards in terms of available consumer goods, housing, healthcare etc. Since mid 1970s and mid 1980s there was a time of so-called stagnation. Living standards reached a plateau and couldn't rise more. That's where the gap between the West and East widened. Then, somewhere after 1986 there comes the crisis and living standards fell sharply. First at more remote areas, later on in the cities of central USSR.
Also, the standard of living much depended on who you were and where you lived. If you were member of one of the priviledged classes (party nomenclatura and their families, army officers, scientists etc) you lived a good life. If you were a peasant who worked on a collective farm (and you were bound by law to remain there), not so much. Biggest cities were better supplied, with absolute priority given to Moscow, Leningrad (modern Petersburg), then on each Republic's capital (Kiev, Tbilisi, Dushanbe etc.). Then the crisis finally reached Moscow somewhere around 1988, it was a symptom of absolute decline.
>>682295
>How did they get paid?
In money, but money never played an important role. More important was the availability of goods that you could actually buy.
>>682295
>How did they buy food and clothing?
In shops. There were all kinds of malls in big cities and smaller shops everywhere. Some privileged classes had their own shops where you could buy goods unavailable to the public.
>>682295
>who made such items, and how did one acquire luxury goods or appliances, cars, furniture?
In factories. There were lots of factories manufacturing such consumer goods.
They often did not produce up to their maximum capacity due to shortages of raw materials/supplies or due to organisational flaws. Also the quality often was abysmal. But those were typical ills of socialist economy.
>>682440
>Buy
This was always a bit odd to me. They were hardcore communists, right? Sholdn't they have just been able to go around and take what they needed?
Has it pretty much become the concencus here that Buddhism, Taoism, and Christianity are the three best religions in terms of social advancements, moral principles, and satisfactory answers to existential questions? Is it possible for one to follow all three?
1. Judaism
2. Islam
3. Hinduism
Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism
Followed by Sufis and orthodox Christians
>>682189
Christianity is the worst religion.
>I am posting this here since /pol/ is a satirical board in denial
For what I have read fascism does not sound like what media tells me it is. So I want to ask
>What is fascism?
>What are their types?
>Pros and Cons
An ideology.
It varies from country to country.
Depends. It's aesthetic but often silly.
>>681493
>What is fascism?
Here's Mussolini's own definition, look no further:
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm
>>681493
Reaction + revolution.
That's essentially all there is to it.
Wittgenstein:
>communication is impossible so don't even bother
Camus:
>shit's absurd, so whatever
>>681343
>Goedel: im in ur system killing ur axioms
Nietzsche
>fuck all of you, fuck everything
>dude god lmao
ITT: Films that trigger you
>>680974
comic ecranisation, not real life history
>>680974
Come on OP. The movie actually begins as a story told by a story teller, not a historian. The embellishments are rather reasonable if you're not incorrectly assuming you're in for a 70s/80s historical drama with British actors.
Sparta has a queen
my sides!
ITT we come up with slurs for ancient peoples and stuff.
For example,
Romans: Imperial Spear Chuckers
Gauls: Headophiles
Carthaginians: Jews
Germanic Tribes: Furries
>>680776
Tree niggers
Why has critique of religion gone so far down the toilet today? What happened to the great geniuses like Thomas Paine, Voltaire, and Bertrand Russell?
>>680561
>Why has critique of religion gone so far down the toilet today?
Because disbelief is seeping into the masses.
>>680561
Because you are basing your opinions on 4chan and tv.
J. L. Mackie has provided better arguments than all those authors put together.
Why were the proponents of religion in the toilet from the get go?
Is suicide morally wrong?
Nah, just morally stupid.
- A.S.
If you accept that moral is about "what you do" with the resources/power that you have (in benefit of society) as in Kant, then suicide is a "waste" and not morally acceptable. Given that our current moral standard is completely derived from Kant, I say the answer is yes.
>>680335
This
