Why do most modern historians seem to dismiss all forms of honor, selflessness, and nobility of spirit?
Every good deed, or nice word, or service is assumed to have a shrewd political or economic motive, and if it doesn't then it's clearly a sign of lunacy. Is it really so hard to believe that great people in the past actually did some things out of the goodness of their hearts?
>>711789
All of that is subjective
Examples?
>>711789
Don't know what kind of works you read but I come across Historians who recognize such driving forces in people.
Sounds like someone needs to read Thucydides.
>>711799
>be the best sniper in history
>get shelled by gommies
>survive that shit
>your descendants honor your memory by turning you into a retarded pedobear maymay copy
>>711789
Marxist subversion.
Those things you described are "bourgeois values".
>>711789
>those meme words
>actually being real
Oy vey
>>711812
I've never seen that form of Haya posting or Pedobear posting
>>711828
It's not hayha on the picture, is it? Just some cool-looking rifleman.
>>711789
For the most part, historians are leftists and such qualities elude them.
>>711795
Doesn't mean they're not better values
>>712322
Another fucking Nietzsche.
>>712342
You can never have enough
>>712309
No. See second pic in thread.
>>712352
Probably because there are no pictures of Simo at work.
>>712366
If you read the filename, it was never suggested in this thread there were any.
Because they are communists and their entire work is dedicated to advance the cause of communist.
None of these values serve much the communists interests, so they are dismissed.
>>712386
But people think it is. I know there are only about 4 images of him in his winter suit.
>>711789
>all this marxist nonsense in thread
Any decent medieval western european historian will tell you that chivalry actually mattered to the nobility in the 15th century and a while beforehand, they could be shrewd but they also had a very definite sense of honour and chivalric code.
As time goes on that matters less, but you've still got acts of heroism that are recognised as acts of heroism. Not sure where you got that opinion from desu OP
>>712415
>that image
such a ridiculous comparison whoever made it is insulting that finn guy's memory even if they were trying to prove a point
>>712440
It's because Simo Hayha is one of modern meme heroes so very popular on websites where people post funny and occasionally informative pictures.
This one is worse. I mean the last point can be taken against him.
I don't mind on the account that Hayha was killing Soviets who are sometimes erroneously portrayed as the lesser evil in WWII.
>>711818
Historians aren't all (or even mostly) marxists though
>>712479
The only historians who aren't Marxist are those who are too dumb to understand Marxism. They are still Marxist-influenced and work to further Marxist ideals, in their own ways.
>>711789
>modern historians
into the trash
Are they trying to be psychologists or philosophers? I thought history, at least today, was a purely descriptive discipline.
>>711789
>Why do most modern historians seem to dismiss all forms of honor, selflessness, and nobility of spirit?
honor, selflessness, and nobility of spirit are all poetic ways to reimagine the shrewd, practical,and political actons of humans....becuase honour and nobility are subjective concepts whose precise definitions change with culture and time....and becuase many people we liked to portray as good and honorable also commited what we know look on as atrocity and inhumanity baised on their prejuduces
we dismiss such ideas in moderniy probobly out of usefull spekticism....becuase it tells us more about historical figures to consider the practical and political situations and complcations which drove their decision making
>>712322
values are dead and we have killed them
>>712428
those codes served the practical political function of upholding the system and status quo
lissen mane im sick of thise raciss racy fucking bull licks over hear i used to be getting the grins but i guess i can say tata to that! now hears a question; what did happen to you to make you such a fuhoolio??Q?!?!?!?!?Q?!?Q??Q??!QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
>>712415
>>712470
I worked with a guy who got his arm torn off (surgically reattached) while in a moving helicopter by an insurgent sniper in Afghanistan. Got a bomb dropped on his head, but he was apparently a badass enough shot that they had an entire file on him.
Kind of makes you wonder how many insane shots are out there that are never know because they're on the wrong side of the fighting.
>>711789
Don't know about you, but where I am history does take into account the 'noble' feelings. Couple of examples off the top of my head: dignitas as a powerful force driving Roman politicians, the 'civilising mission' in late European empires... Some historians do just take a purely 'cynical' position, but you should have no trouble finding others who recognise that values and beliefs were significant and that we should take them into account.
>>712470
Wasn't that cheap slavshit rifle well-made and cutting edge for its time?
Isn't that only Marxist historians? In my country, most history.
Sometimes, they end up with retarded theories to try to fit the facts.
For example, saying that the Paraguay War was caused because the British Empire was afraid of Paraguay.
>>714464
South America stronk
>>712490
Sometimes i wonder if the word "marxist" has any meanin anymore. Seems to be used by right wing plebs trying to insult people who disagree with them.
>>713057
>those codes served the practical political function of upholding the system and status quo
Sure, in cases where honour dictated you served your liege. But there were many times when that wasn't the case, the English throughout the last 1/3 had many instances where a perception of honour drove nobles to act in certain ways that politically hurt them. There were even courts if you were proven of behaving in a way that was not chivalric e.g. fleeing from battle.
Richard of York took Edmund Beaufort's failure to defend Rouen without a fight as an insult to his personal honour even though it wasn't politically prudent to.
>>714519
Just like how leftist faggots call anyone that wont bend themselves over for everyone else nazis?
>>714537
Yeah pretty much
>>714464
>saying that the Paraguay War was caused because the British Empire was afraid of Paraguay.
No one has ever claimed that. Latin American Marxist historiography claims that the with century wars were supported by Great Britain in order to achieve or consolidate control over trade and/or primary production (nitrate for example)
>>714548
19th century*
>>714059
It is still well made by today's standard, but it was 40 years old at the start of WW2.
>>711812
:DDDDDDD
>>711789
>marxists! marxists!
More like the 19thfucking Century happened and you have all these historians looking for rational/functional views of history.
So LE KING FOUGHT LE DUKE OVER SLIGHTED HONOR would be super suspect and people would look into rational reasons for such conflicts.
These historians existed alongside historians who have views like yours OP - naively believing that they did not have ulterior motives.
In the end its both: shit like honor, religion were important for them yes, but so were wealth & political power. If those two concur you'd bet as fucking hell people will dress up rational aims with non-temporal ones.
It's like OP actually believing that Britain went to war against Germany to "Defend Civilization from the Beastly Hun."
>>714059
>>714560
All bolt action rifles were basically outdated by ww2 standards. Only reason why all major combatants besides the US kept using them is that they were easier and cheaper to produce than contemporary semi automatic equivalents, which meant you could churn them out by the truckload.
The Mosin, K98, Enfield, Lebel, Arisaka and Carcano were all designs dating from the late 1800s, and were practically identical in functionality and capabilities. The only outlier was the Enfield because of its high capacity (relatively speaking) internal magazine, which enabled a higher rate of fire.
The French and the Soviets had already field-tested and approved semi automatic rifles as their standard service rifle before their respective entries into the war, the French stopped production for obvious reasons while the Soviets focused on churning out more Mosins. The Germans developed their own designs as well during the war, and the Soviet inventory of semis kept increasing too. Still, the US was the only major nation with a truly "cutting edge" service rifle fully adopted in WW2.
>>711789
They don't. I have a few diplomatic histories of Austria on my table, and many of Austria's actions are ascribed to MUH HONOR. It is often advantageous to act dishonorably in matters of state. But not everyone is honorable, especially the most shrewd and cunning of politicians. When someone known for clever decisions justifies their action with honor, the real reason is probably not honor. Honor is a pretty dumb decision-making metric when it comes to maximizing money and power.
>>711795
>posted from a starbucks
World War III when? Pretty tired of barry the barista thinking he has any idea what life is like outside of twitter cause he liked a few educational posts
>>711812
>be the supposed best sniper in history
FTFY.
>>712470
>Simo Hayha
>confirmed kills
Pick one and only one. Also, I wouldn't brag about having a Sabaton song.
>>715326
He has a lot of confirmed kills, although only about half of what people claim he has. He had over 120, if I remember correctly.
>>715339
Oh, well that's reassuring. Still, going by confirmed kills that puts him kinda low on the sniper totem pole.
>>712415
>Soviet Army: Well-trained professional soldiers
Lmao
