>When you starve a popuIation to achieve communism but they end up creating a free market by seIIing their dead chiIdren
>>2720223
So you agree then it wasn't actually communism, but state capitalism?
Man that shit is macabre.
[spoiler]there's a chance you too will see mass widespread starvation in your lifetime[/spoiler]
>>2720223
>creates the NEP and then accidentally creates an an-cap utopia in Ukraine
The Soviets were definitely /our guys/.
Are there any conspiracy theories or 'alternative interpretations' you subscribe to?
>>2720024
I once heard a theory that OP isn't ALWAYS a faggot, but I've never personally seen any evidence for this.
Esoteric blood cults and inbreeding among all of the elites. Forbidden anthropology and physiognomy. Genetically stratified brave new world tier caste systems. Deep soy. Clones.
The transgender craze is crypto eugenics.
Was Columbia really just named after Columbus, or is there some deeper meaning to her name?
Also has there ever been a cult based around her?
Have you been playing Bioshock Infinite lately, OP?
>>2720112
Played it a while back yeah. Still wondering if there's anything more to her.
1. Yes, she was named after Columbus (as is the country of Colombia)
2. No, there has never been a cult based around her except in vidya
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyfSsgCrjb0
A new archeology site in California suggests that there might have been hominids in america 130000 years ago. A time when in current theory modern humans were just about to leave africa.
Bad Science? Hoax? Traces of unknown animals? Finno-Korean ancient super empire? Whats your take on it?
Were there any primates there at any point after the current continents formed? Because the thought of hominids making it all the way over there seems preposterous
Probable the current scope of science being fucked.
I keep saying civillizations existed before the ice age, but people keep not believing me
>>2719739
How do you define "civilization"?
So I'm only 19, finishing freshman year of college
>inb4 newfag kiddo faggot b8
So I've been struggling with balancing the ethical and moral concepts that were pushed on me at birth. I was taught (essentially) that life is intrinsically meaningful, that acting a certain way has metaphysical consequences, and that the world exists outside my perception, and that this world does in fact exist in a concrete way separate from my consciousness.
As I've gotten older I've felt a natural pull in essentially the opposite direction. I feel compelled to believe that the world I perceive has meaning because I give it meaning, and that there is nothing intrinsically meaningful beyond my judgement. This seems narcissistic, though, like who am I to decide what has meaning and what doesn't, but the more I think about it the more difficult it becomes to argue against it.
I recently took a cute little test to see which philosopher I was most like, and I got Sartre/Camus (existentialists). Basically this whole post is about what I should read to help me understand these ideas better.
I'm not well read in philosophy, but I like to read and I pick things up easily. What books would you recommend.
>>2719636
Read the books in brackets and move on from there:
Schopenhauer (The World As Will and Idea)
Camus (The Myth of Sisyphus)
Sartre (Being and Nothingness)
Stirner (The Ego and Its Own)
Nietzsche (Thus Spoke Zarathustra , The Will to Power)
Descartes (Meditations on First Philosophy)
Siddhārtha ( Buddhism)
The Bible ( Ecclesiastes)
there are no morals, you are a sapient being but there is no evidence this has any meaning, death is the absolute worst thing that can happen to you, if you had any sense you would utterly dedicate every waking moment to gaining power and achieving immortality at the expense of other sapient beings if necessary, but you won't as you are biologically programmed to do nothing but gain pleasure and avoid pain
>>2719702
Alright, thanks.
An idea I thought of a few years back that has haunted me.
All the worlds religions have one thing in common, being that there is a positive outcome to life if you follow their teachings. If you are a good christian or jew or muslim you go to heaven, if you are a good Buddhist you achieve enlightenment and ascend past suffering, if you are a good in shinto you can become deified, otherwise you just transcended to a spirit world, if you are a good Zoroastrian you go to heaven, and so on.
But what if there is no positive outcome? How can anyone say the afterlife is unavoidable, unending, and unimaginable suffering? It seems to me that rather than religion exist to give us purpose it exist to keep us sane against such a possibility.
>>2719565
Religion is meant to keep peasants from discovering that they really just spend their ONLY lives farming.
That's why the concept of an afterlife is so common
>>2719565
Both ancient Mesopotamian and native Finnish religions have a pretty bleak afterlife no matter what you do.
Inuit have no heaven or hell, but there are spirits.
I think that people want there to be something more because it gives them hope for something better than bleakness.
>D-day didn't happen until 1944
I finally understand the "America did nothing in WW2" meme.
we finished it.
>>2719330
America had been fighting in the Pacific for years by that point.
>>2719382
And in the Atlantic, North Africa, and Italy. Don't forget the strategic bombing campaign either. But we'll just ignore all of that.
Why do so many people not care about history?
I feel so lonely in school, when I am the only one interrested in the subject.
>>2719088
Same reason most people don't care about math beyond algebra.
"When will I ever USE this?"
In their tiny minds they can't see beyond the immediate future or why some knowledge is valuable.
>>2719088
>school
get out child
>>2719088
Cause they're dumb. Lel
And how nobody passed his challenge?
>Note: The JREF no longer accepts applications for the million dollar prize from members of the general public.
Hmmmmmmmmm.
>>2719057
Did he pay that charlatan who programmed a computer to appear psychic?
>>2719071
Hey Christcuck. Found Noah's Ark yet?
Why has aid failed in Africa when Europe redeveloped itself through the Marshall Plan post WWII?
>>2719012
>niggers already do nothing to improve their nations
>give niggers food
>the niggers begin multiplying
>you just increased the amount of niggers doing nothing to improve their countries
>confused why nothing changes
>>2719012
Marshall plant rebuilt European industry
Aid in Africa effectively replaces it, making competition and business growth impossible
>>2719012
Europe had no niggers
>Had
Reeeee
>there are still people who follow buddhism
Explain yourselves
>>2718979
Westeners "converthing" to bhudism to be "kewl" in their circle of friends is amongst the edgyiest things i can think of
>>2719015
>tfw I would totally convert to Sikhism except for the edgy hipster cultural appropriation meme
Is this what passes for thought provoking to people like OP?
>Be Anglo
>Own the Promise Land, the birthplace of your religion
>Give it to the jews
>>2718898
>not giving it to the Jews thus preventing wars with the orthodox
>>2718898
>Protestants
>Christian
>>2718915
>catholics
>not pagans
>& Humanities
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/405200126236311554
What did he mean by this?
No, seriously, what the fuck is he trying to communicate here?
A guy proved that you can't prove anything???? Thus God??? What.
>>2718859
If I had to guess, I would assume he was trying to say that if God doesn't exist then there's no reason to believe that truth exists or that anything in the natural world is comprehensible. So without faith in God, it doesn't make sense to believe in any truth or science?
That's my guess. If that's what he means, I'm not sure if I agree with that.
It's shitty meme logic
He's saying you need an axiom, and an axiom requires """faith""", so you need to have faith to believe anything. He then conflates all faith with faith in God like a retard.
>>2718893
But faith is itself an axiom. To have faith is to act as if something is true, without knowing it to be true.
So to have an axiom you need an axiom? Seems very silly.
How will the Second Hyper War play out?
>>2718858
Question isn't how, but where.
It be mad son
It'll be long and damaging to civilization to say the least, but the Mennonite State will prevail and rebuild under the leadership of this skilled tactician.
If Romanos II never died and Nikephoros and Leo Phokas were never brought into the intrigues of Constantinople, how would history have been different?
((((Turks)))) still blow them the fuck out
>>2718327
Maybe not. Maybe Rome would have reclaimed enough land from the Caliphate that the Turks would never have blown them the fuck out or get empowered by Caliphate.
>>2718367
No. They would have still been weak from plague