Why do westerners think that the Muslims not ruling over them is a bad thing?
I, an atheist ex-muslim with alot on history and an insightful mind that's free from the corruption of nationalism, religiousness, heritage, retardation and herd-thinking. Think if the Muslims somehow (it would've taken a long time) conquered Europe, it would've propelled the world into a much faster and earlier-starting modern age.
The problem with western cucks and conservative fairy-tale tier idiots is that they think Muslims are some kind of LOTR-tier mordor orcs, and if they won and conquered Europe. The world will forever be orcs and mordor and evil and we would be Muslims forever.
But, it's only common sense that religions eventually phase out. If Europe was Islamized, Islam would've been, as every other religion and as time has shown again and again, phased out and got outdated, they would be no different today as Muslims than had they would've been as Christians. They wouldn't keep beheading people for more than a thousand years, as they aren't still crucifying people for witchcraft, Massacring Jews, launching crusades and publicly torturing 'heathens' like they used to.
Islam at the time of the Ummayads, Rashidun and the conquests was a new age of civilization and a beacon for science, research and philosophy. If they unified Europe, the cultural diversity would've skyrocketed an age of enlightenment much, much faster than it took (all the way into the late 15th century). While Europeans remained in the shit for little less than a thousand years because they were still recovering from dark ages, small populations (further trimmed by plague) and feudalistic rule and a faith that stood strongly against science and considered most of it heresy
I think if Islam actually ruled Europe, we would've reached our current state much faster (in the 1800s I guess) and we would be much more developed today.
tldr Islam conquering most of Europe would've yielded good results on the long run
>>2512513
The problem with this is the Sh*a who would regress the world by five centuries with their zindiq, majoosi filth
Christian Protestantism is bad. Muslim Protestantism (Wahhabism) is even worse.
>>2512513
I would definitely say religious uniformity among squabbling European fiefdoms would've progressed the world as we know it atleast quicker to what it is today.
I also believe that a form of Enlightenment would eventually reach Islam, atleast starting in Europe or from Europeans studying in Arabic academia.
Just my two cent contribution of ideas.
Would you say its unethical to eat an animal you havent killed yourself?
I think it is. It shows zero respect and reduces a complex creature to little more than a tasty afterthought.
>>2512497
>Would you say its unethical to eat an animal you havent killed yourself?
No.
>>2512497
why do I need to show respect? also, in order to avoid trivializing other complex creatures into nothing but a tasty afterthought, should I shoot my own porn too?
>>2512497
It's unethical if ethical alternatives like fruits and vegetables exist anon. Animals are sentient just like humans, both have a heart, brain (central nervous system) and feel pain. Thus, if killing animals is alright, then so should killing humans, since they're both sentient.
>"God save us from plague, hunger and Croatian warriors."
What did they mean by this?
>>2512445
Nobody has yet provided an actual source for that statement.
It is contested as being an invention by a nationalist Serb historian.
But the context is that a fuckload of Croat soldiers fought in the Thirty Years War and some of them were at the sack of Sack of Magdeburg.
However, so were Hungarians, Croats, Spaniards, Poles, Italians, Frenchmen, Germans, and others so blaming it all on the Croats because they had the balls to storm the walls first is kinda lazy.
>>2512445
Croats are notorious for having poor health and insatiable appetites, so having them over as guests is pretty much the equivalent of the previous two afflictions.
>>2512469
> Croats are notorious for having poor health
Those would be the Montenegrins, not the Croats.
was the bolshevik revolution of 1917 a turning point in world history?
Yes? Every day is a fucking turning point.
>>2512410
Are we raided by plebbit?
>>2512439
what im asking is what is the long lasting effect on the world because of this specific form of communist state developing
Why did the Italian city-states never took part in colonialism? It seems like colonies would be perfect for the declining Venetian economy at the time for example.
Venetians already had numerous colonies across the Mediterranean, or Stato da Mar as they called it, The Domains of the Sea. These included Crete, Corfu, Cyprus, Negroponte, and other various smaller islands. The Genoans had holdings in Crimea, through which they controlled their share of trade from the east.
There are many obvious reasons. First of all, the Americas are too far away for Italians to bother at all. Even if they tried something, the Spaniards would've easily blocked the Gibraltar if they sensed that Italians are making a move in the New World.
Secondly, their shipbuidling was based on light ships like galleys, which were extremely suitable for an inner sea like the Mediterranean. Unlike the Portugese, Italians weren't skilled navigators in high seas voyages, but they were masters of the navigation inside the Mediterranean, probably the best ever. Any Venetian or Genoan venture across the Atlantic would've failed miserably.
Basically the Italians already had for centuries what other Europeans desired so much and because of which they embarked to look for India westwards in the first place - spices, silk, and other luxury goods. Trade with the East was their lifeblood, and abandoning it for some risky adventure westwards would be suicidal. Not even the Ottoman expansion could've stopped Venetian necessity to trade there, that's why they fought so bitterly with Ottomans for centuries, not because of some religious motives, but because of money.
>>2512702
Wasn't Christopher Columbus Genoan?
>>2512756
Yeah he was
ITT: underrated US presidents
Reagan on the other hand is the most overrated
>>2512258
SEA TO SHINING SEA BITCH
>>2512258
I think you're confusing "underrated" with "undeserving of recognition".
Why did the Nazis LARP as Romans? Rome was degenerate as fuck.
>>2512245
if you're using that picture as proof you're an idiot. that statue was made by Donatello in the fifteenth century.
>>2512245
Show boi pussi
>>2512252
It's also if a jew not a roman
What do I need to know about these men?
>>2512106
Marx was wrong about everything
Weber was wrong about protestantism and capitalism.
Their conceptions of modernity are outdated and wrong.
>>2512106
how not to rock a beard.
>>2512106
Marx was right about everything, and is being proven more right every day
Why is Sikhism so A E S T H E T I C ?
>>2512075
How do Sikhs get through airport security if they carry a sword (or knife) on them at all times?
>>2512075
Why doesn't he cut his hair
honestly that looks retarded
it couldve been really cool if the turban was half that size
How would the world be today if the communist countries with social ideals of equality and inclusiveness had defeated the capitalist countries with social ideals of inequality and exclusion?
>>2512046
Global Venezuela.
>>2512046
Our world would be much more sustainable and ethical
/thread
My will is all there is to be, were and will be.
I can die in peace now.
>solipsism
>>2512079
What are you implying with this faggot?
>>2512090
Private language argument, pleb
Why does everyone laugh at islam for banning pork when every other abrahamic religion also bans it?
because they actually follow through with it?
Because the Other religions weren't started by a Pedophile retard
Who is this 'everyone' you are talking about? Do you have a source on them laughing at a religion?
What happened to left-libertarianism?
How could such a thing even exist? Libertarianism itself is a result of classical liberalism being entirely consumed by the left wing.
>>2511941
It's called anarchism and communalism now
>>2511951
But (at least in the U.S.) the mainstream "left wing" has shifted away from labor/social democracy and become much more liberal in the last 20-30 years.
Why was he suddenly able to conquer so much land? Was he a particularly good General or did he organize his army more efficiently?
image.jpg was indeed a particularly good general, yes.
>>2511836
There's a cool little function that lets you look up inages, friend
>>2511821
A lot of it was inherited more as a coup than a direct military conquest. The Persians moved in and took over as the dominant power in what was previously a Median empire, which itself was mostly taken more or less intact from the Assyrian empire.
And having that kind of power base without the endemic revolts that the previous two "dynasties" had gave him a lot to work with.
>>2511836
It's a picture of Cyrus.
You can make one book a mandatory read on /his/, which one?
Tek Wars
The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion
A biology textbook.