Anonymous
Sexuality of Prince Eugen of Savoy 2017-03-06 11:46:23 Post No.2467120
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Sexuality of Prince Eugen of Savoy 2017-03-06 11:46:23 Post No.2467120
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: 250px-Prinz_Eugene_of_Savoy.png (144KB, 250x309px) Image search:
[Google]
144KB, 250x309px
Sexuality of Prince Eugen of Savoy
Anonymous
2017-03-06 11:46:23
Post No. 2467120
[Report]
[View this topic]
>Despite being one of the richest and most celebrated men of his age, Eugene never married and the suggestion is that he was predominantly homosexual. History knows little of his life before 1683. In his early boyhood in Paris "he belonged to a small, effeminate set that included such unabashed perverts as the young abbé de Choisy who was invariably dressed as a girl" wrote the English historian Nicholas Henderson.[113] The Duchess of Orléans, who had known Eugene from those days, would later write to her aunt, Princess Sophia of Hanover, describing Eugene's antics with lackeys and pages. He was "a vulgar whore" along with the Prince of Turenne, and "often played the woman with young people" with the nickname of 'Madame Simone' or 'Madam l'Ancienne'. He preferred a "couple of fine page boys" to any woman, and was refused an ecclesiastical benefice due to his "depravity".[7][114]
>Of related interest is a popular soldier's song which parodied an imaginary voyage by Eugene and the marquis de la Moussaye on the Rhine. A storm breaks and the general fears the worst, but the Marquis consoles him: "Our lives are safe/ For we are sodomites/ Destined to perish only by fire/ We shall land." A comment made by Johann Matthias von der Schulenburg in 1709, who had served under Eugene, could be read that the prince enjoyed "la petite débauche et la p[ine] au-delà de tout," or that he derived his sexual gratification from the virile member of others.[115]
And to think that Nazis named an SS division after this guy, kek.
19 Posts / 4 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2467120
Wasn't he best buds with the Duke of Marlborough
>>
>>2467127
They were probably more than buds.
>>
>>2467120
Everybody is gay according to wikipedia
File: Dunkirk7.jpg (26KB, 550x396px) Image search:
[Google]
26KB, 550x396px
Why didn't Hitler crush UK forces at Dunkirk?
48 Posts / 5 Images
View this topic
>>
Inb4 posts about how he did on purpose to make peace with Britain
>>
Because he was a moron.
>>
he wuz bein nice and let them go lmao
File: 1466795917069.png (55KB, 1292x646px) Image search:
[Google]
55KB, 1292x646px
Overall, has the UK been a positive or negative force in the world?
134 Posts / 32 Images
View this topic
>>
A negligible one
>>
File: AchilleMbembe[1].jpg (60KB, 500x335px) Image search:
[Google]
![AchilleMbembe[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/742mDCd.jpg "AchilleMbembe[1]")
60KB, 500x335px
Looks like someone cannot into necropolitics
>>
>>2466753
Positive
File: 800px-HueyPLongGesture.jpg (147KB, 800x883px) Image search:
[Google]
147KB, 800x883px
What was his endgame?
16 Posts / 2 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2466664
to get kill
>>
>>2466664
Socialism.
>>
>>2466664
to make every man a king
imagine FDR's policies for the Great Depression but more socialist. Polioman was a hack who stole the Kingfish's ideas and then had him assassinated (same with Anton Čermak)
File: IMG_1886.jpg (218KB, 1200x1638px) Image search:
[Google]
218KB, 1200x1638px
How would you counter the argument that religion is the Opium of the Masses?
15 Posts / 1 Images
View this topic
>>
I would say that atheists don't exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0
>>
>>2466585
every fucking thread with this spam, fuck off you cultist
>>
>>2466572
opium is quite good
Anonymous
How come Abrahamicucks have contributed so little to actual science? 2017-03-06 09:18:29 Post No.2466435
[Report] Image search: [Google]
How come Abrahamicucks have contributed so little to actual science? 2017-03-06 09:18:29 Post No.2466435
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: GodfreyKneller-IsaacNewton-1689.jpg (198KB, 407x559px) Image search:
[Google]
198KB, 407x559px
How come Abrahamicucks have contributed so little to actual science?
Anonymous
2017-03-06 09:18:29
Post No. 2466435
[Report]
[View this topic]
The likes of Isaac Newton weren't really Christian. And brights in the Islamic Empires weren't really Muslim either.
How come both so-called Leftys and Rightists continue to defend Christcuckery and Goatfuckism (Islam) in light of this?
15 Posts / 3 Images
View this topic
>>
File: 1459862844401.gif (820KB, 3558x3364px) Image search:
[Google]
820KB, 3558x3364px
Nice bait OP.
>>
>>2466443
>We Wuz Scientists N Shieeeetttttttt
>>
>>2466447
Not an argument
Why religion is becoming more important these days? Is that because it's easier to understand than modern science?
pic unrelated
76 Posts / 5 Images
View this topic
>>
religion is felt, not "understood"
>>
>>2466266
Because its a tool for Ideology.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0
Atheists don't exist. Everyone is religious.
File: 052Do7YbFDPCpzisRzVBpTFMUzKLKU7Mk7IluyPRR2g.jpg (210KB, 1024x768px) Image search:
[Google]
210KB, 1024x768px
What was the bloodiest conquest in History in terms of body count ?
26 Posts / 3 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2466158
My conquest of your asshole
>>
>>2466158
mongols is my guess
>>
Conquest of the white man over the peaceful native americans
File: e45c1120a77a72f8e401a019c8bf44a9.jpg (112KB, 900x598px) Image search:
[Google]
112KB, 900x598px
What do you call this hood thing worn over the greathelm, anyway?
11 Posts / 1 Images
View this topic
>>
its a fukcen turban dude
durka durka durka heh
>>
>>2466074
A cloth.
It's used so that the sun doesn't fry your helmet and your head along with it.
>>
>>2466083
See I was thinking it was a type of chaperon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaperon_(headgear)
But I can't help but think it's going to have its own name besides either of the two. Because it's medieval European clothes we're talking about.
>>2466113
Easy enough to work out why it was worn but yeah :^)
File: 1485068407648.jpg (28KB, 460x460px) Image search:
[Google]
28KB, 460x460px
What's the history of schizophrenia?
56 Posts / 7 Images
View this topic
>>
artistic disease: Van Gogh, Poe, Artaud etc.
maybe Joan of Arc too
>>
>>2465846
Lifetime prevalence of 1% in any population regardless of culture. And no, it's not the same thing as a split personality.
>>
They should humanely removed and sent to the hereafter if they consent.
t. Schizophrenic
File: Brazillian education.png (12KB, 1042x111px) Image search:
[Google]
12KB, 1042x111px
So I found this post on a dead thread from yesterday, and thought to myself that there's no way this could be correct. Brazil is big, but not that big.
And I was right. Brazil falls just short of being half, both population-wise and territory-wise, of SOUTH America. Meanwhile, South America accounts for about two thirds of Latin America, which would also include Mexico, Central America and the Spanish Caribbean.
This got me thinking about how Spain and Portugal got close to equivalent chunks of South America, yet the Spanish portion balkanized while the Portuguese portion didn't. I know distant population centers and geographical barriers played a large role, but has anyone got a more complete explanation?
34 Posts / 6 Images
View this topic
>>
Say what you will about Brazilians today, but Pedro knew what he was doing.
>During the invasion of Portugal (1807), the Portuguese royal family fled to Brazil, establishing Rio de Janeiro as the de facto capital of Portugal. This had the side effect of creating within Brazil many of the institutions required to exist as an independent state; most importantly, it freed Brazil to trade with other nations at will. After Napoleon's army was finally defeated in 1815, in order to maintain the capital in Brazil and allay Brazilian fears of being returned to colonial status, King John VI of Portugal raised the de jure status of Brazil to an equal, integral part of a United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, and the Algarves, rather than a mere colony, a status which it enjoyed for the next seven years.
So although there would be further internal unrest, Brazil had the state apparatus (and economy, and hospitable terrain, and metropolitan base) to remain huge.
>>
>>
Brazil should have Balkanized though. The south would have less niggers.
File: 9028424.jpg (369KB, 1200x900px) Image search:
[Google]
369KB, 1200x900px
"Those willful enough to make up the top of society are those most deserving to be there."
What is wrong with this statement?
15 Posts / 2 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2465632
THOSE WILLFUL ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE WISEST, OR THE NOBLEST; THE TOP OF SOCIETY" SHOULD BE THE NOBLEST AND WISEST, NOT THE MOST WILLFUL.
>>
>>2465712
>[THE] WILLFUL...
>>
>>2465712
Why? The former only exist because of the latter.
File: god-eye-painting-1441320.jpg (22KB, 241x160px) Image search:
[Google]
22KB, 241x160px
The evidence for God is existence itself.
277 Posts / 11 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2465580
The evidence, that humans are fags who bother with a garbled concept of universal regulations, is existence itself.
>>
>>2465580
>believing things based on evidence instead of having faith
terrible desu
>>
>>2465580
Ok great.
Now what's the evidence for Jesus being the son of god or Muhammed being his prophet?
File: 800px-Original_Position.svg[1].png (79KB, 800x566px) Image search:
[Google]
![800px-Original_Position.svg[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/DOBa9Zl.png "800px-Original Position.svg[1]")
79KB, 800x566px
Ancaps and libertarians, what do you think about the veil of ignorance?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance
>It is based upon the following thought experiment: people making political decisions imagine that they know nothing about the particular talents, abilities, tastes, social class, and positions they will have within a social order. When such parties are selecting the principles for distribution of rights, positions, and resources in the society in which they will live, this "veil of ignorance" prevents them from knowing who will receive a given distribution of rights, positions, and resources in that society.
>The idea is that parties subject to the veil of ignorance will make choices based upon moral considerations, since they will not be able to make choices based on their own self- or class-interest.
> A grander example would be if each individual in society were to base their practices off the fact that they could be the least advantaged member of society
Would you still hold your beliefs if you knew that you were a disabled child, who needs expensive medication, born to poor parents and there were no support from the state?
15 Posts / 1 Images
View this topic
>>
>>2465108
>what do you think about the veil of ignorance
I think that trying to make decisions about the ordering of society from a perspecitve of not knowing what role you'll have in that society is a useful sort of thought experiment, if impractical to do in real life.
But Rawls's assumption that everyone would make their decisions based on the least advantaged members of society is specious. What if I'm a larger picture utilitarian, and think that we should try to maximize some sort of overall gain, instead of gain for the most marginalized?
>Would you still hold your beliefs if you knew that you were a disabled child, who needs expensive medication, born to poor parents and there were no support from the state?
Doesn't that itself invalidate the veil of ignorance? Now you're replacing one set of personal biases with a different set of personal biases.
>>
>>2465140
>Doesn't that itself invalidate the veil of ignorance? Now you're replacing one set of personal biases with a different set of personal biases.
The point is not that you know you'll be that that child, but that you don't know you won't.
>>
>>2465432
So then you are mis-stating it. It's would you still hold your beliefs if you know that you MIGHT be a disabled child in terrible circumstances, not that you will, of a certainty, be one.
File: serveimage.jpg (41KB, 900x350px) Image search:
[Google]
41KB, 900x350px
I have made a list of the Generals and Leaders of Military History that I intend to study in chronological order, please tell me what you all think:
Ramesses II (c. 1303 BC - 1213 BC)
King David (c. 1040–970 BC)
Ashurbanipal (934–609 BC)
Cyrus the Great (600 or 576 – 530 BC)
Sun Tzu (c. 544-496 BC)
Leonidas (c. 540-480 BC)
Pericles (c. 495–429 BC)
Epaminondas (d. 362 BC)
Alexander III of Macedon (20/21 July 356 BC – 10/11 June 323 BC)
Pyrrhus of Epirus (319/318–272 BC)
Hannibal (247 – between 183 and 181 BC)
Scipio Africanus (236–183 BC)
Spartacus (c. 109–71 BC)
Sulla (138 BC – 78 BC)
Gaius Julius Caesar (13 July 100 BC – 15 March 44 BC)
Augustus (23 September 63 BC – 19 August 14 AD)
Tiberius (42 BC-37 AD)
Titus (39-81 AD)
Hadrian (76-138 AD)
Marcus Aurelius (121-180)
Constantine the Great (c. 272-337)
Attila the Hun (406–453)
Justinian I (c. 482 – 14 November 565)
Flavius Belisarius (505 – 565)
Khalid ibn al-Walid (585–642)
Charlemagne (2 April 742/747/748 – 28 January 814)
Macbeth (c. 1005-1057)
William the Conqueror (c. 1028-1087)
Saladin (1137/1138-1193)
Genghis Khan (1162 – August 18, 1227)
Subutai (1175–1248)
Kublai Khan (1215-1294)
William Wallace (c. 1270-1305)
Timur (1336-1405)
Henry V (1386-1422)
George Castriot (6 May 1405 – 17 January 1468)
Joan of Arc (c. 1412-1431)
Mehmed II (30 March 1432 – 3 May 1481)
Francisco Pizarro (c. 1471/1476-1541)
Hernán Cortés (1485-1547)
Cuauhtémoc (c. 1495-1525)
Lautaro (1534-1557)
Oda Nobunaga (June 23, 1534 – June 21, 1582)
Abu'l-Fath Jalal ud-din Muhammad Akbar, popularly known as Akbar I (15 October 1542 – 27 October 1605)
Gustavus Adolphus (9 December 1594 – 6 November 1632)
Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658)
Shivaji (1627-1680)
Louis XIV (1638-1715)
John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough (26 May 1650 – 16 June 1722)
Peter the Great (1672-1725)
(1/2)
14 Posts / 4 Images
View this topic
>>
Charles XII (17 June 1682 – 30 November 1718)
Frederick II (24 January 1712 – 17 August 1786)
Alexander Suvorov (13 November 1729 or 1730 – 18 May 1800)
George Washington (February 22, 1732 [O.S. February 11, 1731][b][c] – December 14, 1799)
Ethan Allen (1738-1789)
John Paul Jones (1747-1792)
Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla (1753-1811)
Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson, 1st Duke of Bronté (29 September 1758 – 21 October 1805)
Tecumseh (1768-1813)
Napoleon Bonaparte (15 August 1769 – 5 May 1821)
Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington (1 May 1769 – 14 September 1852)
José de San Martín (25 February 1778 – 17 August 1850)
Agustin de Iturbide (1783-1824)
Simón Bolívar (24 July 1783 – 17 December 1830)
Francisco de Paula Santander (1792-1840)
Antonio López de Santa Anna (21 February 1794 – 21 June 1876)
Robert Edward Lee (January 19, 1807 – October 12, 1870)
Giuseppe Garibaldi (1807-1882)
Ulysses S. Grant (1822-1885)
Red Cloud (1822 – December 10, 1909)
Geronimo (1829-1909)
Marshal Ferdinand Jean Marie Foch (2 October 1851 – 20 March 1929)
Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig (19 June 1861 – 29 January 1928)
Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim (4 June 1867 – 27 January 1951)
Emilio Aguinaldo (1869-1964)
Douglas MacArthur (26 January 1880 – 5 April 1964)
General George Smith Patton Jr. (November 11, 1885 – December 21, 1945)
Bernard Montgomery (17 November 1887 – 24 March 1976)
Thomas Edward Lawrence (16 August 1888 – 19 May 1935)
Ho Chi Minh (19 May 1890 – 2 September 1969)
Johannes Erwin Eugen Rommel (15 November 1891 – 14 October 1944)
Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov (1 December [O.S. 19 November] 1896 – 18 June 1974)
Moshe Dayan (20 May 1915 – 16 October 1981)
Võ Nguyên Giáp (25 August 1911 – 4 October 2013)
(2/2)
>>
>Abu'l-Fath Jalal ud-din Muhammad Akbar, popularly known as Akbar
Anyone have the funny long name of the Congo guy?
>>
k