"Hundreds of ancient earthworks resembling those at Stonehenge were built in the Amazon rainforest, scientists have discovered after flying drones over the area.
The findings prove for the first time that prehistoric settlers in Brazil cleared large wooded areas to create huge enclosures.
Spanish conquistadores ventured into the rainforest seeking fortune, followed over the centuries by others convinced they would find a lost civilisation to rival the Aztecs and Incas.
Some seekers called it El Dorado, others the City of Z. But the jungle swallowed them and nothing was found, prompting the rest of the world to call it a myth. The Amazon was too inhospitable, said 20th century scholars, to permit large human settlements.
Now, however, the doomed dreamers have been proved right: there was a great civilisation.
In the municipality of Calçoene in northern Brazil, a cattle rancher named Lailson Camelo da Silva found what would become known as the “Amazon Stonehenge.” It’s a series of 1,000-year-old stones that experts now believe to be a primitive observatory
Based on what I've seen, it was socially acceptable to discriminate against people of other races and look down upon them before the second world war.
How did racism become a taboo in such a short time?
Basically this
>>2960719
Even back then a significant part of the population had a problem with this treatment of people of other races.
The large scale participation of black people in the labor force and in the armed forces during WW2 tipped the political balance of power in favor of the civil rights movement, which had been attempting to fight Jim Crow since the end of Reconstruction.
Throw in the fact that every US president from 1945 to 1980 was ex-military, and the widespread economic growth of the time period, and the situation was ripe for social and political change.
Polling shows that the majority of change in racial attitudes occurred in the late 50s and early 60s, before the race riots of 1967 and 1968 frightened the white middle class.
why are Muslims so much better than Christians when it comes to architecture
Hagia Sophia cathedral wasn't built by Muslims...
I´m not sure of this
pic related is a catholic palace in Granada, Spain
>>2960405
Catholics merely took over it, though; they didn't design, nor build, it.
Rhetoric is wrong. The fact that rhetoric is a discipline and an area of study and inquiry which has its particular effects upon human beings, is itself a discredit to humanity in general.
What is rhetoric? An art and discipline of constructing and framing arguments in such a way as to persuade other human beings, /which in addition to the facts, obliges itself toward compelling and tugging emotional appeals/. And this itself is exactly rhetoric's failure - its anthropocentrism, the need of emotion together with reason.
Rhetoric /shouldn't/ work, in the sense that human beings /shouldn't/ be the way that they are-emotional, and positively requiring emotion for judgment (which is well documented and which, quite the opposite of denying, we agree with and amplify). This undercuts all possible rebuttals to the appeal how human beings actually /are/ at present. We are discussing instead an ideal - the cessation of emotion, which would be a blessed circumstance.
We should instead be soulless autistic input-output beast-units without qualia, without feelings, again at home among the insects, or gods maybe. "oh, fact, okay, action A, else action B etc). But above all no emotion. This is the correct rejection of rhetoric.
The normative and prescriptive statements in the above are totally excused by the regrettable humanity of the author and the audience. Nothing is to be gained by an opponent by trying and failing to point out this "hole".
>We should instead be soulless autistic input-output beast-units without qualia, without feelings, again at home among the insects, or gods maybe
Jesus, anon
>>2966896
This is why we need AI and machine learning to supplant primitive human emotional thinking.
>>2966896
I like this.
Should government help the poor?
>>2966363
Only to the extent of preventing full scale civil war. It should try its best to keep welfare to a minimum, because welfare is dysgenic.
Do people choose to be poor?
Do people genuinely decide to just give up and live under their means?
>>2966424
It's usually a combination of low intelligence and bad moral character.
Why has the American South coupled with NYC and California produced the most talent? Why don't you see the same amount of talent from states like Oregon, Montana, or Minnesota?
>>2966299
Portland and Seattle are notable hotspots which have the luxury of being inspired by Cali while not inundated by it
>>2966299
Chicago has done some good shit when it comes to jazz and rap and art
they have, you just haven't heard of them because they aren't blasted over the radio and on the top 40 (((charts)))
also no one lives in minnesota and montana
Hi, /his/. I am pretty interested in Greece and, to a lesser extent, Rome. (Honestly, its mostly from the fact that I like spears.
I would like some recommendations on the history of Greece and/or Rome. Any books you know of that are under $10? I have a amazon kindle, if that helps.
A war like no other. Victor Davis Hanson.
It is about the spartan - athenian war. The most interesting war the Greeks fought imo.
>>2966282
The History and Antiquities of the Doric Race by Karl Otfried Muller
>>2966282
I can help you on rome
>History of Rome (Complete) by Livy
0.99$
it starts from the Republic to the Macedonian wars (since the books lost)
but I love it
I'm not sure if his or pol is the right place for this question. If his is the wrong place, sorry.
Compared to other great powers of the past (like the british empire), is the usa capable or incapable?
Capable of what?
>>2966060
Uhhhh, Can you repeat the question?
Why is it that anti-semetic people tend to become neutral or pro-semetic over time? and people who were originally pro-semetic become anti-semetic?
Look at /pol/ and Martin Luther
>>2965982
In either case they realize they were lied to in some drastic regard.
Pro-semetics realize all the controversial information around the holocaust as well as what went into the creation of Israel, as well as the fact Jews were kicked out of every country they settled in, obviously for a reason.
Anti-semetics realize the Jewish people stand stronger with each other more than any other minority, and their success breeds jealousy. That the practices of Jews aren't signs of greed but of hard working.
Their hard working nature being responsible for a large part of the descrimination throughout history.
Neither are inherently wrong, and can be viewed as subjective, as Jews are malicious at times so discrimination is not inherently jealousy, but both truths are kept from either radical side, and upon learning them, it radicalizes them in the opposite direction.
they grow up
I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but can anyone recommend me some good books on the political and economic systems of Ancient Rome and Napoleonic France?
This is the right place but you may have to wait till the next book guide / recommendations thread.
Art of the deal
Hi /his/, recently I've been getting more in to religion and I want to know what the key aspects, rules, end goals and talking points of the three big ones are.
I never grew up with some enforced religion so all the values and teaching I've learned are through reading and researching
So far this is what I have established:
In Christianity God can be represented in The Holy Trinity. There are different interpretations of THT but the main idea is that Jesus is the true son of God and he died for the sins of all people. Jesus must be the son of God because if not, Jesus' death was in vain as the death of a God is the only adequate penalty for sins judged by God. Jews believe that Jesus was not the son of God but the son of Pandere (Pantera) and that the true son of God has not yet arrived. I'm not completely filled in on Islam, but they recognize that the Talmud and Christian Bible are legitimate, but they also believe that the current texts have been changed from that of antiquity, and that Islam is the answer to both other religions.
It seems the the other religions' main issue is the recognition of Jesus as The Son of God, and I know there is a dispute between Islam and Judaism about rights to Israel.
What else should I know as entry level knowledge? And is the information I have correct?
>>2965454
>ews believe that Jesus was not the son of God but the son of Pandere (Pantera) and that the true son of God has not yet arrived.
Jews don't believe that God has children, and that the Messiah is completely seperate from the divinity.
>I'm not completely filled in on Islam, but they recognize that the Talmud
This is wrong.
>What else should I know as entry level knowledge?
You might want to start with the fundamental role of man in each of them, which is a pretty basic thing to start with.
To correct your image: the Moon is an Islamic symbol just because it was a Turkish symbol that got associated with Islam
Also, Islam recognizes the old testament but not the new- so the bible is illegitimate.
>>2965454
>but they recognize that the ... Christian Bible are legitimate.
this is also false.
they have adaptation of some parts of the Hebrew and Christian bible, but they specifically contradict the originals.
it is canon in islam thats the other religions twisted the stories.
Redpill me on Norse mythology /his/.
Is it really just a collection of shallow adventure stories told around campfires or does it contain the same level of depth and sophistication as the egyptian and greek mythologies?
it's more quirky, like you got a whole saga with thor and loki dressing up like women and shit. I doubt the norse were very religious, just used it as a guideline but knew shit was ridiculous, quite unlike the neopagans
Hard to tell really, most of what we know about it was written centuries afterwards by Christians. The best indication is the cultural elements that remained after Christian domination.
>>2965419
wasn't snorri actually a pagan, I remember reading something like that, might have been bullshit of course
If the Holocaust didn't happen, what does the Auschwitz Album depict and why does it involve a bunch of old people, children and moms being taken to the area of Crematorium IV and V?
>>2965307
you're just le kike shill 1488 heil trump xd
>>2965307
Because it did happen.
>>2965307
>its another "anon baits /pol/ into lying about the holocaust" episode
apart from the brutal realities of the lynching tree.
Discuss
What did you expect? Amerifats don't even understand the nature of the Holy trinity lmao plebs
>>2965221
No because the whole point of the crucifixion is that it was a state sanctioned execution whereas lynchings were vigilantism/terrorism; they aren't related other than that they both involve death and wood.
Honestly what's so bad about all the lyncngs in America's history? All the people who were lynched were accused of rape and considering how rape is such a problem nowadays in America, especially among certain demographics, it makes perfect sense if all the rapes in the older days did happen. Frankly the demonization of lycnhings is nothing more but a movement to condone rape towards women. I mean modern day people can't even disprove those rapes.
What went right?
Other than his death.
Literally nothing, Dev and Lemass pinched all his economic ideas without paying attention to his plan to ensure a culturally Gaelic Ireland
So now Ireland is basically an Anglo-American corporate paradise
>>2965115
>an Anglo-American corporate paradise
You literally can't get more right than that.
>>2965115
Were Dev and Lemass both bad guys? I hear Lemass did a pretty okayish job.
But also don't like how Collins is hyped up to be far more than he ever was.