Can someone explain to me why wealth is a legitimate form of income?
Say, even if someone isn't born into wealth and actually worked for their wealth.
This wealth isn't just a "reward" for their work, it's a substitute.
And eventually inheritance makes it so you're just calling aristocracy by another name.
Hardworking parents should be able to leave their offspring well off, even if the wealth sustains several generations of family
I'm not going to put my family members and foreigners on the same platform of importance to me. I can guarantee they don't.
>inb4 some pseudo-Nietzschean argument that any sort of charity for our loved ones will only destroy them, and only through continuously undermining ourselves will we grow stronger
>>2931302
But why should society tolerate your sons living as parasites?
>>2931310
They're not living as parasites, if they're living off the surplus stored up by either me or my ancestors
What went wrong?
Alternative history. How to save it?
Slavery. It brought negros to an otherwise negro-free continent.
Alternative history: negroes don't come to South America. That's it. I'm satisfied with that.
>>2930866
kill bolivar
>>2930866
Only possible way is that Anglos colonized it instead of spaniards, and that they completely displaced the Indians like they did in North America.
How comes it was the Europeans who improved guns when they got access to gunpowder much later than Chinese or the Muslims?
>>2930552
>much later
They got it around the same time as the Muslims. As for why they improved on it; China was and always will be a heavily conservative society. For example, Look how shitty Qing's military was. As for Europeans, unlike Muslims, they were always on the offensive, fighting each other, promoting competition leading to needed improvements on weapons to one up their enemy. Once the ME was gobbled up by the Ottomans, there wasn't much competition (if you don't consider the Turks kicking small Balkan kingdoms around) or need to improve on what's fine.
In short, necessity is the mother of invention.
>>2930598
>As for Europeans, unlike Muslims, they were always on the offensive, fighting each other
Muslim constantly fought one another and each other throughout history.
Man it's really easy to forget that muskets go all the way back to the 15th century.
I feel dumb now I need to read more.
was he right, /hum/?
>>2930211
Dunno about this thing but I'll comment on something else.
In Philosophical Investigations P.I, 352, 516, he wants to cook up an example of some unknown which either IS or IS NOT true. For his example, he selects at random: "Does the string 7777 occur at any point in the decimal expansion of π?" The point is not to answer this concrete question, but to think about its logical possibilities.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bw-duXxYihdvWVlFaUhzclY5Vmc/view
Nevertheless, one is still enticed to "miss the point" of the question by actually answering it. And it turns out that the string 7777 does occur in π, and rather early at that (in its first instance), starting at decimal digit 1589:
http://www.angio.net/pi/
Are you referring to his early beliefs, or later beliefs? The whole language meme thing he later recanted on.
>>2930638
you're already reading the investigations, but you don't have an opinion on his central idea? kids these days, man...
What are /his/ approved documentaries?
Some decently detailed and accurate stuff.
>>2929828
Arnold Krunk's "Times that Were"
And Seb Croon's "A Look at What's Been"
Both are stellar
BBC's The Death of Yugoslavia
a good and relatively objective rundown of the collapse of Yugoslavia
though it released in 1995 before that conflict totally ended
buuut that allowed it to score interviews with all the leaders/future Hague defendants, which is pretty neat
>>2929828
Engineering an empire series was a comfy.
Reminder that there is no evidence of a historical Jesus
There was actually a pre-Christian Jewish belief in a celestial being named Jesus. He was:
>The firstborn son of God (Romans 8:29)
>The celestial “image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4)
>God’s agent of creation (1 Corinthians 8:6)
>God’s celestial high priest (Hebrews 2:17, 4:14)
Christians worship an angel in Jewish angelology that already existed. The earliest known Christians believed this pre-existent being descended, became incarnate and died, rose again, and THEN appeared to select people to tell them this.
>Source: Philo, Confusion of Tongues 62-63, 146-47; On Dreams 1.215; etc.
>Islam
Muhammed claims to have spoken with the angel Gabriel, so the Quran is supposed to be the spoken teachings of Gabriel, not Muhammed.
>Mormonism
Joseph Smith claims to have spoken with the angel Moroni, and the Book of Mormon is supposed to be the spoken teachings of Moroni, not Joseph Smith
>Christianity
Jesus was originally a celestial being like Gabriel or Moroni, and taught his followers in the same way. Then he was “Euhemerized” (stories were created that places him on earth interacting with actual historical figures.) People started believing or selling these stories as the truth.
Christianity originated from beliefs of a mythical celestial being, born from Jewish and Hellenistic literature and then grew from an outcast Jewish cult that believed in revelation, dreams and visions, rather than from the words of an itinerate rabbi who walked the earth.
Explain postmodernism to a renaissance artist.
Go.
That would require two textbooks, several studies, and the violent shattering of everything he holds dear. I think I'd make it to the impressionists before he lost the will to go on.
>>2928046
comfy in the eye of the beholder > objective comfiness
"Remember that shit the pope paid you to paint on the fucking ceiling of a cathedral that took like half a decade to finish? Imagine you could just completely haphazardly bullshit it and pretend it's sophisticated."
Will he be remembered as the greatest thinker of our time?
Fuck off racist
He's a cult leader and a moron.
It would certainly speak a lot about the intellectual poverty of our age that anyone who would so much as minimally require that arguments should be based on reason rather than feelings would be considered a great philosopher, but that's where we're at at the moment.
Reminder not to actually go to a diploma mill for a /his/ related degree. Learn a trade and read in your spare time.
>>2925216
It's easy as fuck to get a job as an archaeologist if you live in Europe or the Middle East
>>2925222
Good luck uncovering ancient walls while sleeping in a tent and not having a life, all for shit pay
>>2925222
Shit pay. It'd be super interesting work, but that put me right off.
How do you defeat them in an offensive war?
With this one little Soviet trick.
the winning move is not to be some kind of belligerent
>>2924560
If they are attacking a real menace, like USSR used to be, yes.
What were some of the most brutal wars fought in human history? As in that both sides had a burning and seething hatred for each other that went down all the way to the infantryman doing the fighting? I know the Pacific War is a good example of a recent war but I'd like to know more about the Punic Wars, I read somewhere that the Romans and Carthaginians shared the same dynamic between them like the US and Japanese did during the Pacific War. Any other examples are welcome though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Violencia
>La Violencia did not acquire its name simply because of the number of people it affected; it was the manner in which most of the killings, maimings, and dismemberings were done. Certain death and torture techniques became so commonplace that they were given names—for example, picar para tamal, which involved slowly cutting up a living person's body; or bocachiquiar, where hundreds of small punctures were made until the victim slowly bled to death. Former Senior Director of International Economic Affairs for the United States National Security Council and current President of the Institute for Global Economic Growth, Norman A. Bailey describes the atrocities succinctly: "Ingenious forms of quartering and beheading were invented and given such names as the 'corte de mica', 'corte de corbata' (aka Colombian necktie), and so on. Crucifixions and hangings were commonplace, political 'prisoners' were thrown from airplanes in flight, infants were bayoneted, schoolgirls, some as young as eight years old, were raped en masse, unborn infants were removed by crude Caesarian section and replaced by roosters, ears were cut off, scalps removed, and so on."[9] While scholars, historians, and analysts have all debated the source of this era of unrest, they have yet to formulate a widely accepted explanation for why it escalated to the notable level it did.
>>2923471
Jesus, I had no idea this happened, I heard the same sort of thing from my uncles and dad who fought in the Salvadoran Civil War, for those who were actually fighting the war had devolved into a war of attrition. I remember my dad told me that at one point he had forgotten why he was even fighting, things like "Freedom", "Security" and "Communism" didn't matter, he just wanted to kill every single commie he could find
>>2923466
>I read somewhere that the Romans and Carthaginians shared the same dynamic between them like the US and Japanese did during the Pacific War.
I doubt there's ever going to be a Japanese-American US President who speaks Japanese as his first language, speaks English with a heavy accent, and makes Shintoism the co-official state religion.
Let's imagine Alexander hadn't drunk himself to death and kept going east, and arrived in Warring States China.
The first Chinese state he ran into would probably have been the Qin, how would they have fared against each other? How did the technologies and tactics of Alexander's armies and the Qin stack up against each other? Legitimately interested in this since all I've read are vague insinuations that the Macedonian phalanx would be vulnerable to the Qin crossbows.
Would the other Warring States band together with Alexander to defeat the Qin or just sit back and let them fight each other?
How big was Alexanders army? Because Qin and the various warring states could already mobilize large conscripted armies, but I guess this is not the main issue considering how Alexander was outnumbered most of the time.
However what is a big obstacle is the crossbow.
The Battle of Zhishi is a good example, either the crossbows defeated Roman shield formation, or they battled Hellenic troops like Alexanders and won a complete victory with no reported loses.
>>2916638
Not OP, but Alexander's forces would probably be around 50K.
I don't see how they will be able to beat Qin in any way. Qin of the time were notoriously ruthless and cunning. Exploitation of enemy through duplicity was their forte. Not to mention they easily have more than 3X the number of soldiers. Link related, one of the battle that took place around same time period. 120K vs 240K
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Yique
Qin also has extremely capable generals, strategists, and advisers for its time period. As they were a legalist state (relied on rule of law and fairness) they enjoyed strong support from public.
Here's how the warring states period played out. Roughly speaking.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jebel_Irhoud
Jebel Irhoud or Adrar Ighud (Moroccan Arabic: جبل إيغود, translit.žbəl iġud; Berber: ⴰⴷⵔⴰⵔ ⵏ ⵉⵖⵓⴷ adrar n iɣud) is an archaeological site located near Sidi Moktar, about 100km (60mi) west of Marrakesh, Morocco. It is noted for the hominidae fossils that have been found there since the site's discovery in 1960. Originally thought to be Neanderthals, the specimens have since been assigned to Homo sapiens and have been dated to over 300,000 years old. If correct, this would make them the oldest known fossil remains of Homo sapiens.
This conclusion was confirmed by recalculating the age of the Irhoud 3 mandible, which produced an age range compatible with that of the tools at roughly 280,000 to 350,000 years old. This would make the remains the earliest known examples of Homo sapiens.
This suggests that, rather than arising in East Africa around 200,000 years ago, modern humans may already have been present across the length of Africa 100,000 years earlier.
>>2937162
>Originally thought to be Neanderthals,
We breed with them and they are homo sapiens. I thought this was common knowledge.
>>2937162
Yeah, heard about this, although anyone could infer this, due to the age of neandertal, who's H. sapiens.
Honestly, I think sapiens should be ballooned to include Heidelbergensis and up. I think too much of our classification of Homo species is based in old science, specifically the Morphological conception of what makes a species
Also, anime
>>2937162
My ancestor :)
http://africaunlimited.com/blog/was-socrates-black/
How do pan-Africanists who claim everyone of any worth in the European world was Black, justify White People coming into power?
I'm legitimately curious
>>2937097
They think Whites were evil albinos created by yukub and were vicious enough to take over the peaceful Black man.
>>2937089
>tfw your people accomplished so much and you will never know because white people covered it up.
Why did they do this? Because our dicks are BIGGER? Because white people were living in CAVES their whole history?
There is the man - there's the problem
There is not the man - there's not the problem
Life has become better.
Life has become more cheerful
Thanks to the Russian people
.. for their patience
Never take offense if someone hurt you.
You forgive him
Or kill