Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 2007. page

Ideally, no.
In reality, yes.


The optimates had great ideals for their vision of Rome but in actuality, if power wasn't centralized it all likely would have fallen apart.

The provincial governors were basically becoming rulers unto themselves and if something wasn't down about it Rome would've fractured.

Not to mention the optimates had little interest in fixing the various issues plaguing the plebs, largely because those issues were at the direct benefit of them.

>>2210145
>senators
Depends on the senator. The likes of Cicero and Metellus Pius might have had good ideals, but Pompey? Crassus? They just wanted to abuse the system for their own gain and glory.
Remember, roman factionalism was extremely personalized. The optimates/populares split meant very little ideologically by Caesar's time. Just look at how Pompey and his dad kept shifting between leading one faction or the other.
Also it's not very clear whether Caesar actually wanted to create an empire. Most roman leaders before the empire wanted just to be first man in Rome, and be the foremost political power within the senate. Being the actual king/emperor/consul meant little to them. Afterall the likes of Scipio, Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, Anthony basically managed to do whatever the fuck they wanted even without a crown on their head and an actual position to occupy. They ruled by influence and traditional clientelism.

>>2210145
>he sounds like a man of principle
Oh also, top kek at this. Cicero was a fucking wheather vane.

It's complex in the sense of:
>Effective
>Organised
>Relies on ability and wages instead of 'inherit this'
>Some nepotism but needs ability to go with it
>maintains taxation and census abilities

Of course, this just made Latins confused. Heck, after the 4th Crusade they dismantled most of the Greek administration because they couldn't understand the concept.

>>2210068
Not very. Buttblast three-meme-arrow landers can't follow a system more complex than a straight line from 'my lord is my better and the king is my lord's better'

File: 1473260610909.jpg (450KB, 1152x2048px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 1152x2048px

>be Crusader
>pass through Constantinople on way to Holy Land
>see the Greeks administrating their lands with "bereaucrats," "governors" and "offices"
>too much for my simple, feudalism accustomed brain to understand

And that's why today Byzantine means something very complex

I think Machiavelli would be a classic example. His commentary, "The Prince" is taken either as his view on how politics should be, or as satire, when it was more probably just commentary on the state of the region's politics.

>>2209935
>I was just DESCRIBING the world,

Not really. 'You' were deducing from dust principles about the assumed nature of humanity the, or a, logical resolution to the conflict which was theoretically inevitable given those assumptions

'You' may have been correct, or largely correct, in your assumptions, but that does not mean 'you' were, nor even understood 'yourself' to be, describing things 'as they are'.

>>2209980

dust=first

etc.

Oh and btw. BRITAIN WOULDNT HAVE FALLEN WITHOUT US HELP EITHER, GET FUCKD STORMFAGS YOU WERENT EVEN CLOSE

Troll thread aside, there is no way the Germans could have beaten the USSR given their objective of a war of extermination. The Soviets would have fought to the bitter end and were too vast for the Germans to destroy. They struggled to Moscow but the Soviet regime was already moving to Samara if the Moscow counterattack failed. And the bulk of Soviet industry was safe past the Urals.

The Germans could have won a limited war, capturing the Baltics/Ukraine/Eastern Poland then forcing the Soviets to sign a peace agreement. But Hitler was far too juvenile for this.

>>2209946
It is true, i just want to attract precious crying stormfags and neo-nazis in this thread

I just watched this, and it's honestly one of the cringiest things I've seen of his. The worst part about it is that it seems like he things this is genuine insight. Here are my thoughts on it, as an archaeology grad student:

First, he never says that archaeology is useless (this is important, since I actually want to discuss his points and not shitpost). What he's actually talking about is how he ended up quitting it as a field because he had problems doing it. These mostly seem to revolve around his inability to remember important things and see the use in artifact analysis. It seems like he thought archaeology would revolve around looking at impressive things in museums and talking about them; actually having to learn about artifacts, study them, and learn how to infer past behavior bothered him, because he didn't want to do it. Or because it was too hard. But that's what archaeology is. It's all about learning minute details, and analyzing boring pieces of old garbage, and applying theory to them to make arguments about past behavior.

His comments about the job market are somewhat useful, but he was ultimately too pessimistic about it. Yes, work will depend on level of education, location, and willingness to travel, but that's true of most fields. I won't say it's a great job market, but it's not as impossible to find a job as he makes it seem. Mostly, he was just bitching about how he wouldn't be willing to do what's necessary to work in the field.

I think this might actually be his worst video yet. Holy shit.

>>2209909
Continued:

If anything good can come out of this video (I can see a bunch of his fans getting haughty about archaeology now), it's in discussing how people are uniformed about archaeology as a field. It's kind a problem because of how often you come across people like Skall, who had a seriously warped view of what archaeology is, and end up disappointed that archaeology can actually be a tough (including physically), rigorous field that isn't just about collecting treasure. I've encountered a bunch of undergrad who basically make the same arguments in their first exposure to archaeology outside TV. Every single one of his points sounds like a person who's just venting his frustration that archaeology was different and required more than he expected, and in general, he comes off uninformed and whiny.

>>2209797
>Did it happen?

Yes

> Did it happen in the same way we are taught it happened?

I have no idea what this means, as it implies it is taught the same way everywhere. It isn't.

> What proof is there that it didn't happen?

Stormfag rambling

>What proof is there that it didn't happen?

You said this before, so I assume that one of the two is proof that it did happen. For an introductory blog as to what proof there is that it did happen, I would recommend this.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/

>>2209888
> Did it happen in the same way we are taught it happened?

Well the whole thing of rounding up 11 million people where 6 million were jews and putting them in labour camps where they were shot and then later gassed to death.

>>2210000

>Well the whole thing of rounding up 11 million people where 6 million were jews and putting them in labour camps where they were shot and then later gassed to death.

That is not entirely correct. Not entirely incorrect either, but it misses a lot of nuance.

There were enormous rounding up of disfavored populations. However, many where 'merely' ghettoized, and not deported to concentration camps. Others, especially Jews in conquered nations or nations allied to Nazi Germany, were ghettoized first and then the ghettos were 'liquidated' at later dates.

Overall death toll of 'The Holocaust', which is usually held to refer to intentional killings by Nazi Germany of civilians under their administration (and as such, not including the 3-4 million Soviet PoWs who died at a rate far in excess of other German held PoWs from other nations) is usually estimated at around the numbers you gave; 6 millionish Jews, 5 millionish non-Jews, 11 millionish total. However, a lot of those dead Jews were simply murdered by roving Einsatzgruppen and skipped out on the whole go to a camp or a ghetto phase.

Also, while even the mildest concentration camps were pretty horrific and likely to get you killed; most of the KZ killing came from 5 camps/sub-camps, Birkenau (a sub-camp of Auschwitz), Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno, and Sobibor. Those camps/sub-camps were kill on arrival. Between them, you have about 2 million dead, and most of those victims would not have been worked before execution.

File: 2ec.png (208KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 327x316px

>austrian intellectuals

wtf i'm John Maynard Keynes now.

File: 1484159966101-pol.jpg (196KB, 640x460px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 640x460px

>>2209564
>nasa cucked by government budget
>satellites and resupply missions launched by private enterprises

>>2209534
He was too revolutionary for the revolution, so when the bourgeoisie liberals took power he and Zapata were hung out to dry.

His name was Doroteo Arango. Pancho Villa was like an alter ego who did awesome things like sending dynamite loaded trains into enemy towns at full speed, invading the USA and lead the revolution to victory.
He knew jack shit about politics, altought he learned something about communism in jail. He was a man of action.

Literally signed a contract with a Hollywood filmmaker to film battles, even got new uniforms for his army to make it look good. Also fucked every woman he saw, even old and ugly.

but anon, the German people will not exist by 2050

>>2209442
Why the fuck would Switzerland get anything?

Buffer against the East.

You needn't be spooked because there's nothing spooky about that observation.
It's pretty commonplace and could have been made at any time in the previous 35-40 years or earlier.

>muh baba vagina prophecies

File: 1406133917320.jpg (157KB, 992x880px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 992x880px

Spooks are a spook.

>>2209270

By the grace of God.

By quelling the evil within ourselves.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

"I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully."

When it become too complicated for teenagers to be spoonfed on.

>rich people wasting their money on an abstract painting by a famous painter because they think of it like buying a commodity is evidence that "art has turned to shit"
explain

File: REPIN_Ivan_Terrible&Ivan.jpg (837KB, 2992x2328px) Image search: [Google]

837KB, 2992x2328px

>>2209238
here is real art for comparison look at deepness of an emotions at all of colors and at complexity that can't be rivaled by modern works

>>2209200
>How did they thrive like that?
Horses provide
>milk
>blood
>meat
Anywhere the horse can live, so too can the rider.

>>2209200
But they did eventually settle each and every time they invaded someplace worth settling, and in the past few centuries were practically wiped out by the advancing tide of gunpowder weaponry.

>>2209200
Pastoralists are specialized populations living in mutualistic or parasitic relationships with farmers or engage in farming as well.

But honestly a significant portion of their calories really did derive from pillaging or making villages pay tribute.

>>2208885
I've heard Buddhism had over a million manuscripts but can't find the source of it.

>>2208885
Qabbalah for sheer density, though still simple to understand as a whole

File: waiting.jpg (145KB, 764x788px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 764x788px

>>2208885
Not sure but I know Hegel takes a spot in the Top 10 metaphysics gone too far

>>2208783
the veil of ignorance is a thought experiment, it can't actually be implemented in reality.

>>2208793
I don't actually want us to vote on laws from the womb, I want the principles of this idea implemented in some way.

Law makers and their families now being able to own businesses and being provided a good life standard so they don't have to work or engage in trade, for example.

Homeboy, Rawls does you one better and actually gives you the two principles of justice that one in the original position will arrive at from behind the veil of ignorance.