Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 2461. page

First you should tell us what the fuck your talking about.

Did you forget to take your meds today?

>>1925347
Humanity just solves problems that it creates for itself. its like a teenage girl, shit-testing itself.

>>1925356

Alright, what would you propose we do about those problems? And what problems are you talking about, specifically?

>>1924824
I'd say handing over the country to the technocrats was a really shit thing he did, by doing that he opened the way for secularism and democracy.

Apart from that he didn't do anything wrong at all, but maybe not taking care of Juan Carlos well enough to pass on his legacy, might be one more thing he did wrong.

>>1924824
>government falls apart on succession
No, no, everything wrong.

File: 1477694496360.gif (56KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 200x200px

>>1924824
He didn't do anything wrong, but he failed to fix any of the problems that spain sufered, he was pretty mediocre but edgy kids like to idealize him because fascism lmao ebin :DDD.
Tl;dr: not bad but not worth the civil war

because milosevic openly started political maneuvering to put Serbs in a dominant position with full support of Serbian nationalists at the time knowing full well it would cause the entire house of cards to cave in

the idea of "heh Serbia dindu nuffin we're all equally to blame" is always conveniently pushed by nobody except for Serbs

yeah, but the idea that Serbs are only to blame is pushed by Western media, or to be precise, by the media of the countries who participated in Yugoslavia demise. Serbia was the easiest scapegoat.

>>1924233

Name one thing wrong in this world that isnt the Serbs fault.

For most European countries sport hasn't changed all that much. There was football, there was tennis and boxing and wrestling.

Now not quite the way we know them today but they were largely similar.

In Medieval England Archery had to practiced once a week by law though it's debateable wether it was really considered a sport but certainly it was an obviously popular past time.

In Germany Shooting took off in a major way certainly by the 16th century and shooting events and tournaments were massive and fairly regular. Fencing and wrestling were popular sidelines at these events but largely diminished in favour of more guns.

Things like hurling and throwing logs and hammers different feats of strength events that now only really still exist in Scandinavia, Scotland and Ireland were much more widespread.

>>1923398
Was fencing always with rapiers and smallswords or were longswords included?

How widespread was mumming/theatre prior to people like Shakespeare? I am largely ignorant theatre history.

The peasants also had constant feast days organised by the church if you want to count that as entertainment.

dude narcissism lmao

Nietzsche? Wittgenstein?

Stirner

sorry earthworm jim

File: Rey_Carlos_II.jpg (13KB, 245x288px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 245x288px

Why are they so similar

ALL EMBRACE ME

>>1922652
Based Mengde was the best leader of the three kingdoms period.

>>1922652
why the fuck is his name anglicized with a 'C' instead of with 'Ts' or something

for the longest time I thought it was pronounced like cow

>>1922711
Pinyin

Marx refuted Marx profit doesn't tend to fall.

yes, everybody with a half working brain.


also, jesus christ this picture is pure cringe.

(you)

>>1914796
>Has anybody not named Max Stirner ever properly refuted Marx?
Stirner BTFO him so there's no more reason to.

File: Administrative Divisions of the First French Empire 1812.png (772KB, 1280x996px) Image search: [Google]

772KB, 1280x996px

>>1907456

>>1907456
What is it with you Anglos and always using Reich instead of empire when talking about German empires?

I mean, they got some Celt and Roman in them. They could be purebred niggers.

You could apply that logic to literally any countries citizens.

>>1929067
Well different nations interbreed at different rates. In America, the only nonwhites people breed with are latinos.

t. rhodok scum

Shit doesn't peirce shields senpai.

>>1929035
I don't know... Is Ramsay shirtless?

>>1928821
1. Workers directly control industry. The lack of a ruling exploiter class makes us wealthier and freer on average. The eventual abolition of the state would erode any potential for tyranny or repression. A democratic economy and more
2. It's really hard to get there
3. Probably, but we've never seen it on a grand scale
4. Socialism still has money and a government

>>1928821
>Number 1: What are pros of communism?
Everyone's needs are met. You are not exploited by anyone else. Hierarchies are based on individual merit rather than ownership and classes. Your success and failure is up to you as a person, not whether or not you're part of a class or someone else has something you don't.

>Number 2: What are cons of communism?
It requires an abundance of goods so that scarcity is not the primary determinant factor of distribution, in other words post-scarcity, and requires socialism first. Rich people won't be able to inherit wealth and success any more than anyone else.

>Number 3: Is communism effective?
No, because it requires socialism and post-scarcity first, neither or which have been accomplished. There's also a misconception that communism means equality just because it is more egalitarian.

>Number 4: What's the difference between communism and socialism?
Socialism is the lower form of communism where scarcity exists, and distribution of goods is based on contribution to society. Think ordering a la carte versus an all you can eat buffet. With a la carte (socialism), you get what you pay for. With a buffet (communism), you eat as much as you care to eat and the amount you eat is unrelated to the price you pay. Socialism focuses on removing what are seen as social parasites who do not contribute to society and eliminating the exploitation of the individual to benefit another, which are generally seen as people who have wealth and income due to ownership, rather than performing labor or management. It does this by removing the individual's inherent rights to ownership of capital, and the rights to stewardship of capital are determined by society, in a way that benefits society, rather than benefiting the individual at the expense of society.

>>1928821
>Number 1: What are pros of communism?

Taking control of the means of production sounds great.

>Number 2: What are cons of communism?

"Taking control" of a system as complex as the economy doesn't actually give you any control over it, but it does make you responsible for failing to control it.

>Number 3: Is communism effective?
>Number 4: What's the difference between communism and socialism?

Communism aspires to statelessness. No communist society has ever achieved it.

Drunk people are irrational in their economic choices

>>1928802
is this considered in the literature?

>>1928807
Not sure, I just know in one of my first microeconomics lessons an immediate example of when actors don't act rationally is when they are drunk. You would have to look into behavioral economics to find out more.

do we have a new keeper?

>dat goal

>>1928772
there is hope yet anon but some changes are needed

>>1928486
Why?

>muh sky is falling because we can't keep muh economy infinitely expanding
average Jap lives an okay life they just need to drop the culture of pretending to work 75 hours a week

>>1928486

Why do you think that I should care about how do you waste your time?