Why did the US and USSR act like such manchild faggots to eachother in WW2?
I get that (on paper at-least) their political ideologies pretty much couldn't be much further opposed, but some of the shit they did is puzzling. Truman said he didn't care if it was Germans or Russians dying so long as they were both losing, both sides started a scorched earth-tier policy on each others parts of Germany after Yalta, and neither side were co-operative in Operation Frantic, despite it being mutually beneficial.
I guess what I mean to ask is, couldn't they deal with the war first, then decide they hated eachother?
>>3284131
>I guess what I mean to ask is, couldn't they deal with the war first, then decide they hated eachother?
it was obvious they were going to beat the Germans eventually. To ignore the post-war world have been absolutely foolish; I genuinely don't understand why that's difficult to comprehend
>>3284141
This.
An interesting thing I found was U.S and Soviet diplomatic relations. I believe this also heavily helped with damaging U.S and Soviet relations later on in the future. Apparently Roosevelt and Colonel Faymonville (Who was appointed as diplomat) wanted to provide the USSR lendlease pretty much without anything in return. Some military attache however did not approve of this, and, weirdly enough, they sent out an Anti-USSR diplomat into the USSR as well (Standley). I'll dump some citations I've found
Is Buddhism the most smug philosophy?
Like, listen to this fucker and tell me he isn't the smuggest fuck in the world
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRRhXE0h250
>>3284055
Yeah. It's basically Hindu Nihilism.
>>3284067
Alan Watts' brand of """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Buddhism""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
*Enters your port*
OPEN THE COUNTRY
Hey you could make a religion out of this
STOP HAVING IT CLOSED
Were maoris more advanced than abbos? Were they based? Did they acept the British rule? Were they hunted by the British settlers like the abbos?
>Were maoris more advanced than abbos?
It depends how you're defining "advanced". If it's in reference to animal tracking and desert survival, then no, if it's reference to weaponry, then yes.
>Were they based?
Meaningless question.
>Did they acept the British rule?
On the whole they did, with some resistance. There was a treaty signed at Waitangi accepting British rule.
>Were they hunted by the British settlers like the abbos?
Kind of. Maori's were a lot more autonomous under british rule compared to Australians.
>>3283991
It's much easier to track an animal in a barren desert than in a forest
>>3283929
They were a bunch of violent cannibal savages, but they were cunning and somewhat quick to adopt new warfare tech.
They definitely had better crafts than abbos.
They formally accepted British rule as subjects but, because of language issues the treaty was interpreted differently from English and Maori perspectives.
some were hunted down by some British settlers and there were some small scale dispute which could've lead to great disaster
>Boyd massacre
They had a series of conflicts called the New Zealand wars lasting nearly 3 decades with Maoris fighting the British army in their empire prime. The use of fortifications gave the Maori a vital attribute but they eventually lost.
Does it ever occur to people how much of an aberration the last hundred or so years have been?
Yes, it's fucking mind blowing. In the bronze age, how often do you think a life changing innovation came along? Once every couple centuries? And the population curve in the last 40 years alone. Jesus Christ!
>>3283896
Every day
I actually think about this all the time. It's NUTS.
Any netherboos here?
>>3283652
I dated a Dutchman for a year - he knew nothing of his history or culture, thought Sweden was the high point of progress and thought every right wing movement was fascist. Are all Dutchman like this?
>>3284375
absolutely not
What made the Golden Age so comfy? Why did they trigger the Anglo?
we all talk about the most benign dictators in history, but what about the most popular among their people?
taking the obvious
>>3283639
YOU "BENEVOLENT", NOT "BENIGN".
ONTOPIC:
— MUAMMAR QADDAFI.
— AGUSTÍN DE ITURBIDE.
— AKHNATON.
— THOMAS SANKARA.
— HUGO CHAVEZ.
>>3283655
>YOU [MEAN] "BENEVOLENT", NOT "BENIGN".
>>3283639
Move aside memes.
Ask me anything about Cato the Younger.
>>3283618
Who was in the wrong and why was it Cato?
>>3283619
I won't say that Cato was wrong but he made a lot of dumb mistakes that were easily avoidable, and ultimately doomed the Republic. Cato's stoicism gave him endurance and toughness far beyond what most humans are capable of. It also made him inflexible and stubborn. It's a great example of someone's greatest strength also being his greatest weakness.
>>3283618
Why have you only read one book about Cato the Younger and are trying to pass it off like you're some sort of historian on the subject?
I feel like politics has totally ruined philosophy. If I have to read another philosophy article that has stuff like this I am going to scream
>"This [entry-level philosophy] is extremely vital in these times..."
>"In this post-truth era..."
>"In a time when we are meant to believe "alternative facts"...."
>"This movie/book/etc about totalitarianism/censorship is sadly relevant today..."
I am tired of reading this bullshit. Always there are these hack, trash references to how we live in a "post truth" era and they can't stop bringing up that dumb, meaningless "alternative facts" episode as if they are making some grand statement of our time.
>>3283557
>"This [entry-level philosophy] is extremely vital in these times..."
>"In this post-truth era..."
>"In a time when we are meant to believe "alternative facts"...."
>"This movie/book/etc about totalitarianism/censorship is sadly relevant today..."
I've never came across academic philosophical articles starting like this, want to post any examples from a journal or something?
Do we drink water because we need it in order to survive, or is water a social construct?
>>3283562
https://iainews.iai.tv/articles/why-we-must-reclaim-truth-to-resist-fascism-and-evil-auid-871?access=ALL?utmsource=reddit
This world would be perfect.
>>3283416
bump
>>3283416
That's a nice way of plunging the world into chaos by means of countless civil wars
>>3283416
>EU
>Meme Caliphate
>Slavshit nationalism
>turkey
>mega china
There is so much wrong with this that it isnt even funny
Was he an idealist who thought he could create a new global order of peace and self determination for all peoples, or was he a fool who betrayed the foundations of the nation by enacting a banking system the fathers warned against while getting America involved in European general wars?
Considering that the broad strokes of the 14 points are things which the post WW2 global order has been built on I'd say he was looking in the right direction.
>>3283256
A bit of the first but definitely none of the second.
Wilson is a complicated character, and the /pol/ memes of Wilson being "worst president ever" are retarded.
>>3283273
I don't know about /pol/, but it's hard to say he didn't shit all over what the founding fathers envisioned for America. He intentionally got Americans killed in order to get involved in a European war.
Who was in the right?
Goring
>>3283238
not Goring
How did he get away with it?
How bad were 'Western' cities during late 19th/early 20th century? Were they as filthy and crime ridden as third world shitholes today?
>>3283215
>Were they as filthy and crime ridden as third world shitholes today?
they were comparable to some third world shitholes, not all
>>3283215
Measles and Spanish flu were probably a million times worse than aids. Maybe not as much crime or trash as modern slums but tenement housing and lack of workplace regulation are comparable.
Right now the world is at a stage where many slums are either being developed or torn down but they also continue to grow in some places as well.
>>3283425
And why was there less trash and crime than in third world countries?
What the fuck was his problem?
Being too right.
>>3283104
seems like he explained himself pretty well.
>>3283104
Apparently being micro-dosed with LSD while having an underlying genetic predisposition to BPD
Why is it that some sects in Western society presumes that progressivism, particularly as it relates to gender identity and gender roles, is inherently right? I'm not discussing equality of opportunity, equal pay, etc. Obviously everyone deserves a right to these things.
I'm asking whether the "elimination" of gender roles is, in actuality, the incorporation of women into a modified, male gender role, and what purpose that ultimately serves. Qualities which exemplary progressive women exhibit - independence, intelligence, developing a career, and sexual freedom - are all qualities we traditionally associate with the male gender role.
It's as if we said, "Feel free to play ball, but by our rules." And those rules happen to play into the capitalist system and male identity within it.
>>3283071
>inherently right
there is no inherently right
and answer usually boils down to muh feelings
>>3283071
>I'm not discussing equality of opportunity, equal pay, etc.
those things imply the things you are discussing
and they literally cannot overrule biology - women are women and men are men
men and women have the same rights, as they should, but there are biological realities we can't change, gender roles cannot really be eliminated other than in the minds of polfags and tumblr whales, where it's just wishful thinking to be proven right
women nor men will never ever do something that's biologically or naturally prohibited, outside of their potential or the like
we can discuss how to put things around within that framework
my problem with the current framework is - im not getting laid, so i think people(females included) might be having too much sex and should stop immediately
>>3283071
HURR DURR ROASTIES STAY IN THE KITCHEN REEEEEEE