There is a thread right now that is called "cultures that had ot be distroyed with a picture of the aztecs.
Now, the aztecs were brutal but non as devestating as western culture.
What is it about western culture that both convinces people it is amazing but at the same time it being extremely devestating and malicious?
Europeans are biased in favor of European culture.
>>1795809
and yet most europeans are highl critical of 'western culture'
if you ask the average european hell have few good things to say about it, and will mostly make a distinction betveen 'his culture' and 'western culture', which is usualy identified as america
>>1795801
>extremely devestating and malicious
anon are u fucking ok
What did he mean by this?
>>1795706
That the world is much more full of knowledge than we think.
that complete knowledge of even the simplest things are impossible
Was he a good leader?
Did he make Britain better?
Started off well, but really fucked up after uniting the country. He throws out the Monarchy with the intention of ending their power forever, then declares himself 'High Protector'?
>>1795680
was he a good ruler? he ruled for about 10 years didnt he?
>>1795686
Sort of, he was very competent, but he was too radical - bringing too many changes to the establishment before it had time recuperate, not to many starting further wars JUST after the Civil War and during the supposed rebuilding period. He also dissolved Parliament and ran the state as a Dictator, using his son as a successor. Not to mention he was a severe fundamentalist who had some odd decisions (ie he invited all the Jews formerly banished from England to resettle, and banned Christmas celebrations)
Why do Austrians speak German instead of their own language?
But they do speak their own language.
Or do you think that present day countries are homogenous and distinct from each other in every way including language?
They do. They speak English.
Jesus /his/ really has gone down the drain.
Are Jewish people white ? How do they see themselves?
>>1795495
They see themselves as chosen people and the rest of us as goyim sheep that are to be used and discarded.
Depends on who you ask on both sides.
Everyone in the world besides Europeans consider Jews white.
Jews in the US save a few sparsely numbered conservative sects consider themselves white
Israeli's consider themselves "Western", but not necessarily white. They have a more national identity to Jews.
Anyway, there's your answer. In b4 the /pol/beards
they're basically white but neither stormniggers or jews want to accept it
I'm looking into the arguments for and against technological determinism but all the books I see seem to be in support of the theory. Are there any books that directly argue against the theory?
>>1795483
who is this seminal feminal
>hey, I really like your massive birds popping out above your deliciously slim waist er I mean bird
>>1795483
who is this discourse mistress?
What would have happened if Britain remained neutral in WWI?
Germans would have obtained a French surrender by the end of 1915. The Russian Empire would have been partitioned as it was historically in 1916 instead of 1917.
>>1795463
I doubt the French would have held on. It wouldn't be a defeat on the scale of 1871 or 1940 but Paris would fall eventually.
I also doubt as many countries would've jumped on the bandwagon and joined in favour of the Allies. Italy might even be persuaded to join the Central Powers if the war goes especially bad for the French in the early stages.
Tough call. Some sort of a Marne would still happen. Some sort of a pre-1918 German victory with Germany coming on top from a conflict of attrition, not strangled by the blockade and with a numerical advantage over the French forces.
What the fuck is this country's problem? Why haven't they ever done anything ever?
Are they just island aboriginals or something? What's the deal?
it's what Africa would be if it was never colonized
>>1795484
there's an island in the map called New Ireland. Doesn't that indicate they were colonized?
>>1795485
also new britain
/int/craft 300BC is launching on the 23th of September
* IP Address: intcraft.online
* Server Version: 1.8.8 (any client from 1.8, 1.9 or 1.10 can join the server.)
* Chien's World Map cropped to Eurasia
* Towny, Brewery, meme recipes, word filter and more..
RP and General Rules
Contrary to previous iterations we will now state the actual rules for the server in a clear way, pre-launch. In theory, as always, there is only one rule: Don’t be a shitter. If you follow this set of rules, you are thereby not a shitter and you are in theory allowed to do what you want on Intcraft, and it will be up to the server population and community to put an end to their own disputes.
Towny War Flag will only be enabled from Friday-Sunday, from Monday-Thursday it will be disabled. PvP will always be enabled.
First 24 hours after launch will have War Flag disabled
Roleplay
1. Building a town/nation must be historically accurate for that location given the current time (300bc-300ad)
2. Buildings do not have to be 100% accurate, variations are allowed. But no memes.
3. Towns do not have to be exactly in the same geographical location as they were, but it should be in the same general area.
4. If you only want to pvp, find a pvp server
5. If you only want to buildfag, join a nation or get gud.
6. Nations can spread through conquest or diplomacy, but no Atlantic Federation tier memes.
7. Towns must be in a nation (within 24 hours of its creation)
General Rules
1. No spam
2. No hacking
3. No advertising
4. No betraying
5. No alt accounts
6. No advertising /int/craft to unapproved boards/sites
7. No talking about Anime
Moderators and Janitors will strictly enforce these clear rules only, if you arent breaking any rules there will be no punishment.
Neither Moderators or Janitors will recieve creative mode, or anything of the sort that would have much potential of game breaking abuse. They strictly exist to enforce the current set rules to some degree until an admin is available
>>1795413
That's nice
>>1795413
>Australia
Let's burn those trees down
>>1795413
Bump, it's pretty fun, right now I'm building a little tribe in the south of ireland
Do any of you happen to have a BBC episode of 'Timewatch' called 'Battle of the Bombers' that aired in 1993? I've looked everywhere online but cannot find it in either a physical copy or stream.
The episode features British bomber veterans defending their actions in discussions with civilians who experienced the receiving end. There is a short clip of it in a later Timewatch episode;
Starts at 9:33;
https://youtu.be/utIFh9ySRFI?t=574
>>1794794
This ones more famous, German veterans on partisans;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQdDnbXXn20
>>1794799
The look on that woman's face on the end.
Bamp
We will ever again see outright Imperialism?
Or has humanity matured past that?
>>1794746
I think russia,iran and china have some imperialistic tendencies,no?
>>1794746
Classic Imperialism was neat. You get to some place, you conquer it, then you establish some sort of administration and public services in the conquered place while raping the economy of the country.
Modern Imperialism, USA basically, is un-elegant. A combination of direct military interventions to destroy countries and indirect interventions, via coups d'etat, regime-changing, economic war, support for terrorist/factionalist groups to destabilize countries and so on to keep countries under their political and economic domination.
Also, funny pic. Prussia never was an Imperialist country and had zero colonies.
>>1794811
>Can influence nothing that isn't bordering their own country
You'd call that Imperialism?
Was the British empire as evil as people say?
>>1794702
No. There's nothing wrong with bringing civilization to savages.
Obviously even the Nazis didn't REALLY believe the Empire was all that evil, since Hitler supposedly made all the SS recruits watch some old film about British India as an example of how to keep the population in line.
mixed bag, as all empires
among the good things they introduced newspapers, commerce, sports and transport
>>1794725
And sanitation. Don't forget the loos.
Why is it that, in spite of their supposed dominance on the medieval battlefield, so many European medieval battles saw infantry-heavy armies crush others composed of knights? I get that knights were heavily armoured and armed, so untrained peasants weren't really a threat (i.e. chevauchee), but it seems like their power on the battlefield is overstated.
Examples of knights getting BTFO by infantry:
>Golden Spurs
>Agincourt
>Crecy
>Morgarten
>Jaffa
These are just a few I could think of, but I'm certain there are more.
Knight is a title not a class of soldier.
>>1794719
True. What OP is referring to are men-at-arms (which are technically not 'knights'), although any knights who fought in battles would have likely been men-at-arms.
I think the issue is that infantry warfare basically adapted to account for knights over time, while earlier knights in the time of Charlemagne and the Early Medieval period would have definitely controlled the battlefield.
>>1794691
Because it's not what you have, it's how you use it.
In Agincourt and Crecy the knights were deployed terribly, attacking in such a way that the usual advantages were negated by the terrain, order of battle and many other things.
This is not unique to medieval Europe; it's a recurring theme in warfare.
There was a battle during the US annexation of the Philippines where riflemen were ambushed and butchered with knifes and machetes. Why? Because riflemen lose most of their potency as a military tool when used indoors, as opposed to on an open plain. In their arrogance they let their guard down, and the Flips made them suffer for it.
In the first Battle of Grozny, tanks were used horribly and there were actually factually reports of tank crews getting killed with SWORDS. The tanks were driving in a straight line, so the Chechens blew up the first and last tank, trapping the entire column. Thus making almost everything useful on the tanks a liability.
Did he dindu nuffin /his/?
personally believe he was a good boy and the terror was a necessary evil, but curious to know what others think about him and the terror in general
>>1794630
Performed a necessary evil, his only fault wasn't going far enough
>>1794704
virtuous citoyen detected
>>1794630
The FreRev totalled about 40-55k deaths. Not really an evil compared to what happens today.
What can /his/ tell me about gypsies?
You see, India has many traditionally nomadic peoples.
Some of these people wandered out of India proper and plague the rest of mankind.
>>1794515
Ah yes, they wandered out of India on their own. British colonialism played no role in relocating Indians different parts of the globe.
>>1794527
>british colonialism
>having anything to do with g*psies
This is a basic google search away.