Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 2770. page

It's dead and buried.

>WE WUZ ROMANS N SHIEET

File: 1473236458375.jpg (71KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x480px

>Hate globalism
>Hate nationalism
What do you want instead, if I may ask?

And I only think we can through might and control of land, the Roman empire(s) changed so much through history it's pointless to try to rechange in terms of culture, religion or ideology.
If someone managed to control Italy, Greece, Libya as well as a good amount of other parts of the Mediterranean coast I suppose they may officially claim to be the Roman Empire reborn.
Does this make sense?

>>1710680

>What historical conditions would have to have been met for the USA to support the Axis instead of the Allies?

They'd have to be absolutely fucking colossal. Greater economic ties with placesl ike Germany and Italy instead of Britain and France, which itself would necessitate an entirely different course of development, as the latter were maritime empires, the the former land and Mediterranean based, with the British and French having the fleets necessary to support that kind of intercontinental trade and ensure it's safety.

You'd need to sever or at least alter the enormous cultural ties, especially between America and Britain: Sure, they'd have their spats, but at the end of the day, they speak a common language and hold a lot of common cultural values like democratic institutions being good and autocratic ones being bad (however bad they were at implementing this), and notions about how the interactions between various classes should work, a distrust for militarized states.

Quite honestly, you'd need to change so much of the world's geopolitical situation that you'd probably erase most of the underlying causes of the war. The entire question is pretty stupid.

>Would more trade and a Republican president be enough? Maybe something to do with Plan Dawes?

And this is enormously stupid.

>>1710680
a hardcore /pol/ack would have to find a way to travel through time, kill all political opponents, find a way to hypnotize the multicultural American people into believing that multiculturalism is bad. and then somehow become president.

>>1710680

Basically the government of the US would have to be made up solely of 12 year olds that post on /pol/.

>>1705747
Basque Hyper-Empire

>>1705747
>Portugal
>Port-of-the-Gauls

Gee I wonder

Celts, Iberians, Celto-Iberians, Basque, Carthaginians in the South

Spainard Historians have little shit storms over which was better to be descended from.

File: Ataturk.gif (61KB, 402x402px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 402x402px

Interesting man.

>>1692943
Does anyone have that Sonic OC made out of him?

where are the comuns jajaja

Yes

>inb4 luddites

>>1707095
Most political issues are ethical questions, not technical ones, so no.

>>1707095
Yes.
Why not?

Germania

File: frisian shitter.png (176KB, 1116x893px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1116x893px

>>1706400

>>1706400
I'm 100% Cappadocian

File: image.jpg (78KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 564x423px

In the Godfather Vito said that Sicilians suffered a lot through history

Is that true?

The sea people came from Sicily
atleast some of them

>>1714958
Thapsos?

Come on, there must be someone who knows all about Mediterranean buttsex on this board

>>1714931
Faggots doing faggot shit isn't what this board is for.

>>1715002
It's an historical topic. This board is for history

>>1714805
You sure are.

>i'm so beta that no woman wants to be with me

>>1714805
He had a fucking cheek beard LOL

>>1714240
>It's pretty easy to get lost in the wilderness.
Actually getting lost in wilderness is no different that getting lost in a city youre new to. Someone who is native to that city wouldnt get lost so easily.

they obviously knew their surroundings and could navigate by looking at the sky if they had to

They had bags full of bread crumbs they would leave in a trail as they went.

>>1714210
Its just faith. Anyone arguing otherwise is both wrong and completely missing the point

>>1714210
If the Quran was true why didn't Allah make sure it was the biggest influence of my life. Since my life is the most relevant to my appreciation of religious the book I was raised with must be the legit one.

>>1714227
There exist people who are raised with the Quran, thus it must be legit.
Whooops, its a paradox. I guess you need to go back and approach the issue in another way.

Irish need not apply

File: 7474747.jpg (129KB, 1204x800px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1204x800px

>>1714069
What about Irish loyalists?

In paddy caps ofcourse.

>>1714096
>irish loyalists
Lowest of the low.

>>1714069
Loads of people still wear them here.
Farmers wear them all the time, as to half-farmer half-hipster half breeds.

There's shops that sell them on the high streets.
Most of them are a bit smaller, though.

How are men's suits not "normal" now? What is normal?

>>1713818
solid color that isn't bright green or yellow or some shit, and no bell bottoms

>>1713820
http://images.lmgtfy.com/?q=men%27s+suits

Why do people not use the catalog again?

>>1713762
You mean WW1 era battleships?
Do you see those cannons?
In an age where planes could barely carry simple machine guns, parking this ship near a coastral city would mean you own the city.

>tfw battleships became obsolete within a generation

What is gender really? You always hear that gender is a social construct, which implies that gender is invalid in a way but on reflection I don't feel that this is the case. Language is a social construct but that doesn't mean it isn't real, it isn't useful and valid.

Sex is what biologically differentiates humans. Men are bigger and stronger, women are weaker and softer. Which then extends into gender. Strength becomes associated with masculinity and weakness with femininity despite that fact that males can be weak and females can be strong. Of course the strongest female can never compare to the strongest males, but the fact is that strength and weakness are not inherently male or female traits, they are just traits. All of gender really comes down to this. Women have less hair then men, so hairlessness is associated with women even though they still have hair all over their bodies. Men cut their hair so that it doesn't get in the way of their duties, then eventually short hair gets associated with men.

In this way of thinking, why can't a man assume the roles and expectations (that are available to them) of a woman in their society? And the same with a woman assuming the roles of a man?

Obviously a male cannot have children and cannot assume the role of mother. But a woman doesn't have the male strength, endurance, and power needed to be an effective front line warrior (soldier, special forces) or boxer (competing against men). But not all females become mothers and take advantage of that particular biological ability, and not all men become warriors or athletes or any role that requires the full extent of male physical capabilities.

If society expects the IDEAL woman to have gentle posture, long hair, makeup, feminine clothing, and a male is wiling to put forth the effort to do all this, why should he not be given societal permission to be recognized as a female instead of as a male? For all intents and purposes.

>>1713510
>Personally I feel as though transsexualism, just based on the evidence, is some kind of heredity / developmental defect rather than some kind of acquired mental illness.

It's neither. It's an aesthetic, or way of life.

It's so tiresome that people fail to understand this.

>>1713535
God poured stupditiy generously into this one.