Which side seems more reasonable?
Anti-Life.
Doesn't matter how you feel about the subject.
If you want a free society you need to allow pro-choice.
Does not matter about terminology, it's not the same as conventional murder, as people claim it is.
If you want choice, abortion is a side effect of a free society.
>>1670198
Pro life.
If you support abortion AKA the systematic genocide of black children you are racist and need to go back to /pol/.
Prove to me anything or anyone from this Ireland changed anything in history.
>>1663780
Google Ulster.
John Scotus Eriugena
St Columba
Bernardo O'Higgins
John Philip Holland
Michael Collins
>>1663780
Kennedy's
If you could prevent one murder in history, who would you save?
>>1661049
myself from the future just in case
>gaurdian angel
harambe xD
>>1661049
Your mothers pussy, just so I could slay it again.
You know what goes in all fields.
Would WWII have occurred, or at least in the manner it had if the terms in the Treaty of Versailles had been harsher?
>>1667545
Harsher for whom?
The piling on of German culpability is what caused the resentment that led to further conflict. And why would harsher terms matter if they were broken with impunity and allowed by appeasement?
>>1667601
Maybe the Krauts would have gone for communism instead?
>>1667545
It was Nazi vs Ally/URSS or URSSvsAlly.
>"If life wasn't short it wouldn't be meaningful"
Is this the most successful sophistry in the history of sophistries? It's not even good.
>>1661836
>Meaning.
>>1661840
exactly, what a bullshit concept
>>1661836
I don't see how it is successful, nor how it is sophistry considering that it doesn't even sound correct, just stupid.
People often say that a short eventful life is better than a long empty one, but I've never heard anyone saying that shortness gives meaning.
Were there any other colonies/colonist who were cruel and exploitative similar to the Belgian Congo
>>1660720
Don't think so. Even other Europeans thought it was too much. It's nigger/muslim tier punishment.
>>1660720
Dutch.
Daily reminder it was correct for the British Empire to end South African Dutch-descended states.
>>1660720
Of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_genocide
There are people lurking this board RIGHT NOW who DO NOT have a shrine on their homes dedicated to Zhuge Liang, Liu Bei, Guan Yu and Zhang Fei.
Before the thread begins, you must get on your knees and worship Kongming and accept that the Han, ruling by the will of Heaven, are the only righteous form of government, even greater than Cao Cao!
>>1623259
Three Brothers shit is Southern Chinese crap.
Northern Chinese just have something dedicated to either the ancestors, or those meme statuettes of Confucius, Laozi, and Mencius
>>1623259
>>1623259
>Three brothers promised they'd kill themselves if one of them died with their Oath of the Peach Garden
>Liu Bei and Zhang Fei don't kill themselves after Guan Yu dies
>Liu Bei doesn't kill himself after Zhang Fei dies
What do we concretely know about the Gauls and other La Tène era Celts?
From what I understand, a lot of Roman accounts are plain wrong and sometimes outright propagandistic. They certainly had cities of sorts, they were very advanced in metalworking and artistically were indeed very impressive. The idea of them knowing no military tactic but to suicidally charge at the enemy also seems to be largely debunked.
However, I sometimes wonder if there really aren't any political interests involved in depicting the Celts as being this wonderfully sophisticated culture that was lost to the evil imperialist Romans. It smells of something that both nationalists and hardcore lefties would back.
So yeah, anyone got any good material on the Celts they could share?
>>1667666
In celebration of those digits, I shall dump some Celt-related images.
>>1667682
Do you think the Constitution still works well in the modern day /his/?
Did the founding fathers go to far in separating the powers and thereby allowing Congressmen to abuse bill amendments and pander to vested interests in their districts?
Are there any other parts of the Constitution which just don't work in Modern America?
>>1666993
the right to bear arms
>>1666993
It's outdated. It was written by old white men. Let women and POC add their own ideas to it to better represent our modern society. Preferably having our country based on a newer document not written by a bunch of white supremacists
>>1666993
>Did the founding fathers go to far in separating the powers and thereby allowing Congressmen to abuse bill amendments and pander to vested interests in their districts?
They clearly did not go far enough, considering how much power the president has in the modern USA. Some anon told me the president used to be more of a simple representative as he should be, but at some point was given far too much power.
Honestly, looking at the modern USA, the blatant corruption in its politics, it's become more than clear that the founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing.
ALL EMBRACE ME
SWEDEN YES
IT'S MY TIME TO RULE AT LAST
KRONAN KOMMER EJ FRÅN KYRKAN, DEN KOM DIREKT FRÅN GUD. DUNDUNDUN
Okay... so... so...
What if the Nazis *did* win? What if they achieved their dream utopia? The society and world they so desired to build? What if they actually accomplished that and "forwarded" the Earth in whatever direction they wanted?
How long would it have take for that all to fall apart? For their proposed society to collapse and wither away to the history books? I imagine it would've just been a matter of time.
>>1665148
They would still be in power today. The rest of the west would have been forced to eventually ally with them to defend the world from communism
>>1665148
Their society would never collapse and the world would be a better place, also we would colonize other planets right now
Would all depend on how and when they won and on Hitlers successor.
>Professor starts every class by talking about current events
>Professor starts giving lectures of cultural Marxism
>>1660227
>Professor then asks why you're puking while he's giving lectures about cultural Marxism
>You tell him to fuck off and leave class
>All of those little shits surrounding you laugh their asses off and the professor smugly smiles
>You come back the next day shooting everyone in that room
>Tfw you get away with it scot free
>>1660262
oh how I wish I could feel that
You know, as a /fa/ggot I've always looked at old photos and wondered why did people wear the clothes they historically did? The clothing was so universal that it left no room for any individualism or attempts of self expression. Have a look at this picture of a busy street in New York. Everyone wears a suit and a hat. Colors are all conservative; blue, gray and brown. Even the children are wearing the same stuff, except for knee high socks.
Why would anyone want to dress like that? Why would you want to wear what everyone else is wearing? What would set you apart? What if you have good hair but can't show it off because you have to wear a hat? What if you are well built but cannot make it seen because everyone's wearing loose fitting suits? For women the situation was eve worse because they couldn't even show off their legs or ass as wearing a dress was the norm.
So that got me thinking - what if that was the point? Intentionally or not, the clothes served as an equalizer. Good looking people were put at a disadvantage whereas the not-so-good-looking were at a relative advantage due to clothing that covered and hid a large group of traits that would be used to consider ones attractiveness.
So why would that be beneficial? Well, as we know West is very strictly monogamous, meaning almost all males get a female partner. Let me remind you that historically that has absolutely not been the case for most of the duration of humankind. There being almost as many fathers as mothers has only become a thing recently in our existence. This is how it relates to clothing:
>>1658548
I hereby posit that the clothing fashion that evolved in West did so because it acted as an enforcer of monogamy by equalizing males so as to lessen sexual competition and desexualising females so as to lessen the need and want for any sexual competition in the first place. The implication here is that the less there is sexual competition, the stabler a society becomes as males - the primary function of whom it is to procreate - are liberated from having to compete with each other for females and instead their energy and resources go into "higher", more abstract things, such as building a complex house or engineering a nuclear power plant. There seems to be quite some data to support this claim. Sex and Culture is a good research.
From this perspective the current increasing sexualization of everything and the increasingly liberal freedoms for clothing should be worrying, as it is a sign of erosion of the strictly imposed principles that may have been what made the West, or any other great civilization great in the first place. As you become more able to show off your skin, everyone becomes less equal in looks. And this will only lead to sexual competition as the males on the lower scale of attractiveness find it hard to acquire a partner whereas those in the top will find plenty, further ruining what used to be a delicate balance.
Thoughts?
Sorry this came a bit too long.
This is the picture that got me thinking in the first place.
You can barely tell who's athletic and who's not, and this is the beach we're talking about...
>>1658556
I posit that western clothing evolved because europe is cold as fuck in winter
If you wanted to write an African Game of Thrones, what period/area would you base it off?
>>1643007
Game of thrones is lame, who cares which continent it happens on?
>>1643007
In the Malian or Ethiopian Empires? Those seem like the best candidates for feudal nobility to fight amongst themselves for power.
tbqh an African Game of Thrones does sound cool as fuck. It's a different setting entirely, with different mythology and different customs, so the story would be engaging and fresh. Props to the guy for deciding to actually write it instead of sitting on his ass like tumblr and demanding inclusion.
Portuguese contact era Kongo, pre-vassalization
European enough to be familiar, African enough to be exotic and interesting
How accurate was For Honor with their knight designs?
>>1661884
how would we know? it's not set in our history.
Peacekeeper is accurate, the rest are bullshit
It's a fantasy game you utter prat