My candidate is "murder of Junko Furuta"
https://ripeace.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/the-murder-of-junko-furuta-44-days-of-hell/
The white washing of history. You see the first romans was ruled by kings who was black. Tarquinius superbus the last black king of rome was overthrown by the whiteys who ruled rome for a couple of centuries. Until sulla the great black general overthrew the whiteys and exterminated them in the social war. Now blacks was running rome again and a whitey wasnt seen in the region again until it was sacked by alaric and the whiteys eventually killed or sent the black romans to africa. Julius caesar was black.
Also hiroshima and nagasaki were war crimes
>>1507641
bait
>>1510194
raysis ass whitey
Itt: what you're currently reading and drinking.
Inferno, nothing.
>destroying your mental faculties before attempting study
Not even once.
>>1507567
This thread, and Sunny D. Also, I wonder how long it took you to set everything up and take that photo.
I'd say 15 minutes minimum.
>>1507567
>oh boy! I should pose my dad's whiskey and my book carefully on this desk. Maybe I should put a tasteful filter on this photo.That'll show /his/ how much of an intellectual I am
Does the restriction on emigration undercut the Communist/Socialist states of the 20th century, in regards to how they claimed to be a "paradise" for workers?
>>1507511
Could you elaborate?
The Berlin Wall was constructed to keep fascist and revisionist elements out of the newly created workers state.
>>1507527
>Keep people out
>Shoot people trying to flee your country
Let me guess: All those women and children fleeing East German rule were secretly spies who had to be stopped
Why is it that in almost every society, regardless of time or region, most leadership positions were held by men, and women were either just underrepresented in leadership or were downright second-class citizens?
>>1507456
Probably because men have been one to take action and lead in a situation, whereas women have routinely been seen to either stand idly-by and let the situation be overtaken by the men or are too emotional and reactionary to allow legitimate ruling.
>>1507456
Because a man can put a harder punch on a woman than a woman can to a man
The Mosuo of China are matriarchal. Men cannot own property or run a business by traditional law.
Drug use and alcoholism are rampant (and have always been rampant), men live with their mothers until she dies, then they move in with their sisters until they die, then they starve in the streets. Crime is abundant, and children never know their fathers as marriage does not exist. The Mosuo instead practice "Walking Marriages", which are akin to the Western concept of hookups.
They're an incredibly depressed people, and the biggest threat to their culture is Mosuo women giving up being breadwinners to be housewives to wealthy Han men.
Is falling love something that was created in the 19th century.
I've been looking at the 3 types of love the Greek's came up with and "falling in love' seems to not fall to any of them.
Is falling in love merely people mislabeling sexual attraction or is it a true force that the ancients did not feel.
>>1507430
We've recorded hormonal/neurochemical irregularities over a period of 6ish months that correlate kinda heavily with the whole concept of "falling in love"
Not to be all muh chemicals about it, it does the exact opposite of delegitimize love and romance as a concept.
>>1507430
The notion of falling in love with a woman, loving the woman you're married to, etc. is a creation of the Christian establishment in an attempt to better the lives of the women of antiquity. Women were seen as subhuman breeding machines only good for making male heirs. The men thought of them as less intelligent, unable to understand such concepts as love, honor, or friendship, and they looked for those things exclusively in other men. Homosexuality was so rampant in Antiquity because the men hated women that much.
And then comes Christianity, the religion of women as the Romans called it, seeking to rectify the situation. Early Christians sought to help these poor women in their suffering, just as Jesus would have instructed them to do, but their work was not enough, and so they initiated a centuries long effort to change the entire culture of all the peoples of Europe and Asia, culminating in the Middle Ages with chivalry and the vilification of homosexual relations to make sure things could never regress to the way they were. And this is why we "love" as we do today.
This is a very interesting concept that I've never even considered before... People didn't realise there are different types of working ethics etc until the last fifty or so years either but it makes sense people didn't realise this concept till more recently.
My guess is through history love was achieved after marriage where the pair would develop feelings for each other. There was probably no time nor opportunity to have occasion to fall in love until more recent times especially after people stopped arranged marriage type stuff.
Has any group in history suffered worse than the entire collective Amerindian cultures?
>90% population decrease since the Europeans arrived
>Forced to live in tiny shithole reservations
>Culture has been reduced to stereotypes used to sell Halloween costumes and headresses worn by ravesluts
Yeah but they dont got to pay taxes so its even
>>1507437
100% this
They even got casinos which rack in millions and ruin countless life's. It's almost unfair that American Indians can get away with this stuff.
>>1507415
Aren't there just as many today as there were pre 1500? I remember reading something like that in APUSH for what that's worth.
Also are they forced to live on the reservations? I don't think there's anything stopping them from going out and doing stuff in the US (on top of getting apologizing welfare money for just existing)
Does the bible outright deny the existence of other gods? Or does it simply deny the relevance of other gods?
Essentially does it say -
No gods exist except me
or
No other gods matter except me
Genuinely curious.
>la ilaha illa'llah
It's pretty much established that the Jews were henotheistic until the Babylonian captivity
>>1507321
Bullshit
Deuteronomy 4:35,39— Unto thee it was shown, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God;there is none else beside him. Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
Is it true /his/? Will women be the downfall of our civilization? Has there ever been a prosperous, long lived "feminist" empire? Is the patriarchy truly the best form to rule?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxpVwBzFAkw
>>1507110
Considering the dynamics of most historical civilizations, it shouldn't be surprising that women having a more prominent role didn't work out. However, I think we live in an age where it is possible for an equal society to succeed. Let's look at employment, for instance. Historically, most jobs were labor intensive, and warfare more rampant. Therefore it made the most sense to have women be the primary homemakers and child rearers since everything else was much more dangerous or better suited for men. In the modern economy though, services and technology are more prominent and warfare is for the most part something that happens "over there." Thus it's no longer necessary for men to be the primary breadwinners since women can theoretically perform these jobs just as well. Regardless of the logistics of an equal society, the one thing that would have to change is the sexs' view of themselves and each other. Double standards would have to be addressed and mentalities would have to be changed. For example, mothers would no longer receive preferential treatment in divorce or child custody, and men would have to value chastity as little or as much as they expect women to.
All feminists are trannies. All women who want independence are trannies. They all want to be men.
>>1507170
Yes, and?
If Europe had stuck with its various brands of Aryan paganism till the modern day, what would have been the result of our linguistic reconstruction and discovery of the original Indo-European religion? Would everyone have to drop their specific Germanic/Celtic/Hellenic/Persian and embrace the older "truer" religion?
Can we determine what religion is the most correct by discovering whichever is the oldest?
>>1507026
There already exists a great aryan religion for you.
Mythology =/ religion
>>1507048
Thunor and Woden were genuine venerated dieties. I heard that pre-Christian religions took a more relaxed approach, but it wasn't outright mythology to them.
>Make thread agreeing with far-right leader or ideology
>/POL/ NEEDS TO LEAVE
>STORMWEENIES GET OUT
>ANYONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH MY LEFTIST VIEW OF HISTORY IS /POL/
Why are leftists on here so insufferable, it's impossible to have a discussion. Literally worse than actual /pol/ shitposters yet they believe they're the rational, calm and collected, open minded ones.
>I'm going back to /pol/ where I can have intelligent discussions
>>1506986
>believe they're rational
Of course, liberalism is rationalism in politics. A fundamentally flawed idea, however.
>make thread regarding islam or africa
>FUCKING SJWS NEED TO LEAVE
>GO BACK TO YOUR HUGBOX
>IMPLYING NIGGERS
Why is the alt-right on here so insufferable, it's impossible to have discussion.
Why don't people fuck around with constructed languages more?
I'm not here to promote any specific conlang, but I'm interested in peoples' reasoning against using conlangs. Generally when someone suggests using one, the reactions revolve around a lack of culture/history/literature making the conlang useless. Why is this such a big concern? What's wrong with creating an easy to use "product" such as an easily learned conlang (like Esperanto), or testing out new methods of communicating (such as attempted with Lojban), basically creating sandbox languages to test out grammar/orthography/etc. in attempts to make communication efficient? Why is it that only autists seem to be into this kind of thing and that using a language that lacks a long history seems at best, dorky, and at worst, some kind of violation against human culture?
Basically, why cling to natlangs so tightly? Is there any good reason aside from nuts and bold transitional stuff such as having to translate a bunch of old texts (which plenty of people do for free), convert school curriculums etc., were a conlang to start being adopted as official (not really what I am talking about at all)? Or do people only think conlangs are ugly and natlangs are beautiful simply because muh old shit? Why insist on using only old languages and hold new languages as inherently inferior?
Also, I imagine around the dawn of language there must have been a few autists who sought to improve it and probably invented some words and methods for communication, and managed to get other people to join in. Why not? People have been doing that continuously with writing systems since writing was developed; seems sensible that pre-writing people could have been playing around with morphemes and advanced grammar structures in either spoken language or sign language before that.
Well for one, conlangs are greatly influenced by fantasy languages from all sorts of fantasy stories.
They bring wierd people in and regular folks don't really care about it.
But what you are asking is like asking why aren't more people interested in book clubs, even though it might help them.
It's just not interesting to most people.
Also learning a new conlang is pretty hard, even though auxlangs are designed to be easy.
I would rather just learn a natlang.
Also, I already know how to speak toki pona, so my conlang learning fays are over desu.
>>1506978
>pre-writing people could have been playing around with morphemes and advanced grammar structures
As a linguist I can tell you I think it's probably true that people were 'playing around with morphemes and advances grammar structures' since language first developed, lol.
What the fuck do you think a natlang is?
Do you think there's a hard and fast distinction between constructed and natural languages, beyond the fact that almost nobody uses constructed languages because they're contrived?
Actually study linguistics before you go around proposing linguistic policy whilly nilly.
Because constructed languages (the non-fictional ones anyway, so I'm excluding shit like Elvish) usually come with political and ideological baggage that nobody really identifies with. Also there is no depth or diversity of culture and expression. No real acquired metaphors and poetic images. And the evangelists for languages such as Esperanto are so goddamn annoying and awful that nobody would want to talk to them anyway. If I learn Chinese, I can speak to a wide variety of people with different ideologies, beliefs, personalities, and modes of expression. I learn Esperanto, and I'm basically talking to the equivalent of Linux evangelists. No fucking thanks.
Also, languages like English and French have succeded far more than conlangs at what the conlangs are supposed to do.
What is this /his/ ?
>>1506918
Looks like a coin to me.
>>1506918
I'm guessing it's a coin from 1878
Can beauty be objectively rated?
Beauty is a perception that varies from person to person.
So realistically no.
>>1506894
No but threads can
I r8 shit/8 m8
>>1506894
Most certainly. It's up there.
Would you say western civilization is the "main character" of world history? If so, who would be the "supporting character" or the "antagonist"
>>1506828
I'd say the "protagonist" role is split in roughly three ways between the East, West, and Middle of Eurasia. So it's more of a rival dynamic rather than a protagonist-antagonist one.
>>1506828
Woah, the future looks bright
The Middle East from Islam on is the antagonist. Every culture they come into contact with they try to assimilated, enslave or destroy
>swedish """""""""""empire"""""""""""
>>1506732
bigger than what you'll ever own
>>1506732
>Spawned over multiple ethnicities and was a monarchy
Yep it's an empire alight,
>>1506732
Better than the British Empire.