is he the definition of the übermensch?
>>1485950
no. men failing to be as good hedonist as women, men invent fantasies where they gain power over men, women and nature. they try to be at the top of their contrived hierarchy. This guy follows his fear of pains and his love for pleasures and invent a way to be good at it. nothing more to see here.
>>1486010
So he's an urmensch?
>>1485950
more like autistmensch
What is the proper name for this region?
Indochina
Mr. Nixon's Neighborhood
>>1485836
Chinkland
What is love ?
>>1485716
Baby don't hurt me.
>>1485716
I don't know
>Asked this in a forum full of virgin neets
>chris chan is the more well documented human on history
>he has an entire wiki about his life
>most historical figures can't even compare
>>1485702
I had the same reaction but to this shitty thread
>>1485702
>open ancient Greek vault
>find thousands of books
>they're all about an infamous lonely neckbeard who wrote Lysistrata self insert erotic fanfiction
>>1485702
That's because he's a recent thing; in a hundred year it'll all be gone
But yeah the amount of people trailing him is beyond autistic
Could we get a 'fuck those guys' thread going on?
Because, sure, the Aztecs were brutal. But all that destroyed history.
And the Incas, a civilization far more interesting that Spain ever would be. Its like we lost a China so that Romania could have an empire.
I play a few shows in Mexico City every year and I can't tell you how bad it feels to stand on top of the Pyramid of the Sun and think about all the shit that was destroyed. Worst part is they built a fucking Wal Mart at Teotihuacan, trashed a ton of newly discovered artifacts, and fired the workers who reported it.
Fucking Spaniards. Fucking Mexicans.
Spoiler alert: I'm Mexican.
>>1485623
That's a terrible metaphor, Romania would and could never stand a chance against China. In this case Spanish had much better artillery, armor and ships, so their civilization was militarily superior to say the least.
I do agree with you though about the destruction, religious zealots are cancer.
They left messed societies
So I've been taking a look at the trailers of civilization vi, and was wondering about some of the leaders (since I don't even know who some of them are.) I'd rather ask here than in /v/ because you guys are more likely to know these people
France - Catherine de Medici
Aztec -Montezuma (not really an option because of faggot history-destroying conquistadors)
America - Theodore Roosevelt
Egypt - Cleopatra
Japan - Hōjō Tōkimune
China - Qin She Huang
Discuss. Are these good or bad picks?
>>1485500
>Cleopatra
>The woman that did fuck all for her country and spent all her years spreading her legs for the biggius dickius
I realise that they want more female rulers, but the fucking Cleopatra meme has to stop, she was shite.
>Theodore Roosevelt
All the presidents are basically the same, has anyone of them ever done anything interesing?
I think it is time for a real American "Empire builder" like John D Rockefeller
>Catherine de' Medici
Never heard of her
>Qin She Huang
GOOD, GOOD
>Aztec -Montezuma (not really an option because of faggot history-destroying conquistadors)
This is true
>Hōjō Tōkimune
Seems fine
>>1485544
>All the presidents are basically the same
I guess Washington and Lincoln would be the exception, if any American knows of any other interesting presidents please do tell me!.
>>1485552
FDR was good. Brought us out of the depression and spearheaded the policies that would win us WWII
Is aversion to homosexualoty innate or learned?
both
Innate
It's natural to thing faggots are disgusting scum
Aversion to 'false positives' in your mate selection systems are innate. People can then be taught to hate the people who trigger this in them.
Why was Mongolia never colonised?
Was there any interest in colonising it?
Amongst the 20th century empires, Britain, France, Portugal, Japan or Russia who would've been the most likely in colonising it
Also add maybe the Dutch and Germans I guess
It sort of was.
The Soviets brought the many joys of communism to them shortly after the Russian revolution. They were the second country on the planet to become communist, after Russia itself.
Because it's in the middle of nowhere, you can say the same about fucking Afghanistan
>Holy
>Roman
>Empire
>liberte
>egalite
>fraternite
>god
>save
>the queen
>>1485043
why does this absolute trash make me laugh so much?
It isn't - contrary to popular opinion - about having nice buildings and less uneducated people
Civilization means one simple thing : taking away the original biological reason for an action and replacing it with a cultural one
Sex goes from procreation to fun
Eating goes from surviving to indulgence
Forming a society goes from a need for protection to social prestige
These things mean civilization.
The more "original" a culture is, the more it still operates on biological imperatives, the less civilized it is.
Opinions?
FUCK nature
A dildo is literally the most "civilized" thing in existence
It is the original sexual organ, once used for procreation, turned into an object of entertainment and a product
fully de-biologized
>>1484951
Civilization means your society (at least in part) lives in cities. No more and no less
Weren't most wars that involved Britain "world wars"?
no
no
You can't have a World War that isn't a total war.
Britain has fought many total wars, but if you glance at her history of conflict, the wars are overwhelmingly Britain completely overpowering their adversaries without any serious war effort.
China, Boers, India, etc.
Anyone suggest some books/documentaries to give a reasonably unbiased view of the Troubles in NI?
I always hear that it was essentially started by how Protestants/Loyalists treated Irish/Catholics but find that a bit hard to believe.
>>1484513
There is no unbiased source for historical events in the last 100 years.
NI fag here, specialised in modern Irish history, parents are from Greece and I'm an Orthodox Christian so I don't really have a stake in the whole ethnic/religious debate
These are my go-to, reasonably unbiased, "general" sources, if you want something more specific I can dig up my old university reading list
Paul Bew, Ireland the politics of enmity, 1789-2006 (2007)
P. Bew, P. Gibbon and H. Patterson, Northern Ireland 1921-1994: Political Forces and Social Classes (1995)
David Fitzpatrick, The Two Irelands, 1912-1939 (1998).
Alvin Jackson, The Oxford Handbook of Modern Irish History (2014)
Henry Patterson, Ireland since 1939: The Persistence of Conflict (2006)
Brian Girvin, From Union to Union: Nationalism, Democracy & Religion (2002)
J.J. Lee, Ireland 1912-1985: Politics and Society (1989)
Charles Townshend, Ireland: The Twentieth Century (1999)
Ronan Fanning, Independent Ireland (1983)
R.F. Foster, Modern Ireland, 1600-1972 (1988)
K. T. Hoppen, Ireland Since 1800: Conflict and Conformity (2nd ed., 1999)
F.S.L. Lyons, Ireland Since the Famine (1973)
Ronan Fanning, Fatal Path: British Government and Irish Revolution 1910-1922 (2013)
>I always hear that it was essentially started by how Protestants/Loyalists treated Irish/Catholics but find that a bit hard to believe.
That's an incredinly simplified view of it but it's not a bad way to sum the whole thing up in a sentence
>>1484516
By unbiased, I mean I don't want a case of
>"The Troubles in NI: How the IRA killed my dog"
>"The Butcher's Apron: Life as a Catholic under British Oppression in Belfast"
Something written by someone informed as opposed to driven by passion of having witnessed it from one side or another.
>>1484547
Thank you, anon.
I'm really just curious about the legitimacy of the conflict, the legitimacy of uprisings/militias/rebellions of any sort is something I love finding out about.
The Troubles in particular is hard to get to grips with, however, because the scale of it seems bizarre. It seems that in some areas it was a war and yet even a few miles away it was as though nothing was happening.
Discuss
If nobody has the right to property, then who is being stolen from.
>>1484251
Whoah...
>>1484251
The collective. The basic idea is that property is founded on exclusion. Let's take a desert oasis, in its natural state anyone can come an take water, but when someone claims ownership over it, all those other people have no been deprived of their ability to do so.
What technology, science, or ideas did they have that were superior to old world societies?
>>1484036
Sadly little of their ideas (theological, mathematical, philosophical) have survived.
Their crops were superior, judging on the books 1491 and 1493. Indians were better fet.
From reading "Aztec philosophy: the world in motion" I learned that they didn't do stupid Descartes faggotry but had some serious issues with the world (the Aztecs). They believed they were in the last age of humans and had to sacrifice honorouble enemy warriors to keep the teotl (energy), with it the universe, going.
Incas had a nice economy system. Every region produced something else and the surplus was redistributed. Some socialists like it.
>>1484036
they crops they domesticated were important for old world societies.
Just think of how many millions of Irishmen died because the potato was their main food.
And I remember reading that Spanish population didnt begin to recover until they begun to grow corn.
potatos, tomatoes, corn, cacao, vanilla, beans, pumpkins and hot peppers are all from the Americas.
and they are the result of selection in agriculture for thousands of years.
Unlike Europe, Agriculture in the Americas is a local creation, not something that was spread by farmers from the middle east.
Misunderstood geniuses who were very perceptive about nature.
One may think that the Aztec fear of star-demons that could devour the Sun was exaggerated, but the fact that present-day astronomers failed to foresee an impact as massive as the Earth on Jupiter is somewhat worrysome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAJI4gqX3Zg
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy just published an article about the rationality of voting
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting/
This is fucking fantastic.
Plato Stanford confirmed for best philosopher of our times.
> The act of voting has an opportunity cost. It takes time and effort that could be used for other valuable things, such as working for pay, volunteering at a soup kitchen, or playing video games.
This is good from first sentence.
>>1483955
They are correct