Is this movie one of the most accurate historical films in recent memory? It sure seems so to me.
>4 years of research poured into this shit
>overwhelmingly based on primary sources
>hand stitched accurate clothing
>accurate replica of an English colonial farm, down to the type of wood used
>characters speak in early modern English
>Reformed Calvinist themes pretty heavily present throughout the movie
It was marketed as a horror movie, but it really isn't all that scary. However it's an awesome period piece.
vumb
There was no such thing as witches, anon.
So that throws out like 90% of the movie.
The filmmakers suggested ergot poisoning led to hallucinations that sparked the Salem Witch Trials, but that theory is no longer accepted as plausible by historians, and even then the film got things wrong about the basics of ergot.
What did the filmmakers get right? Well there are these English puritanical colonists in 17th century New England. That's about it. There are a number of problems with the little homestead they build, like the windows and the bear traps and the clothing, and of course the whole thing is just too big for a family of banished outcasts to have built by themselves in a single season.
>>1123032
Witches are definitely real, anon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man
The End of History and the Last Man is a 1992 book by Francis Fukuyama, expanding on his 1989 essay "The End of History?", published in the international affairs journal The National Interest. In the book, Fukuyama argues that the advent of Western liberal democracy may signal the endpoint of humanity's sociocultural evolution and the final form of human government.
What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.[1]
Fukuyama's position contradicts that of Karl Marx, who predicted that communism would displace capitalism.[2] Fukuyama himself identifies on some level with Marx, but more strongly with the German philosopher Hegel, by way of Alexandre Kojève. Kojève argued that the progress of history must lead toward the establishment of a "universal and homogenous" state,[3] most likely incorporating elements of liberal or social democracy; but Kojeve's emphasis on the necessarily "post-political" character of such a state (and its citizens) makes such comparisons inadequate, and is irreducible to any mere "triumph" of capitalism.[4]
Was he right? If not, how can we modify his thesis to make it more accurate? If you don't believe that the purpose of scholarship is accuracy, then please explain to me why you think that. I know some of you exist, and I'm not sure how to address you when making threads like this.
>>1122281
It did pretty good things for his career mostly but he was wrong. He did later rescind the idea that we lived in the last era of political development too which is a pretty big indictment anyway.
>>1122318
>It did pretty good things for his career mostly but he was wrong. He did later rescind the idea that we lived in the last era of political development too which is a pretty big indictment anyway.
As a Foucaultian i would tell you that the use of his work to justify the Iraq War makes him right, even if he rescinded his work. Power relations, etc. His work is grounded in neoconservative foreign policies now, it's too late to withdraw it.
>>1122325
I had no idea it was used to justify the Iraq War, pretty interesting. I thought he withdrew it on the basis of flaws inherent in Western liberal democracy.
Western liberal democracy isn't even a concrete term considering the huge array of different methods through the West. We weren't instilling Western values in Iraq it was geo-political and I don't see anything remotely approaching success in instilling Western liberal values in Iraq or anywhere else that foreign policy has led us to.
Ol' authoritarian China is having an unprecedented amount of growth in the 20th and 21st century despite having a centrally planned economy too.
What is the saddest event in human history and why is it the harrying of the north?
That's not the Holocaust
ac wēa, þis is ān fullstandiġ holocēast
That's not the Sack of Baghdad and the fall of Islam
https://screwplato.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/ancient-greek-philosophy/
The link says out loud what we all know: that Greek philosophy was a load of assertions that are unfalsifiable and badly argued and generally shitty.
WHY do people pretend that the Munchhausen trilemma doesn't clearly show the triviality of philosophy? You can choose any axioms you fucking want and then make the logical deductions ffs.
>>1122221
>unfalsifiable
You're on a history board. An entire subject which cannot be falsified, in fact most things can't at all. Including your the ideas in your own post or the very idea core of falsifiable while you are at.
>You can choose any axioms you fucking want and then make the logical
Whether something works on paper doesn't matter, what matters is it's application and it's results. For instance, Solipsism is perfectly justifiable but it's not going to have any influence
>>1122221
Except the Munchausen Trilemma is full of shit.
Proof doesn't need to be made infinitely because you would eventually get to the fundamental proof of every component of everything you're discussing if given enough time to express your knowledge of the truth.
It's just in the name of time and parsimony people don't bother explaining the fundaments of physics every time they're making a finer point about ethics. If you and whoever you're dialoguing with are autistic enough, you could start with the baselines of the sciences (energy, matter, math, etc.) and spend six months working your way to the original question about the nature of man.
>>1122380
>I was only born in 1999
Are you a least 18?
What's the difference between a general and a generalissimo?
It's the same as the difference between a General and a Marshall in Central/Eastern europe.
or the difference between a 4 and 5 star general in the US.
Generals command single armies, a Generalissimo is the commander of the combined armies. a commander-in-chief who isn't a civilian.
to make it simpler, it's comparable to Zhukov's rank of Marshal of the Soviet Union, or Erich von Manstein's rank of Generalfeldmarschall.
General is with cream, Generalissimo is with milk
It should be added that, in the memory of today's Spain, the only generalísimo is Franco. I was fairly surprized to see the similar english term generalissimo being used in english historical books.
ITT: Apples who fell about as far from the tree as is humanly possible/literally fucking destroyed dad's empire
inb4 KWII
he looked fly as fuck doing it tho
>>1121979
Caligula, Honorius and Agrippa Postumus come to mind, just to stay within the roman empire.
>>1121979
Piero the Unfortunate.
Were there real Assassins? I know the portrayal of Templars was utter horseshit, but what were the Assassins real life counterpart? Did they have one?
>>1121961
nice meme
>>1121961
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins
>the name used to refer to the medieval Nizari Ismailis.
>the Nizari Ismailis were an Islamic sect that formed in the late 11th century from a split within Ismailism, itself a branch of Shia Islam.
> While "Assassins" typically refers to the entire medieval Nizari sect, in fact only a class of acolytes known as the fida'i actually engaged in assassination work.
>Lacking their own army, the Nizari relied on these trained warriors to carry out espionage and assassinations of key enemy figures, and over the course of 300 years successfully killed two caliphs, and many viziers, sultans and Crusader leaders
So there you go, the big Christian thing of AC is actually from a Muslim sect
There were these guys, from which the word 'assassin' literally comes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins
What are your toughts on the ideas of original national socialism?
I personally think that their main ideas were pretty straight forward, but they drifted it into something different
>>1121949
It's garbage that would collapse after 5 years of peace
>destroyed a whole country and major economy that had to be rebuilt from scratch afterwards
pretty shit-tier
Why is every response to existential crises a call to pile on shitloads of spooks? You know religion is used to take advantage of people, right? You know lit affects religious inclinations in order to portray a veneer of "patricianhood" based on "respect" for "culture" (i.e. pseudo intellectual masturbation), right?
You know that philosophy (ignoring mathematics or science) cannot lead to non trivial conclusions, right? You know that literature is pushed as "an insight in to the human condition" (or anything more pretentious than entertainment) by the publishing-media-academia industrial complex for financial gain, right? Also by pseudo intellectuals who try to look smart.
>just spook my shit up: the post
Existential crises may lead people to do crazy things. Or to act in their own interests.
I know personally I had an existential crisis which led me to Nietzsche, and after years of refinement built myself my own morals that I stand by. I had to reject society though and get metaphorically and literally beat up to learn who I am and what my purpose is.
Western society forgot this and passive-aggressively structures our lives to be all one way.
>>1121866
>You know that philosophy (ignoring mathematics or science) cannot lead to non trivial conclusions, right?
Is that a philosophy? You do a disservice to Stirner.
>You know that literature is pushed as "an insight in to the human condition" (or anything more pretentious than entertainment) by the publishing-media-academia industrial complex for financial gain, right?
What the fuck? There's no evidence of such a thing
Do you guys think that Christianity, or on a broader perspective religion in general, will ever die out? If so, how would it end, and what would be the main factors causing Christianity's downfall?
I don't see religion in general ever not being a thing, but I can see Christianity fading away as the years go on considering the current direction of society. In fact, at least in western culture, I definitely can see people moving away from religion in general.
Is this just a counter-cultural response to past history where civilizations and countries had deep roots in their organized religions, or is it because of the growth of technology, or some other factors?
>>1121739
OP is a faggot and a heretic.
>>1121739
Christianity does predict it's downfall desu
>>1121739
It depends what you mean.
Will it die out worldwide? Not in the forseeable future. Places like Africa will always be ripe for it.
Will it die out in the developed world (America, Europe, Canada, Japan)? Certainly. That's what the demographic shift is. The Christians that do remain are very moderate in their beliefs, save for the bible belt.
What events shaped Ukraine's relationship with Russia?
>>1121623
Early on probably the Crimean Tatars periodically raiding the Ukrainian steppe, I think the Russian response from Moscow was usually irregular because it didn't really affect them
>>1121675
Tatars came from the east you do know that right?
>>1121687
He meant Crimean Tatars who lived in, you guessed it, CRIMEA and were vassals of the Ottoman empire. They often raided the areas we now know as Ukraine for slaves and loot.
>Interested in Mesopotamia
>jack shit is written about it
>>1121487
Maybe you should try these things called 'books'. There are a lot of books about Mesopotamia and other early civilizations.
>>1121492
Comparatively, very little is written about it.
>>1121505
Comparatively? Compared to what, WWII historiography? Doesn't really matter when you're never going to learn everything that was written about Mesopotamia.
How is it possible that socialist countries like Nazi Germany and USSR were so efficient at manufacturing things? Yes, I know that Germany lost partly because they lost the arms race against Allies, but considering where they started from after WW1, I think it was still impressive. How do you do that without the insanity of a dictator? Would that kind of economy work if instead of tanks you make cars for example, or direct the power and effort with same efficiency to some entirely different field? How does this compare to capitalism?
Not a bait, Im just stupid.
>>1121391
>How is it possible that socialist countries like Nazi Germany
stopped reading right there
>socialist
>efficient
4Head
Nazi germany wasn't socialist it was Keynesian, which works really well. The government starts a lot of manufacturing projects and creates a lot of jobs that stimulate the economy. It's not rocket science.
Don't forget that Hitler also ignored the Versailles treaty which was a giant burden on Germany.
How can a populist movement be anti-democratic?
>>1121241
What if the majority of the people dispise democrazy?
Peisistratos was a tyrant in Athens, who had the popular support.
Really all you need is being popular, while traditions, customs, forms of government, voting and everything else that involves how you are legitimately supposed to obtain the position can go fuck themselves.
>>1121241
Because people are easily deceived and won over idiots.
are the writings of philosophers intentionally convoluted out of vanity ?
>>1121110
Kant was criticized in his time for being deliberately obfuscatory.
>>1121118
what do you think was his motive for that ? is it just easier write in such a style and not focus on clarity or was he just vain?
The Greeks and their dialogues are very readable
Kant was an illiterate man who should have hired a scribe
The Tractatus Logicus-Philosophicus and Wittgenstein in general avoid being convoluted