the Glorious Revolution was the greatest historical development in the history of humanity
>>1011874
The Glorious Revolution was neither glorious nor a revolution
All "revolutions" past the 1700's have only been adding to the earths inevitable demise.
When Kant wrote admiringly about republican government, the "republic" he had in mind more than any other was England.
England was the one country to which every enlightened person in Europe looked with longing: the country which had conquered monarchical absolutism and religious obscurantism.
What is the best way to give yourself a classical military education? I want to be like Hannibal and Alexander.
>I want to be like Hannibal and Alexander.
If I had a fedora saved on my computer right now I would post it
>>1011684
Out in the field.
Does the existence of the Pirahã debunk pretty much every humanities theory?
>they have no concept of religion
>their language has no past tense
>their language has no numbers
>their language has no subordinate clauses
>they have no fables or stories
>they make no art
>they name their children after other members of the tribe, and many cannot remember the names of all four of their grandparents
Any theory of objective humanity trend, sure. But no one really believes in that anyway.
>>1011645
What we know about them is filtered through a rather dubious source.
I don't believe human trends and "laws" should be taken as completely absolute but as a way to Generalize human behavior.
This guy approaches you in the middle of the night and says "hey kid, wanna hear about the magical world of forms?"
What do?
Tell him idealism is death.
>>1011465
Ignore him to go hang out with Diogenes.
>>1011465
ask him what the difference between a plucked chicken and a man is
Why is Adam reluctant with his touch?
I bet you think the mona lisa is giving a meaningful half smile too.
The finger is in motion.
God is reaching as far as possible. Man needs only to lift a single finger.
Is the only possible outcome of the modern economic capitalist system we live in a total failure? Will it ever work properly? Will we actually be able to 'make' money? Instead of simply moving it and creating debt? What will the crash look like? First world nations reverting to third world?
>>1010638
Everything is destined for failure, but you can't determine whether something is a failure if it's based on lies anyway.
>>1010638
>Will we actually be able to 'make' money?
>>1010638
>Is the only possible outcome of the modern economic capitalist system we live in a total failure?
No
>Will we actually be able to 'make' money? Instead of simply moving it and creating debt?
What do you call the kilotons of manufactured goods and megatons of raw materials we've extracted?
Why have I never heard this stuff before? This should be taught in schools. It is stunning. I had no idea this kind of recording existed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHDfC-z9YaE
I mean think about it, he fought through the Civil War, lived through the Wild West times, the Industrial Revolution at the turn of the century, and saw the inventions of radios, televisions, cars, airplanes, tanks, jets, and nuclear weapons.
I really can't even fathom it.
Here is another neat video. I wish we had more of these old people on tape giving interviews. Post anything you have.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UCRBZ-qlWM
Pretty interesting
>>1010646
It's neat to hear the accent. Definitely different. Hard to put a finger on it. (he's from Virginia)
>>1010650
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNfBdzpG6L4
Not really an authentic recording. But still a moving reading of an authentic letter.
Biggest scumbag in history?
He was a hero to all mankind.
>>1010607
To all Serbs maybe.
>>1010607
This. He singlehandedly destroyed the monarchies of Europe. Well done, mate.
Does anyone actually like this pretentious little pissant?
Also, Existentialism thread
>>1010547
What's wrong with his philosophy? I only know the basis "being-onto-death" which I find to be a right way to look at life. I was actually going to get into his philosophy more, but I'd like to know what you dislike about it OP.
Who the fuck thinks Existentialism is an actual thing nowadays?
And who the fuck thinks Heidegger is an "existentialist"?
>>1010689
idiots
idiots
ergo OP is an ___
What does /his/ think about Psychology? Can we have an intelligible conversation about it?
>>1010462
>psychometrics
>evolutionary psychology
>social psychology
Memelogy.
>>1010482
Well are you going to explain your position or what?
>>1010490
It's a good source of topics for shitposting and flamewars.
Since the last thread got archived with only one reply I'm gonna post this again.
I need all the sources you have on:
1) Freemasonry
2) Rosicrucianism
3) Martinism
Academic and sacred texts are both good.
I already know about Lewis Masonic and McCoy.
>>1010454
Look in the archives for threads made by the ape of thoth or go to x if you want good answers
>>1010454
Tobias Churton is good. But those two really cover everything. You just need to know how to use them.
>rich people
What is peoples actual opinion on this man?
He gets shit on a lot on 4chan and while his party was definitely inolved in some questionable actions, was he himself so much to blame?
No opinions on the apartheid please, just on Mandela.
>>1010288
Loved him in Se7en.
>>1010288
Not as bad as M*gabe.
>>1010288
He was in the IRA.
Was he wrong?
>>1010234
No, he was right.
>>1010234
Yes, he was wrong.
i dont care if you do or don't agree with it
how do anarcho syndicalists claim not to employ coercion? and if they really don't coerce anyone to work, what of those who choose not to but leech off the society? jsut let them? because i think disallowing someone to leech would be saying they can't eat without work which sounds to me like capitalist coercion
sorry if ive compeltely misunderstood
if you thought that an anarcho-leftists could be reasoned with then you truly have completely misunderstood
all human discourse is coercion unless people automatically agree all the time, if freedom is the ability to do what someone immediately wants then any kind of challenge to somebody's beliefs or advocacy for the truth is coercion
this is why I left anarchism
>>1011211
ok but seeing as you once were anarchist, how would you have explained it back then? surely such an obvious answer must have an answer, no matter how weak the answer may be
>private ownership of the means of production is a totally fair and balanced institution
>there are people who legitimately believe this
>>1009857
>there are people who believe people believe this
Strawman. Free marketeers don't believe it's balanced; they believe greater economic growth regardless of who benefits is a better policy than more balanced economic growth with "chosen" winners.
>>1009882
>if I own things it's better than if you own things
Kek people are really dumb