Were Incas the least degenerate of all Amerindians? At least they covered themselves with nice clothes.
But more importantly, were Incas superior to Europeans?
Why do eurangutans get enraged when they notice Inca superiority?
Nice to see some of them already start falseflagging threads. Pretty amusing if you ask me. Hehehe
>>3161708
Only great empire that made it in the southern hemisphere
what's his name again?
Sir Arthur "If Britannia Still Has A Mast, Dresden Gets The Blast" Harris
>>3161694
Bomber Harris. Is it that hard to forget?
Sir Arthur "About to burn some Kraut" Harris
bury it deep, yamaguchi
BURY IT DEEP YAMAGUCHI
Bury it deep, yamaguchi!
bury it deep, yamaguchi
Can anyone explain the logic behind these to me because it seems like they're deigned to fuck the user over nutritionally
>live on the coast but can't eat crabs
>pigs everywhere but can't touch them
>even the meat you are allowed to eat has to be slaughtered properly, making hunting for yourself impossible as well as neighbors' food
>you can have dairy but not if you've also had meat recently, arbitrarily limiting your protein intake
>can't cook anything at all on Saturdays
>can't even eat BREAD on the holiday
It's like, what the fuck does a poor Israelite live on at that point?
>>3160933
Luckily Israel has ENTIRE grocery stores, butcher shops, dairies, etc. selling kosher food.
>>3160941
In 1000 BC?
>>3160933
Religion, mang. Ain't gotta explain shieeet. Ancient wisdom and stuff. If you disagree, then you must wear a funny hat, not unlike that guy on your pic.
what would history be if humans had accepted a matriarchal society instead of patriarchy?
I think there would have been less wars because most wars are caused by men because of women directly or indirectly. Having women as leaders would cause men to quite down on the raping (because more respect for women) and stop pillaging to have more stuff to gift to the girl they like two of the most powerful drivers of wars in antiquity.
Lol look at Sweden. Matriarchy doesn´t minimize rape, it maximizes it.
>>3160046
Given how high maternal mortality rates used to be, it would be pretty horrific, as men have a much better chance (barring a disastrous war in the vicinity that your side loses) of surviving their 20s until the advent of modern medicine.
You'd have a much smaller pool of talent to draw upon for your leadership, and honestly, you'd probably graft it to whomever manages to hang on long enough to amass wealth and power
>>3156296
See a concrete example.
>society is ruled by women
>men are weak cucks
>society is conquered by foreign men, turns into a whorehouse for said foreign men
ITT: Stupid shit you thought or misunderstood about history.
>didn't know the Vietnam war and the war with the Japanese in WW2 were two different wars
>Thought the new world just meant spain and nobody had gone that far south, which is why all the "new world" stuff ended up so similar to spanish stuff
>Thought northern ireland and ireland were two different landmasses
>Thought the same about scotland and england
>>3159316
I thought Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates were all the same person until I was 16.
I would use "England","The U.K", and "Britain" interchangeably until I went to university.
I thought Hitler actually would have been good for Germany and really fixed it's economy in an enduring, excellent way until I took a WW2 history course here.
>>3159316
>thought Napoleon was an evil hitler type dictator
>thought Prussia was what Russia used to be called
For some reason I thought Alexander the Great had founded the Holy Roman Empire. Yes, not even the Roman empire, the HOLY Roman Empire.
Don't even ask, I don't know how that idea came to be.
Whats the most interesting/bizzare ideology you know of? Not necessarily something you like or agree with, just something you find fascinating and/or weird.
>you're all just gonna post ancap aren't you?
Anarcho-Primitivism.
literally any possible solution to the hard problem of consciousness
>>3157620
It makes complete sense, it's just not feasible.
Everything that is diagnoses modern civilization is true, but the kicker is that we already have progressed and we can't go back.
Anyone who attempts to revert will not be able to materially compete with advanced civilizations.
My only hope is that someday human advancement becomes more than just things that allow us to grow as a species in number/power/economics but things that make life worth living after we've lost our purpose (survival).
>BCE
>CE
Seriously?
Using the same dates as anno domini doesn't make it secular.
Think of it of a rebranding if it bothers you this much.
>>3164018
But it's such pointless rebranding. If someone was bothered enough to change AD to CE simply for the sake of secularism, then why not pick a new date for the start of history.
>>3164046
0AD isn't considered by anyone to be the start of history and there's no reason to cause confusion by using a different dating system to the traditional one.
The best President we never had
>>3158116
that's not Huey Long
How is islam supposed to be a religion of peace when it was literally founded on conquest? Christianity was founded by a prophet who endured suffering imposed by the wickedness of humanity, and yet he forgave all sin. Muh-hummus on the other hand was some fucking lunatic with multiple child wives, whom he fucked, whose favorite color was green, and felt the only way to make people believe him was by force. I dont know, islam doesnt sound much like a religion of peace.
Islam isn't a religion of peace, they're spooked.
Is there much else to this conversation?
>>3156731
Religion of peace doesnt mean peaceful religion
>>3156731
>if you kill your enemies, they win
Christianity in a nutshell
>Nazis chimped out at Slavs, who are Super Wbite
>Crusaders chimped out at Eastern Christians
>Crusaders failed to keep the Holy Land (which they didn't have a stronger claim to than the Muzzies or Jews there)
>Japs aren't White and got backed by Nazis when they chimped out at Australia (which the Japs didn't have a claim to, at least not more than the Whites there did)
>Axis repeatedly pursued foreign and internal policies that either messed things up for them or picked fights with countries that could whoop them
>Heroes of the White Man and/or pol
How is this a thing? What drives any modern fellow to worship such losers?
>>3166101
>Crusaders failed miserably
no, they were a major success for Europe because they slowed down the Islamic rape train on the entire Mediterranean long enough to develop circumnavigation.
these two are not comparable
please end yourself
>>3166121
>pol believes this
So you've convinced yourself that the first cause is sentient.
How do you link that to a specific religion at the expense of all others?
>>3165768
Divine revelation.
>>3165784
elaborate
>>3165831
Dog directly imparts true knowledge that is otherwise impossible to derive.
Why doesn't the bombing of Dresden count as war crime?
Losers commit war crimes.
Winners make tough choices.
>>3165290
They literally asked for it
MACH ES WIEDER BOMBER HARRIS
It's Sunday and I'm too lazy to do anything so give me some interesting historical youtube channels to watch. No memes like lindybeige, John Green and Real Crusades History pls.
Here's some I'm subscribed to:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClq1dvO44aNovUUy0SiSDOQ - In-depth history of WW1 firearms
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUfsbWIraXIl7a6HKSJINUg - Animated Civil War battles
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK09g6gYGMvU-0x1VCF1hgA - Military History Visualized
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCitjN1GDlEVcLz-fAy5VIpg - Lectures on Ancient ME
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrfKGpvbEQXcbe68dzXgJuA - Misc historical firearms
>>3164611
I'm pretty sure John Green is both a historian and a novelist.
>>3164611
>>3164611
Here's a cool video on the history of Poland
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UL8MCgwTlk
If Padraig Pearse had succeeded in The Easter Rising how would Ireland look today?
>>3164262
It would probably be a kingdom under Prince Joachim of Prussia.
>During the Easter Rising in Dublin in 1916, some republican leaders, including Patrick Pearse and Joseph Plunkett, contemplated giving the throne of an independent Ireland to Prince Joachim.[1][2]
>While they were not in favour of a monarchy per se, Pearse and Plunkett thought that if the rising were successful and Germany won the First World War, an independent Ireland would be a monarchy with a German prince as king, like Romania and Bulgaria before it.[3]
>The fact that Joachim did not speak English was also considered an advantage, as he might be more disposed to learning and promoting the use of the Irish language.[4]
>>3164271
Huh never knew that. Thats interesting, thanks.
>>3164271
what the fuck pádraig