Was Hitler a Bodhisattva?
Why are there names like Chad and Howie that are pretty unique to America and not other cultures?
Is Von Clausewitz the best military theorist in history?
Sun Tzu's works is too broad/generalized and is only useful as general guidance of "use common sense and don't do stupid thing" while Jomini is too focused on the mechanization of war that as technology and tactics evolved, his idea is fast becoming obsolete
Enlighten me /his/, is there any reason why the toilet culture of the Romans was completely lost in the middle ages? I just can't wrap my mind around the fact that the knowledge of public toilets was more or less lost.
They've built cities and public toilets all over Europe, why did no one bother to build roman style toilets after the fall of Rome? Was it really that much more convenient to shit on the street or throw your shit out of the window?
Do you know how much infrastructure and organisation it requires to supply a city with fresh running water, let alone heated water? Many of the medieval kings lacked the resources to invest such large amounts while they had more pressing issues or wanted to expand their small territories.
Also, the reason why Romans were so effective in building this infrastructure (e.g. aqueducts) is because they ruled a large empire, allowing them to transport water for miles. This is a significant hurdle for small kingdoms.
I see your point, but just think about central Europe, there were cities like Cologne which also had running water etc., those cities used Roman infrastructure for hundreds of years and somehow no one cared enough about the toilets to copy them.
Even if you ignore public toilets with running water, public pit latrines are still better than a river of shit on the street.
Technically Poland was "a noblemen democracy" with elected kings (the election looked like pic related, all neblemen could vote):
>The countries with the highest proportion of nobles were Castile (probably 10%), Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (15% of an 18th-century population of 800,000), Spain (722,000 in 1768 which was 7–8% of the entire population) and other countries with lower percentages, such as Russia in 1760 with 500,000–600,000 nobles (2–3% of the entire population), and pre-revolutionary France where there were no more than 300,000 prior to 1789, which was 1% of the population (although some scholars believe this figure is an overestimate). In 1718 Sweden had between 10,000 and 15,000 nobles, which was 0.5% of the population. In Germany 0.01%.
>Perhaps the closest parallels to Poland's 'Noble Democracy' can be found outside Europe altogether ? in America ? among the slave-owning aristocracy of The South, where slave-owning democrats and founding fathers of the USA such as Thomas Jefferson or George Washington had many values in common with the reformist noblemen of the Commonwealth.
>In theory at least, all Polish noblemen were social equals. Also in theory, they were legal peers. Those who held 'real power' dignities were more privileged but these dignities were not hereditary. Those who held honorary dignities were higher in 'ritual' hierarchy but these dignities were also granted for a lifetime. Some tenancies became hereditary and went with both privilege and titles. Nobles who were not direct barons of the Crown but held land from other lords were only peers "de iure".
>The poorest enjoyed the same rights as the wealthiest magnate. The exceptions were a few symbolically privileged families such as the Radziwiłł, Lubomirski and Czartoryski, who sported honorary aristocratic titles recognized in Poland or received from foreign courts, such as "Prince" or "Count". (see also The Princely Houses of Poland). All other szlachta simply addressed each other by their given name or as "Sir Brother" (Panie bracie) or the feminine equivalent.
>The political system of the Rzeczpospolita was regarded by the nobility as the best in the world, and the Polish Sejm as (factually) the oldest. The system was frequently compared to Republican Rome and to the Greek polis – though each of these eventually surrendered to imperial rule or to tyrants. The Henrician Articles were considered to be the foundation of the system. Every attempt to infringe on these laws was treated as a great crime.
Why didn't the frogs extend it along the Belgian border as well?
I wasn't so much "they will never go into Belgium" rather the French overcompensated by moving a huge force into Belgium to meet the Germans thinking "it is impossible for tanks to move through the ardennes" and then when that happened they got cut off and destroyed.
top 10 anime betrayals
So hear me out, let overthrow the Tsar in the middle of the war, and let us (literally nobodies) rule the country, that will surely bring order and stability and nothing will go wrong
Why were the CUP (The Young Turks) nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1910?
Name: Ahmed Riza
Profession: President of the Ottoman parliament"
Well, that explains a lot.
But initially they did restore a constitutional democracy in Turkey before they went full Turan.
>Trotsky was peace-loving and not authoritarian
>The soviet union would still exist if Trotsky took power
Is this the biggest meme started by /leftypol/?