>mfw Normans consider me an intellectual because I construct convoluted narratives for everyday phenomena by mixing marxist analysis, new age esoterica, and conspiracy theories
why are normies such mental midgets?
>>3003824
Why can't you get laid?
>>3003865
Because I'm ugly
>>3003887
If you'd be really smart you'd talk girls into sex and make good money. Being an underfucked basement dweller is underachieving.
Speaking strictly Ottoman Turks, was Skanderbeg the most successful Christian Kebabremover? He did beat the full turkish army, twice.
Also, How would you rate him as a late medieval military commander?
>literally kills hundred thousands of Turks for Christendom
>no one remembers you
>>3003646
I'd say he's actually one of the greatest commanders in the late medieval period. It's pretty impressive that he was always outnumbered and still managed to win so many battles
>>3003722
His people became Muslims so it doesn't matter
What's the verdict on Cixi? She's traditionally seen as one of the worst ruler of China. But some historians also try to rehabilitate her, claiming she was maligned for being a woman.
>>3003441
Cixi is shit, the vast vast majority of Chinese and Chinese historians rank her among the worst rulers in Chinese history.
The revisionists are primarily based in the West and didn't have to live through the consequences of her actions.
>>3003547
was she shit because she was shit, or because there was shit after her and due to her?
>>3003441
The Chinese scholars are revolutionary so they hate queen and kings. Working with the monarchy was the reasonable choice. All solid HAN officials, those with both power and vision, supported her. The revolutionary alternative to her and her cabinet were jokes. Well perhaps the officials are jokes too if they had their chance. But the revolution destabilized china for a hundred years.
Why does religion cause so many wars? it's like "you don't believe in my imaginary friend so i will kill your civilization and mark it as an ok thing to do"
>>3003391
I'm sorry anon, this site is for 18+
Come back in 5 years.
>>3003391
>>3003449
>Why does religion cause so many wars?
Because a significant portion of humanity chose devil worship over God.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuKFX1NuoaI
>>3003391
people fight for many ideologies. for example communism sought a militant approach to bring violent revolution to establish global dominance during the 20th century.
What was the relationship between Caesar and Octavian?
Julius Caesar was his uncle, and later adopted Octavian as his son (probably miffed off Mark Anthony a bit doing that though)
>>3003274
Not biological relationship, I mean emotional. What did they think of each other? How did they get along?
>>3003279
Octavian was 19 and training for a military career in Macedonia when his uncle was murdered, so I doubt they had any strong emotional friendship beyond a shared common sense of duty towards protecting the family.
Caesar made Octavian his son because he seemed the most capable of protecting their kin, and Octavian accepted the postmortem adoption because no one else could step up.
Was there ever a more fearsome person in history?
but how did people percieve him in the soviet union?
like what did the peasants think about him? and the military? and the politicians?
>>3002957
>5"6
Haha
>>3002967
Is that relevant to my question?
Can we be sure that he was even human?
Pls no bully
How can such a flawed individual not be human?
>>3003286
this
Why does the Constitution say all men are created equal when that's obviously a lie. Not everyone is as fast as Usain Bolt. Not everyone is as intelligent as Neil deGrasse Tyson. Not everyone is as talented as Lil Wayne. So what was the rationale behind all men are "created" equal? The statement implies we are all the same from birth and that our outcomes are determined completely by environmental factors and how "hard" we choose to work or not to work. Which science has shown is a lie.
>>3002873
"Everyone is created equal" means everyone is equal under the law and provided the same rights, you literal autist.
>>3002879
But why use the word "create".
>>3002882
because our rights, just as our existence, come from God
>indian nationalist
>married and had children with an Austrian
i mean he was allied with germany, but still. hitler never married a japanese girl...
>nationalist=/=racialist
There are many ethnicities and races in India. India itself is not one race.
>>3002800
Nationalist =/= ethnonationalist
Germany was the only ethnontionalist axis power during WWII. Hungary's Fascist leader was like 5 ethnicities but not actual Hungarian.
>>3002800
Indians are true Aryans
If somehow Napoleon Bonaparte was resurrected by the French to lead the French army in 1915, would he be able to end the war sooner, or do you think it could lead to defeat for the French? Perhaps a similar outcome?
Lets say he has a basic knowledge of WW1 weapons, i.e he knows how MG's work and that aeroplanes exist, but how he would utilise/counter them is down to him in his early 19th century brain.
Also he can't be sacked or replaced.
>>3002789
Napoleon had a great mind for logistics and grand strategy. That's not to say he wasn't a great battlefield tactician as well (he was), but it's what really set him apart.
You've got to remember most of the deadlock in WW1 on the Western Front came from generals applying a 19th century mindset to early 20th century weaponry. I'm not sure whether Napoleon would've adapted any faster than generals of the time did - but he did apparently have a distaste for new-fangled technologies like rifles, he favored mass infantry attacks, and these kind of point to him making the same mistakes everyone else did.
>>3002901
Wasn't he an artillery specialist though?
Is human progress a myth?
>>3002783
If you are not talking about tech, yes.
>>3002823
How can we measure the 'progress' of technology?
>>3002783
It isn't until it is
>Mongols, nomadic tribes with a basic culture and technology conquer most of Asia because of muh horses
>Alexander the Great, the ultimate conqueror, cucked the mighty persians while always outnumbered
>Portugal, managed to keep Spain at bay all of its history while outnumbered, first to create a global empire and laid the path for European domination of the globe.
>France under Napoleon, France was emerged in chaos and was in shambles, yet raises to be the most powerful country in Europe and conqueres half of it before being defeated
>Arab conquests, a pedophile maniac manages to unite a bunch of sandniggers under one religion and they conquer all of the middle east, north africa and iberian peninsula in a short period of time
Lock in your votes and suggest more candidates
What about america
Prussia smacks the Hapsburgs around, creates first welfare state, captures Napoleon III and Paris and unifies Germany under Prussian leadership
>>3002818
How is America an overachiever? Overachieving implies its shouldnt be possible. America is the biggest Western country in the world.
The Pacific Front of WW2 was the greatest naval war in human history.
Prove me wrong
>>3002733
But you're not wrong tho. It's like the definitional example of modern naval combat.
>>3002733
wrong
the first punic war had the largest naval battles of all time.
>>3002770
He didn't say "largest battle" (even if you're taking numbers from ancient spices at face value), he said "greatest war". The Pacific war was really the first time a major world ocean, 1/3 of the Earth' s surface, was conceived of and used as a single integrated strategic area, tighter than fighting around harbors or strategic passes. Moreover, it had massive development of technology and new weapons (aircraft carriers, radar, fire control, etc.) that increased power projection way beyond what was previously possible.
>conquered all of Asia and some of Europe
>most skilled soldiers of the time
>fucked so many women that 0.5% of the worlds population can be traced back to him
Fucking Chad
>>3002678
>white people trying to steal another black historical figure
smdh
>>3002678
Also murdered 5% of the world population of that time.
>fucked so many women that 0.5% of the worlds population can be traced back to him
Not that impressive since it pretty much is just the chinese, mongolian and korean population.
Hey /his/, /tg/ here, and I need some help on a concept I'm working on.
So imagine an English Crusader from the First Crusade was cast into modern New York during the Siege of Acre by ancient Persian wizardry.
Being well educated and relatively intelligent, as well as well funded and from noble blood, what can be assumed consists of his common knowledge? What languages does he speak, write, and read? Given that he was in the middle of a pitched battle what does his equipment consist of? Will he even be able to communicate with modern Americans? And if so, with what degree of difficulty and in what language? What would he have the hardest time comprehending, keeping in mind that he's rather intelligent? What would he adapt to rather easily? What are some things that come to mind about the scenario (barring handwavy magic)?
>>3002590
Well you could probably assume he speaks Old English perhaps French so he wouldn't be able to actually understand anyone.
>>3002590
considering how bastardized modern english is compared to old english, he wouldn't understand diddly squat. he'd get scammed by shopkeepers trying to barter his belongings, and the food he eats will be so rich compared to what he's used to that he might get indigestion. If thugs tried to rob him, he might actually get killed if they had a gun but if they had nothing but knives and bats he'd probably kick their asses.
all in all, if you're asking me in a realistic standard, I think he dies on the streets as an illiterate hobo because culture shock and language barriers do not allow him to integrate into a society as harsh as New York City's.
>>3002590
>Being well educated and relatively intelligent, as well as well funded and from noble blood, what can be assumed consists of his common knowledge?
Well, he's English, but England wasn't one of the nations that "officially" went on Crusade in the first Crusade. So language wise, he probably knows Latin, Greek, and some dialect of old French, possibly a Old English dialect, as well as a smattering of any local languages he's picked up in his travels. None of them are likely to be current. Degree of literacy is hugely variable, and there's no real way to be sure as to what he could read and write based on what he could speak.
He almost certainly knows how to ride a horse well, as well how to care for it. Add in knowledge of weapon use, armor and the care of cleaning it, and how to manage a small manor and the surrounding countryside, and contemporary military tactics. He probably has at least one hobby, so might know how to play an instrument or something.
> Given that he was in the middle of a pitched battle what does his equipment consist of?
This is before the development of plate armor, so he's got a mail coat, a helmet, a shield, a lance, at least one (but probably more) backup melee weapons, maybe a dagger secreted about his person somewhere. However, he probably had a squire carrying some or all of his backup kit, so he might not actually have all of those (sans the armor and lance) on his person. Although if the battle's been going on for a while, his lance might have broken or be discarded, and he'd probably be fighting with a sword or a mace, depending on how well armored his immediate adversaries are.