Worst examples of pseudohistory

>>2193485
1. Ancient North Africans were Black.
2. People accusing the RCC of being anti-science
3.Anything "black legend or Columbus sought to prove the earth was round" tier
4."Dark ages"
5.Jews pretending to be descended from ancient Israelites when at best they had 4 Judean male ancestors who had children with 4 Italian female proselytes many centuries ago.
6. Christianity comes from Judaism.

>>2193513
>Christianity comes from Judaism
I mean theologically there are many differences but the Old Testament is literally the Torah

>Free
>Planets
>Alliance

>>2193485
Pretty much all history of Ukraine, Belarus, Slovakia, Slovenia and such places that implies they had an identity before XX century

>>2193513
>6. Christianity comes from Judaism.
What alternative interpretation is there?

Jesus was literally a Jewish heretic. He was born of a Jew and raised in the Jewish faith. He considered himself to be Jewish.

"Christianity held progress back" followed by a smug atheist grin.

Giordano Bruno was a rationalist ahead of his times and he died martyred for his scientific research.

"The Third Reich was more advanced than the Allies" followed by extreme dicksucking of Kurt Tank and Erwin Rommel.

>>2193538
>>2193558
This review argues againt it but I think it sums it up pretty well. http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/judean-jew-jesus-paul/

Essentially some people (my self included) hold the belief that "Jew and Judaism" is a historical anachronism.

>>2193557
If you include Estonia in that, then I'm triggered

fuck you, we were around since at least the middle ages, even had our own mythology and religions and shit

>>2193590
WE

>>2193598
no we were never kangz because russians and swedes refused to fuck off

our culture has existed for a long time though

>>2193485
>absolute goods and evils
>RIGHTFUL (x) CLAY
>technology is a linear process
>(race) is so inferior to us because (factor that isn't connection to other civilizations through trade)
>(x) authoritarian despot/(x) communist regime wasn't that bad
>eternal (x)
>conspiracy theories
>righteous genocide

>they covered everything in spices to disguise the taste of the rotting meat they were eating
>they drank only beer because they knew that the water was dirty and would make them I'll

These normally get brought up within minutes of each other. The amount of cognitive dissonance required is staggering.

>>2193558
>Jesus was literally a Jewish heretic.
There was Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots, and what would become Christians (who were obviously differentiated from Pharisees and Sadducees). To call Jesus a "Jewish Heretic" isn't correct. He was a different sect of an ancient religion.

>>2193584

Claiming "Jews and Judaism" are historical anachronisms (which doesn't at all track with me) doesn't really seem to address the issue. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but are you claiming that the "real Jews" died out prior to the time of Christ and Christianity was built from the foundations of a FAKE Jewish faith and tradition, and therefore didn't really come from Judaism?

I mean, I just don't see how the argument works here. Setting aside just how "Jewish" Jesus himself was or wasn't, the construction of the Christian faith was built upon the Abrahamic teachings and tradition straight from Judaism.

>>2193485

"At the height of the Cold War in [year]..."

I have heard this phrase applied to absolutely every single year from 1917 to 1991.

>>2193670
>1917
really nigga

>>2193670
A think the late 1940s-early 1960s is reasonably the height of the Cold War tbph

>>2193676

Yes, really.

>>2193680
what kinda retards do you hang around? the height of the cold war is indisputably the 60s

>>2193670
>Conflating the Cold War with the First Red Scare, confusing everyone in the process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Red_Scare

>>2193679
There was a second flareup in the early 80s after detente failed.

>Haha the Holy Roman Empire wasn't Holy, Roman or an Empire because Voltaire said so and he's smart so there

>>2193660
>the construction of the Christian faith was built upon the Abrahamic teachings and tradition straight from Judaism.
No, it was straight from the religious practice of several near eastern Judean sects which derive various traditions from Moses, Abraham, David, Solomon, ect.

>>2193686

Textbooks, documentaries, articles, etc.

Pretty much anyone who wants to hang some cheap extra gravitas tosses this phrase on the front of their discussion. I've even heard applied to years in the detente period in the '70s.

>>2193547
They had planets at least.

>>2193714

Ah, I think I follow. So the Jews were just one sect that came from the Israelites, while Jesus came from different one.

Which one? The ones I'm seeing still claim Jewish origins.

>>2193608
>technology is a linear process
How can anybody think that

>>2193736
Ask /pol/.

>>2193513
>Deus Vult Starter pack.jpg

>>2193735
"Jew" and "Judaism" as the English language can comprehend it means a particular religion which formed in the 6th century based on the Babylonian Talmud. The word used in the new testament, Judean, had several different meanings at the same time. Modern Jews aren't any more Judean than Christians or Muslims, and the various sects and traditions they come from don't have any more or less claim to the title either.

>>2193755

Things change; it doesn't mean the origins and ties are lost.

>>2193755

New to the conversation, but the Babylonian Talmud is itself drawn from older teachings, and a set of oral traditions and written texts that are at least claimed to go back to Moses.

If you want to say that's enough of a difference that it counts as a different religion, I suppose that's legit, but by the same sort of logic, you can't really claim that Jesus, the Apostles, or Paul were "Christians", or at least not in the modern sense we use the word "Christian".

At which point, what the hell does the conversation even mean?

>>2193618
my grandmother grew up drinking wine as a four year old in rural 1930s Romania, people most certainly did drink alcohol because of sub standard water sources

>>2193513
>He doesnt know Bach was actually a Black Moor

LMAO I WAS LIKE LMAO

nigga aint een woke AF

>>2193769
>Things change; it doesn't mean the origins and ties are lost.
I'm not saying they are. I'm saying they aren't more or less valid than other claimants.

>If you want to say that's enough of a difference that it counts as a different religion, I suppose that's legit, but by the same sort of logic, you can't really claim that Jesus, the Apostles, or Paul were "Christians", or at least not in the modern sense we use the word "Christian".

The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have traditions and documents which prove the continuation of Christianity to the present day. They very much are the same religion of Christ and Saint Paul.

>>2193547
>implying they werent relatively freer than the ginga teikoku
>implying they didnt reside on planets
>implying they werent' allied against the ginga teikoku

>>2193701
In all fairness it wasn't

Jet fuel can melt steel beams

>>2193779
Nothing. Splitting hairs over how Jewish Christianity is or isn't is just splitting hairs.

It's still a sandpeople religion that has no place in Europe or the New World and never should have.

>>2193861
>a sandpeople religion that has no place in Europe or the New World
>i'll just LARP away 2000 years of my ancestors and history in deference to my meme ideology

File: angry-pepe.jpg (7KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 236x236px

>>2193833
25 YEAR RULE REEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>2193608
You have to go back.

>>2193608
>(x) authoritarian despot/(x) communist regime wasn't that bad
Isn't it true that some authoritarian dictators were more benevolent than others?

Though I agree this one is misused a lot.

>>2193485
"greeks and romans were white"

>>2193485
Actually, I got one.

the other night, I was told while playing DnD with friends, that knights armor used to be so heavy that they would climb trees to get on horses because they couldn't get on the horse otherwise.

this prompted another member of the group to say "If you can't climb a horse with your armor, how do you climb a tree?"

I wouldn't say stunned, but the man didn't have a comeback

Much of accepted US history is bunkum.

>>2193816
>The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have traditions and documents which prove the continuation of Christianity to the present day.


And again, how is that different from Judaism, other than "MY religion is the one that's right"? The Jews too, have traditions and documents which 'prove' (if you accept their provenance, which is dubious in both their case and with Christianity's) an unbroken tradition to their holy figure.

That's before you even get into the fact that the religion that Paul preached is almost certainly NOT the one that Jesus preached, or the rather radical differences in practice from his day to the 1054 split, let alone today. You seem to be very much a double standards sort of guy.

>>2193937
Your missing the point. Christians, Jews, Muslims and others can trace back to the Old Testament with equal validity.

The RCC church (and by extension, Orthodox) have a lot of writings by saints, recorded history, ect which very clearly links them Christ and St. Paul.

The Jews today, as well, have many writings linking them to the foundation of rabbinical Judaism in the 6th century.

>>2193513
>Ancient North Africans were black
Of course the black supremacist WE WUZ KANGZ is bullshit, but after Nubian conquest and integrated Dark skinned aristocrats there were many black, politically prominent North Africans but you are correct in saying they weren't all niggers. Not that much of a mistake on your part.
>Christianity comes from Judaism
>Pseudohistory
The first Christians were Jews. My father is an Epsicopal priest/prominent figure in the theological community. I studied deeply, however amateurishly, the history of Christianity. The first followers of Christ did not call themselves Christians and for about 200 years worshipped in Jewish temples alongside their conservative Jewish brethren. After several violent revolts from the early Christians, they officially broke away and formed their own cult before that remained slowly grew. By embracing logic and humanism they converted waning Jews and Roman citizens (which included members of ex-jewish states) who had little to no faith in the Imperial cult.

>>2193950

>The RCC church (and by extension, Orthodox) have a lot of writings by saints, recorded history, ect which very clearly links them Christ and St. Paul.

And the Jews have a lot of writings by old Rabbis (or at least are purported to be such) which link them to Moses and the prophets of the Old Testament, and to spiritual leaders far, far older than the 6th century. Why doesn't that count but the RCC material does?

>The Jews today, as well, have many writings linking them to the foundation of rabbinical Judaism in the 6th century.

Which themselves link further back, to both the Temple Period and beyond in time. Again, why are you suddenly saying that it's not a continuation of the Old Testament Judean religion?

File: 1483480665763.png (394KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 600x800px

>"Nazis fixed the German economy."

>>2193950
>>2193937
The Bible was composed by many people with different viewpoints.

The New Testament was not supposed to be a continuation of the Old Testament but instead partially an indirect critique of the values present (keep in mind I said "present" and not explicitly trascribed as the religion was mostly orally spread) in the Old Testament and partially a presentation of values misplaced from popular the popular Jewish thought.

>>2193485
>Everything in the Middle Ages was backwards
>people never bathed before the modern age
>most people dropped dead by 45
>Africans never went beyond the hunter-gatherer stage
>communist regimes killed (94) (100) (150) (200) (400) (1) (million/billion/trillion) people

>>2193957
The church has the Old Testament linking them to Moses as well. Its about timespan. That group of ancient people known as Judeans had many different sects. Some become Jews as the English language perceives them, some became Christians.

At this point your arguing your particular brand of Abrahamism is the valid evolution of the ancient Israeli religion, and the others are heresies. I'm saying that's not case historically, but a misconception.

>>2193618
What's the cognitive dissonance?

>>2193959
I don't know much about this period of history, but they certainly couldn't have made it worse? Could they? I thought the reichsmark was worth nothing after WWI and retained some value after WWII

>everything about turkish rule in the balkans was bad
>turks didnt have a positive impact on conquered lands

>>2193902
Obviously a figure like post-1948 Josip Broz Tito, Albert Rene, or Ian Smith would be better to live under than someone like Robert Mugabe, Francisco Macias Nguema, Teodoro Obiang, or Roberto d'Aubisson. That being said, no regime is immune to criticism.

>>2193987

>At this point your arguing your particular brand of Abrahamism is the valid evolution of the ancient Israeli religion, and the others are heresies. I'm saying that's not case historically, but a misconception.

No, that is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that you have an enormous number of documents from a variety of religious figures, which are usually formatted as claiming the authority of some long dead religious leader, whose views always seem to be remarkably in line with the present day values of when the text is discovered.

Quite frankly, I don't believe any of you guys. I don't think that the Jews of today practice the same beliefs as the "Rabbinic Jews of the 6th century who in turn were probably only casually connected to the Pharisees (to say nothing of the sects that didn't make it, like the Essenes) of the 1st century, who themselves were probably only tangentially connected to the practices of the almost certainly henotheistic Hebrews who arose in the 8th century B.C or so.

Similarly, I don't believe that the modern Church practices the same beliefs and rituals that the church of a thousand years ago practiced, nor do they in turn practice the same beliefs as Jesus and Paul, who had some VERY different views from each other a mere 20ish years apart. And that is assuming the core Christian documents like the Gospels are accurate and honest; given the number of mistakes they make in what should be common 1st century Judean knowledge of their purported authors, I doubt that too.

What I'm claiming, is that saying that Christianity is the same religion as what was going on in the first century, despite the vast differences, while simultaneously saying that modern Judaism is from 6th century Rabbinic Judaism which is completely distinct from earlier Judaisms, is hypocritical in the extreme.

>>2193990

Not him, but the Weimar republic never had to have peacetime rationing of food. The Nazis were at that point in 1937.

>Jews invented circumcision
I'm Jewish, against the practice, and still know this. Why is this meme still around?

>>2193928
t. noam chumpsky

>>2194004
Some misunderstanding may have occurred. I'm saying modern Christianity is the living continuation of the religion of Jesus and Saint Paul. Numerous writings, traditions and customs back this up. I'm not saying its the exact same practice. Judaism, likewise, can trace itself to Pharisees of Christ time.

Where we differ is this. The ancient Israeli religion had several different sects, each who thought they were the true decedents of Abraham. Christianity didn't form from Judaism, Christianity is just another continuation of that same Judean religion that Judaism came from.

>>2194126
So what you're trying to say is that Christianity is to Judaism as Neanderthals are to Cro-Magnons.

>>2194126
>I'm saying modern Christianity is the living continuation of the religion


What the hell does that even mean? How far do you stray before you're no longer a "Living continuation"?

>the religion of Jesus and Saint Paul.

Considering that the two almost certainly preached extremely different things, I very much doubt this in the conjunctive sense.

> Numerous writings, traditions and customs back this up.

We have 0 writings about what Jesus was actually doing, saying, and believing, and a lot of writings that purport to be from eyewitnesses of him but clearly aren't, and then traditions drawn from these. You'll forgive me if I take them with a very large grain of salt.


>Christianity didn't form from Judaism, Christianity is just another continuation of that same Judean religion that Judaism came from.

And I'm agreeing with that last part, but I'm saying that "Christainity", or if you want to divide it further, a bunchy of different sects of Christianity, formed from a chain of tradition that has since veered from the "primitive Christianities" of the 1st century at least as much as Rabbinic Judaism has veered from Pharisism. (or whatever the proper demonym is, I'm not really sure) Saying one is a "living continuation" and the other isn't is a double standard based on, as far as I can tell, your personal convictions in one.

>>2194138
....maybe?

>>2194148
>And I'm agreeing with that last part, but I'm saying that "Christainity", or if you want to divide it further, a bunchy of different sects of Christianity, formed from a chain of tradition that has since veered from the "primitive Christianities" of the 1st century at least as much as Rabbinic Judaism has veered from Pharisism. (or whatever the proper demonym is, I'm not really sure) Saying one is a "living continuation" and the other isn't is a double standard based on, as far as I can tell, your personal convictions in one.
No. How is modern Judaism any more of a living continuation to Old Testament Judaism? than Christianity Pro tip: it isn't.

>>2194148
>>2194138
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
This is how Christianity is a living tradition.

>>2194155

>No. How is modern Judaism any more of a living continuation to Old Testament Judaism? than Christianity Pro tip: it isn't.

I'm not 100% sure what you're saying with this, but I *think* you're denying the equivalence. If you're not, and I"m arguing against a strawman, please forgive me.

But, if you wish to accept the Jewish claims, then you have a continuation of canonical scriptures from Moses down to Yehuda Hanassi, which confirm a consistent theology, cosmology, and divinely mandated mode of behavior, including a set of authority as to who is and who isn't allowed to speak in God's name, mandate laws for people to follow.

While some practices have changed, most particularly in regard to animal sacrifice and certain laws of ritual purity, the state of divine command is constant and the line of authority is clear. It's a continuation.

>>2194157

So what? The Jews too, have a long list of texts that go far back into antiquity. What exactly is your point? The Mishnah, the Briaita, the Tosefta take up pretty much where Ezra and Nechemiah leave off, and that's not even counting books that were penned but ultimately rejected from their canon.

>>2194005
That meant they got food. Under weimar they starved

>>2194169
1. Christianity was not a heresy of Judaism, but an equally valid sect of the Judean faith which would later solidify into the Christian, Jewish and Muslims religions as well as Gnostics, Yazidis, ect.
2. Christianity can trace itself back to at least the 50s AD, but the actual substance of claims always went further back to the Old Testament. In this way its living, because these writings have always built upon each other.

Literally every "mainstream" list of best US presidents is all wrong.

File: wgl58Qy.jpg (307KB, 1016x665px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1016x665px

>>2193580

I fucking hate this one.

>hurr durr I love science and rationality and empiricism and the scientific method
>now let me jack off for the next half an hour because Giordano Bruno based his cosmology off of a divine revelation he had in a dream and talk about he was right and his heresy trial held back progress for generations when he WAS LITERALLY ESPOUSING SOMETHING HE HAD SEEN IN A DREAM THAT JUST HAPPENED TO BE RIGHT AS A MATTER OF COINCIDENCE AS HE ALSO BELIEVED THAT JESUS WAS A JEWISH WARLOCK ON THE BASIS OF A DREAM AS WELL

NdGT can fuck off for putting him in Cosmos and starting this meme.

Also when people say the Rohingya are indigenous people of Rakhine state aka the entire media they rustle my jimmies to not end.

BENGALIS OUT

+ the picture of Thich Quang Duc being used to show opposition to the Vietnam War. It was to protest the persecution of Buddhists by Diem's regime.

>>2194205
>1. Christianity was not a heresy of Judaism, but an equally valid sect of the Judean faith which would later solidify into the Christian, Jewish and Muslims religions as well as Gnostics, Yazidis, ect.

By whose standards? Who made you a judge and jury as to what counts as an equally valid sect and what counts as a heresy? For all we know, Christianity as it is practiced in modern times is a "heresy" to Jesus's Christianity, and the Ebionites or another long dead group were the ones who were practicing the sort of Christianity Jesus was.

>2. Christianity can trace itself back to at least the 50s AD, but the actual substance of claims always went further back to the Old Testament. In this way its living, because these writings have always built upon each other.

Modern Judaism can make the same claims. The "Rabbinic Judaism's" Gemara builds upon the Old Testament, as well as older rabbinic writings and teachings like the lost book of Rabbi Akiva, half of the damn thing is Rabbis shouting [citation needed] back at each other. These books would in turn build upon each other to produce things like the Moreh Nevuchim, or the Shulchan Aruch.

Plus, Christianity can NOT trace itself back to at least the 50s AD, at least not to any unified set of beliefs. They couldn't even agree as to the nature of God until the Council of Nicaea, and even then, you had groups like the Arians who hung around for a long long time. If you're going to claim that Modern Judaism is a successor belief that sprount out of Ancient Judeanism like branches from a tree, I see no reason to give Christianity any special treatment in that department.

>>2194205
>>2194250


2/2

If building upon a series of texts that each links back to the next and eventually leads you to the OT, then they're both "living faiths". If it's about continuity of belief and practice that sets you up as to whether you're the same religion or a successor religion, I'm struggling to come up with a standard of similarity that leaves you with the conclusion that one is the same practice as its forebear but not the other.

>>2194251
I said from the beginning, Christianity did not come from Judaism but that they came from the same source. No where did I deny the validity of Judaism, or Islam, or anything from also coming from that source. That would be a theological issue, not a historic one.

>>2194245
If we're doing Vietnam memes
>that picture of a south vietnamese soldier shooting a handcuffed vietcong in the head being used to illustrate how evil those mean americans were

>>2194261
No, you've simply said that


A) Modern Judaism is distinct from Ancient Judeanism (or whatever you want to call it). Modern Judaism starts around 600, presumably because of the Gemara. I am sourcing this from this post.>>2193755


B) That Christainity started with Jesus and what is practiced today, while not necessarily the same stuff that Jesus preached, is a "living continuation" of it.


What I am saying is that you have yet to illustrate whatever standards you're using to make such a claim in such a way that they aren't flat out falling on their face. You've never demonstrated what kind of disjunct of continuity of belief or practice is enough to say that something is no longer a "living continuation" and is a new religion. The closest you've gotten to illustrating the concept is in this post >>2194205, where you've siad


>but the actual substance of claims always went further back to the Old Testament. In this way its living, because these writings have always built upon each other.

But it is such a standard that if applied to modern Judaism, you would lead to the conclusion that it too is a "living continuation", and thus not started in 600ish.

> That would be a theological issue, not a historic one.

You very much seem to be basing your historic categorization based on a theological judgment, namely when a religion properly continues as opposed to splitting off into a new faith.

>>2194270
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html
Since you need this again. Browse away.

File: Reinhard.jpg (124KB, 595x1440px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 595x1440px

Everything Great Man Theory related

File: overhead.jpg (12KB, 582x386px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 582x386px

>>2194285

So what? Yes, there are early Christian writings. That doesn't mean a damn about continuity of practice, and if you're trying to make your claim based on continuity of theological scholarship, the Hebrews have that too, and therefore your claim that it started in around 600 is baseless.


I'm not sure how I can make my point any clearer, but your list to the existence of early Christian writers doesn't even address it.

>>2194270
Judaism as term originates later. The Greeks, Romans, and "Jews" of the 1st century called themselves Judean, which had different meaning than Jew.

>>2194298
You can find continuity of practice by the recorded history of the martyrs. I fail to see what's hard for you to accept.

>>2193513
This, one hundred percent.

>>2193538
>implying Judaism is from the Torah

>>2193558
>Jesus was literally a Jewish heretic.
wew

>>2193951
>My father is an Episcopal priest
>Episcopal
>priest
Your father is a heretic and not a priest.
>the first followers of Christ did not call themselves Christians and for about 200 years worshiped in Jewish temples alongside their conservative Jewish brethren.
No. This is 100% wrong.

I am replying to all now. Christianity is not New Judaism. Judaism as it exists today is a schismatic religion created by the Pharisee sect of rabbis during the Second Temple period. They had apparently received some mystical revelation called the Oral Talmud, later to be written down as the Babylonian Talmud. The Talmud is the holy book of Judaism - not the Torah. The most conservative Jewish rabbis of today teach Talmudic doctrine as having precedence over the Torah, because the conservative Jewish rabbis are ideologically descended from the Pharisee sect. Liberal (and humanist) Jewish rabbis teach that nothing in the Torah is real and are just good stories to live their lives by, while having respect for what is taught in the Talmud and teaching some of it.

The only reason Jesus was treated like a heretic was because the Pharisees were winning in a Second Temple theological battle. The religion of the Pharisees was nothing like how Judaism was. They did away with the priests that were central to the Old Testament faith, conveniently making Judaism the religion of the rabbis.
Jesus was a super conservative Torah teaching Old Testament believer, who preached to the Torahites who became the first Christians. The reason why Judaism changed so radically after Christ was because the Pharisees caused a schism as they could not accept Christ as High Priest.

The Pharisees wanted nothing to do with the early Christians, and went around persecuting them where they could find them. Early Christians wanted nothing to do with the Jews either.

>>2194327
continued

Early Christians wanted nothing to do with the Jews either. If you knew anything about early Christianity, you'd know about the Didache. In the Didache, several customs are altered for the express purpose of not being Jewish or being associated with the Jews. The fasting days were moved to Wednesday and Friday to not appear Jewish.
Look up the Council of Jerusalem, which was an event that took place in Acts. The whole purpose of the council was to have a conclusion on the place of Jewish customs in Christianity. Peter's vision of the falling blanket with unclean animals and his authority in the early Church what put the issues to rest. They rebuked the ideas of the Judaizers who taught that you needed to be circumcised and follow Jewish customs to be Christian.

>>2194299

You are, quite literally, offering a semantic argument. An incorrect one at that. You look at say, Philo's writings on Moses, and you see not only a continuity with past "Jews", but one that extends outside the land of which he includes himself, living in Alexandria. It was certainly different to how say, the Romans viewed "Judeans", which were the native inhabitants of Judea.

>>2194306

Well, I don't see Christians giving up their wealth to follow mendicant preachers. I don't see them killing each other over trinitarian differences, which 1st century Christians did a lot of. You have the enormously differing practice involving clerical celibacy, the existence of replacement theology, which was certainly not something Jesus was doing or his associates like James were preaching, you have the primacy of Christmas as opposed to Pentecost as the primary holiday of the Christian calendar, and probably more stuff I'm not familiar with.

And again, if that's similar enough that it's still the same religion, why can't you make the claim for other religions that also change their actions?

>>2194327
>The Talmud is the holy book of Judaism - not the Torah.


You will not find a single Rabbi who agrees with this. You will, however, find a bunch of Rabbis who say that the Talmud is essential to understanding the Torah.

>The most conservative Jewish rabbis of today teach Talmudic doctrine as having precedence over the Torah, because the conservative Jewish rabbis are ideologically descended from the Pharisee sect.

Please source a few who in fact say this.

>They did away with the priests that were central to the Old Testament faith, conveniently making Judaism the religion of the rabbis.

Then why does the Talmud go into requirements for Priestly action, purity, how the sacrifices are to be done, etc

>Jesus was a super conservative Torah teaching Old Testament believer, who preached to the Torahites who became the first Christians. The reason why Judaism changed so radically after Christ was because the Pharisees caused a schism as they could not accept Christ as High Priest.


Well, if Jesus was a "super conservative Torah teaching Old Testament believer" then surely he would never put forth his own claimancy to the High Priesthood, since it was a hereditary office, and last I checked, his dad wasn't Ciaphas.

>They rebuked the ideas of the Judaizers who taught that you needed to be circumcised and follow Jewish customs to be Christian.

I.E., there was a significant number of them until Paul came along?

>>2194351
>You are, quite literally, offering a semantic argument. An incorrect one at that. You look at say, Philo's writings on Moses, and you see not only a continuity with past "Jews", but one that extends outside the land of which he includes himself, living in Alexandria. It was certainly different to how say, the Romans viewed "Judeans", which were the native inhabitants of Judea.
You seem to have missed this. The review doesn't even argue for it, I said early I agree with it. Its not a semantic issue, its a translation issue and an important one at that. http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/judean-jew-jesus-paul/

>Mossadegh was literally the Persian Bernie Sanders popularly elected in a landslide and was going to save the country until the US decided to turn democratic Iran into a monarchy just to be mean.

>>2194381
>You seem to have missed this. The review doesn't even argue for it, I said early I agree with it. Its not a semantic issue, its a translation issue and an important one at that. http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/judean-jew-jesus-paul/


That again, is completely irrelevant to what I've been saying. There was not a unified meaning of the term "Judean" in 1st century parlance. Hell, even the article points out that Ioudaios in a single work doesn't have a precise meaning, and has to be contextually understood.

The article, by the way, uses some rather weak historiography, with statements like this

> he served them in trying to quash the incipient churches of Jesus’s disciples not only in Judea but also in Jewish communities elsewhere —in synagogues in Damascus — where the authority of the High Priest stretched

that are quite simply incorrect, which makes me dubious of her other, linguistic conclusions.

>>2193513

Just because the period from circa 476, to, oh, say 800 or 1000 AD is somewhat historically obscure, does not mean that it cannot usefully be assigned the epithet of "dark ages". I certainly wouldn't have wanted to have been alive at that time, and indeed, circumstances did generally regress across the continent so far as we are able to understand them, some impressive illuminated gospels notwithstanding. So that takes care of that.

Your latter point is a sort of contrarian stupidity that hardly merits dignification, but we will try this to see whether you bite.

If as you rhetorically say, "Christiniaty does not come from Judaism", then /what exactly do you have in mind/ by that absurdity? You can try this two ways: you can argue that Christianity is ontologically different from Judaism in various ways (and thus possibly be obliged to ignore the historical connection, which is contextually the central point that your original assertion is obliged to defend), or you could explain why common printings of the Christian Bible contain a rather large block of information which is referred to as the Old Testament. Go on.

(You will pretend to easily dispatch these points by presenting evidence, which elucidation will necessarily make it that much easier to dispatch you totally.)

>>2194413
She's arguing against it, and an unqualified reviewer. The point is, Judean existed. "Judaism" did not.

>>2194418

>The point is, Judean existed. "Judaism" did not.

You certainly haven't proven that. You've created an arbitrary term to distinguish from a different arbitrary term, both of which have been used in dozens of contexts to refer to mutually exclusive groups of people.

About the only way you could make such a claim stick is to use it as definitional for a paper or something you'd write, where you'd define "Judaism" and "Judean" as different things. If you're the same anon who wrote>>2193755 then you're quite literally arguing from your conclusion, especially since you seem to take it as a given that "Judean" has a meaning defined insofar as how it's used in the New Testament and not say, in other sources.

>>2193608
This.
I hate to deal in absolutes but pretty much anyone who disagrees with this is just trying to bait you or being an edgy kid

>>2193608
What is conspiracy theory and if rightful clay can have certain meanings.

>>2194418
top tier autism m8


Buddhism never existed either m8, know why? Cause in your distorted reality ideas and beliefs changing over time somehow makes them invisible, non-tangible things

File: IMG_1362.jpg (46KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x500px

>this thread

>>2194327
You can make the same reasoningto say that protestantism didn't originate in Catholicism, or that Catholicism didn't originate in Christianity.

>>2194480

Which is of course to say that there is no historical reasoning at all, which is what must expressly be argued so as to refuse any subtleties of a false rebuttal. This is the point.

>>2194451
top kek

>>2194245
>It was to protest the persecution of Buddhists by Diem's regime.

IIRC it was because a lot of vietnamese monks had suicide pacts with monks in other countries. The "diem repressed budhists" thing seems to have come under some scrutiny in recent years.

>>2193996
kill yourself faggot

>>2193831
In all fairness it really was, just not in Voltaire's day.

>>2193485
The Holocaust

Any attempts at portraying Christianity as inherently violent as Islam.

>>2193996
They would let dhimmis live only because they were lucrative and provided most of the brainpower to their empire. Once they discovered the dangers of letting dhimmis live under their already oppressive system (Balkan nation states seceding) they chimped out and for the first time in history attempted to completely eradicate an ethnic group. The roaches still don't even recognise their atrocities.

>>2194327
So if I'm hearing you right -

New (Talmud) Judaism and Christianity are both sects of Old (Torah) Judaism.

qed:

Torah Judaism = JeWDOS
Christianity = Judaism 3.11 for Goyim
Talmud Judaism = Judaism NT4

>>2194637
And to be fair, I should add:

Islam = Judaism ME

File: image.jpg (36KB, 325x235px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 325x235px

>All white people benefited off of slavery

>>2193485
People who think we have a good record of ancient times/ literature and think that what remains is representative beyond reasonable doubt.

"Original/old Christianity or Buddhism is just like therevada / church fathers say it is because they have documents from their

>>2193513
Christianity is to Judaism as Islam is to Christianity.

Get over it. Mental gymnastics, word games and pedantry will not change the self-evident facts of the matter.

>>2193485
/pol/

>>2193816
No. They are heretics who claimed that title despite not following the teachings of either.

>>2193982
>most people dropped dead by 45
That`s true all the way to the late middle ages though, as long as you do not exclude those that died during infancy and early childhood.

>>2194005
There wasn't rationing because they let people die.

>>2195364

That's kind of the point. Average life expectancy is just that, average. People didn't drop dead at 40. They dropped dead at 2 or 3, in massive numbers. Once they got past the first years, they had relatively modern lifespans.

>>2194138
He means that rabbinic Judaism (what people call just "Judaism") and Christianity are both inheritors of a previous tradition, on an equal foot. Christianity is no more derivative of previous Hebraic traditions as rabbinic Judaism is. In fact possibly even less given how late rabbinic Judaism crystallized.

File: image.jpg (26KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x360px

>Romans were the REAL Barbarians

>>2193608
>RIGHTFUL (x) CLAY

unless it's Serbia related

>>2193679

>when some knob pipes up saying any year after 1970 was "during the height of the cold war"

why the fuck is this so commonplace, even in legitimate textbooks and shit this goes on

Go to /pol/ and click on any thread.

File: 1467707103602.jpg (100KB, 640x385px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 640x385px

>>2193485
>Operation Barbarossa could have succeeded if only the Germans did [x]
>The Wehrmacht was 'clean', blame the Waffen SS
>There is no distinction between ordinary Wehrmacht, normal German people, or Nazis
>The Tiger was the best tank of the war
>It took 6 Shermans to knock out 1 Tiger tank
>Muh KDR
>WWII Soviet tactics consisted mostly (if not entirely) of costly human/tank wave attacks
>The Soviets deliberately mowed down their own troops with machine guns a la Enemy at the Gates, on a regular basis
>Soviet soldiers were generally untrained, peasant conscripts that were only meritable through their sheer numbers
>The man with the rifle shoots, the man without the rifle follows
>Japanese soldiers took after the ''''honorabru'''' samurai of their 'heritage'
>The Japanese stood a chance against the Americans, but could have won the Pacific Theatre if they did [x]
It horrifies me that people still believe this bullshit

>>2195479
Not surprising at all, seeing how Reagan hyped the shit out of the commie threat

>>2195497
>The man with the rifle shoots, the man without the rifle follows
It fits WW1 Russia however.

The New Deal was a failure

>>2193485
>whitewashing of atrocities in indigenous societies, and the retrospective unification of native tribes
>american history, often they have no idea about the korean and opium wars in particular
>ww2 was "only hitler" "only germany" or "only against [whichever country is telling the story]"
>all world history ceases during the "dark age"
>gross moral revisionism where mean life expectancy doesn't account for infant mortality and diseases, then uses that to justify traditionally low ages of first birth/marriage
>japan vs US in ww2 without even mentioning the sino-japenese war or the role of the chinese
>the view that classical thinkers were all influential in their lifetimes esp. ancient greece
also
>>2195479

>>2193557
Well, Belarus kinda has history - Grand Duchy of Lithuania

the bible

>>2195557
it was

>>2195352
>being this retarded
Kys

>>2195404
This. Jews spreading their pseudo history that Christianity is a derivative of their 6th century babyloan cult of Baal has to stop.

>>2193679
The cold war starts and finishes in 1946-1949, everything after that is waiting for the USSR to collapse.

>>2194269
When I discevered what was behind that picture I changed perspective as well.

>>2193928
the ghost of Howard Zinn makes his ghastly presence known

>>2193598
they shot our kangz in the head

they shot them in the fucking head

>>2193485
>immigration killed Rome

>be mccarthy
>literally run the entire government because if they dont listen to you they're communists and will be shot dead on the spot
>guy stands up
>NO MISTER MCARTHY, YOU'RE A MEANIE POOPIE HEAD!
>Melt into a pile of goo and promptly die because some brave American stood up to your evil

>>2195720

thats why literally nobody saw the collapse of the soviet union happen and people right up into the 1980s were terrified that they'd be nuked into ashes right?

>>2193485
I have had people actually say to me we and the South Vietamese were not militarily defeated in Vietnam, and that had we gone a couple more years they would have been bled dry and forced to surrender.

>>2194245
I've seen so many god damn autist bring up this picture when they talk about Tibet.

>>2197405
Depends what you mean.

If they 'held out' using the exact same tactics it would be no different. But to imply that the US was putting anywhere near enough resources in for a decisive victory is wrong.

>>2193485

That history is teleological. I hate it when people argue X is on the wrong side of history or Y is on the right side of history.

>whigs GTFO

>>2193485
Belgium is a cohesive state with a historical mandate

>>2195952
But it was

>>2197467
No, it really wasn't.

>>2193608
>absolute goods and evils
>righteous genocide
Pick one faggot and don't be hypocrite

>>2197633
underrated post

>>2195952
>this one thing that agrees with my beliefs is what really killed Rome

>>2193485
>Slavery was an exclusively white-european endeavor

>>2193485
>Nazi death camps
>Hitler could have won WWII
>Wrong/right side of history
>Black Hebrews
>Khazar theory
>Pointing to one specific thing and saying that it was the reason Rome fell
>Slavery was the motivation for the Civil War
>Glorifying/demonizing the Crusades

>>2193557
Not as if people started suddenly living there in the 20th century

>>2193660
More like Jews are a post-Christian construct, the word or the concept didn't even exist during the times of Moses, Abraham or David.

>Poles charged german tank on horseback with lances and sabres

It triggers my inner pole

>>2194405
Bernie could only hope to be Mossadegh. Mossadegh was condemned as an Socialist for trying to reinstate the sovereignty of his nation and performing the most basic of reforms to turn Iran into somewhat less of a shithole/plaything for great powers. Bernie on the other hand really is a socialist.

>>2194297
This.

>>2194631
>first time in history
not even close
see: Mfecane, Qing China against the Dzhungars, Russia against Circassians, Maori against the Moriori etc.

>the civil war wasn't about slavery
>the "inevitability" of Hitler
>the Catholic Church held back society

The most common and egregious examples I can think of.

>>2199219
> the Catholic Church held back society
Just look at Italy, man.

>>2193741
How does /pol think that.

>>2193861
>sandpeople religion

Wow this thread is about you and you somehow made your way in here

>>2199321
/pol/ is /pol/

File: 1470017325613.jpg (105KB, 1024x612px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1024x612px

>>2193485
Holocaust denial

>>2199365
/pol/ doesnt talk about technology as a linear development

nobody does because the practical application is pointless

>>2199365
/pol/ makes fun of people who believe in linear progression though
where do you think the [current year] meme came from?
tumblr?

>>2195952
Wasn't so much immigration as it was conquest.

> 5000 years of Chinese history

File: 1480314120540.png (307KB, 600x530px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 600x530px

>>2199398
>5000 years of continuous chinese history

>>2199409
> China has always been unified

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBdk5hDadYE
DAS RITE

>>2197603
What was it, then?

>>2193485
>What are the worst examples of pseudohistory you've encountered?
the internet

>>2199396
>implying there's a difference

>>2193513
>6. Christianity comes from Judaism.
This is worse than Protestants saying Catholics aren't Christian just to make themselves feel special.

>>2199412
So did they suddenly become not Chinese?

>>2193784
>ywn be a little girl in 30s rural Romania getting turnt every day

>>2193608
>absolutes don't exist
>authoritarians/communist regimes are absolutely bad

hmm

>>2193913
a tree doesn't resist

The 6 gorillas

>>2193618
>Civilization knows and drinks mainly tea
>Civilization does not have a tradition of drinking alcohol

>Civilization does not have a tradition of drinking hot beverages
>Civilization develops a tradition of consuming light alcohol

strange...

>>2193485
Eurocentrism, especially prior to colonization

>>2200442
t. kang

>>2200498
no, afrocentrism is even dumber, but I see way less of it.

>>2197442
I'm with you there

File: 492-19453.jpg (13KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 320x240px

>>2193996
>TFW got unironically flustered over this

>>2194269
>>2195745
What's the story behind it?

>>2200275
>putting words in my mouth
Away, shoo you little troglodyte!

>>2197442
This, dumb progressives keep calling victory too early

>>2199385
>[current year]
That was a meme about how people often used it as a justification for continuous social equality in representation, like women presidents and various races getting representation. Which isn't the idea of linear progression as much as propagating their own ideals as the current one, it being dominant over all others.

>>2195497
>>WWII Soviet tactics consisted mostly (if not entirely) of costly human/tank wave attacks

well, what did it consist of then? Honestly curious.

It's /polhis/ but

>We're a nation of immigrants!
>1500 years ago our ancestors came here and usurped the then native population and estbalished Kingdoms ruled by their own cultures and customs.
>So yeah let in more muslims idiot.

>>2201738
You know what nation of immigrants means, right?
We immigrated here.
We established colonies.
Then we let German, French, British, Scottish, and Irish immigrants in.
Then we let more Europeans in.
We eventually let Arabs and Asians in.
Ect.
It's literally true, it's not like we are the fucking indigenous population of the US.

You can make arguments against immigration without being retarded you know?

>>2201755

First of all I'm not an american I'm British which is what my example was referring to.

Second of all, current immigration/migration in the western world is occuring in a fashion incomparable to the past. In the past there were waves of immigration, the people coming in had no choice but to become one with the nation they entered. So that in a few generations their descendants were essentially the same as the natives in terms of culture,

Now that doesn't happen, the migration is constant. They don't intergrate, they don't homogenise. They form their our communities where they don't speak the native language and in many instances don't respect the native law. It's not the same in the slightest.

>>2201755

Maybe he isn't American?
Besides, its not immigration if you supplant the preexisting order, its conquest.

>>2201805
>
Now that doesn't happen, the migration is constant. They don't intergrate, they don't homogenise. They form their our communities where they don't speak the native language and in many instances don't respect the native law. It's not the same in the slightest.

Are you fucking retarded? Please kill yourself or read ONE book


The same came with literally every group of Western hemisphere immigrants

>>2201581
IIRC the guy being executed had just killed everyone in an artillery base including the commanding officer's wife and children, because he would not reveal how to operate the artillery.
The guy who shot him was a goddam hero imo

>>2201581
The man getting shot was a Vietcong leader who had just carried out a mass execution of like 30+ people, including children, and was caught with his unit burying them in a mass grave.

The reporter who took the picture said he regretted the negative publicity it gave the war, and considered the officer doing the shooting a hero.

>>2193485
1. Greate conquests (Alexander, Arabs, Mongols).
1. Middle Ages in European countries (except Italy and Greece).
2. Japan before 19 century.
3. China before 18 century.
4. "Silk way" and other non-sea trade routes.

>>2202037
???????

>>2202037
1. 100 000 or bigger armies wasnt possible with ancient llevel of logistics.
1. Europe was settling from Greece and Italy during 16-17 centuries. Most of earlier stories are just national legends. Example: Sweden was empty in 1500. just hundreds of white colonists from Germany and thousands of native nomads ("Finns").
2. Japanese "emperors" of 18 century havent photo or portreits - no reason to read this "history".
3. Official point of view of Chinese historians - all ancient docunments were "lost" during Tsin deleting of archives of 1750-1790 and cultural revolution of 1950. Nice justification, but real China of 1800 was weak and shitty hole, so no.
4. I mean massive non-water hauling. Silk way is lie.

>>2193513
>6
But it does. Every western idea built itself on this when adopting Christianity.

>>2202179
Judaism is a 6th century invention.

>>2202128

>1. 100 000 or bigger armies wasnt possible with ancient llevel of logistics.

I don't know why you'd say that. If you can have a city of 100,000, you can have an army of 100,000. And there are numerous well documented cities of antiquity that large.

>Example: Sweden was empty in 1500. just hundreds of white colonists from Germany and thousands of native nomads

Then they raised an awfully large army for the Dano-Swedish war in the 1470s. How do you think they did it?

>2. Japanese "emperors" of 18 century havent photo or portreits - no reason to read this "history".

So? We don't have any photo or portraits of most historical kings.

>3. Official point of view of Chinese historians - all ancient docunments were "lost" during Tsin deleting of archives of 1750-1790 and cultural revolution of 1950. Nice justification, but real China of 1800 was weak and shitty hole, so no.

1) No, that is not the official pov of Chinese historians

2) Just because it was a shithole in 1800 speaks very little to before or after. If you plopped down anywhere in the world in 1,000 it's hard to think of a better palce to live than Sung Dynasty China.

>I mean massive non-water hauling. Silk way is lie.

And you're basing this on? Again, if massive movement of goods and people overland is impossible, how do you think they had inland cities?

>>2193485
Nationalist history

>durr Greek polises were one nation despite being constantly at war with one another every five seconds including before and after the Greco-Persian war
>hurr Germans were always a nation despite being a bunch of tribes of varying ethnicity that were just given a blanket term that Frankenstein's monster of a language definitely shows that they are the same
>herp derp Normans were French and sheit

>>2202128
okay, you are just retarded or trolling which is basically the same thing
filtered and reported

>>2202219
To be fair, by the time of William's conquest of England, the Normans were about as French as the Occitanians, Picards or Bretons were.

>>2202208
>1
If you have army of 100000, you need developed supply lines, logistical divisions and technologies to provide it. Typical army size of 1600 is 10000, huge ancient armies must be prooved with detailed description of logistics, but there no. 400 000 of Mongols or Arabs, fighting out of European infrastracture of 19 century, even in deserts - just myths.
>2
Because most of ancient kings are just artistic characters of historians-writers. Lord of the Rings is fair fantasy, "history of Norway of 10 century" - not.
>3
Try to provide any examples of degradation in modern (16-21 century) history. Even worst events like French or Russian revolutions hadnt stopped technical progress more than for 20-30 years.
Shitty China of 18 century means primeval China of 17 century. Opposite point of view must have strong prooves.
>4
All cities are near water. Even railways hadnt change proportions of hauling. Better swim 1000 miles than walk 10 miles.

File: glubokaya_operatsiya_1.jpg (218KB, 1298x867px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1298x867px

>>2201710
Not military historian, but I know one or two thing about Soviet doctrine. So if I'm incorrect, please, feel free to humiliate me.

The Soviet doctrine was the Deep Battle or Deep Operation. Roughly speaking, it was divided into two phase, the tactical deep battle, followed by the deep battle operation to fuck the strategic depth of the enemy.

They aim were to use a combined arms assault against the front line (preferably with a local superiority of everything, more shells, more bombs, more tanks, more planes, more canons, more rockets, more of everything, against a weak spot) to create multiple breach, to then send fresh and mobile reserves to pour through the gap, led by tanks (and hopefully motorised infantry when they had them, or they could just ride on the tanks) to inflict a strategic defeat by attacking the enemy logistic and command abilities (supply, airport, road junctions, HQ, communication lines, train depot,...) and thus provoke the collapse of the enemy front and it's strategic depth.

It's a bit like the Blitzkrieg in a sense.

The concept of depth is very important here. And is quite fitting to the colossal size of Russia.

Then there is the maskirovka, the art of camouflage, like hiding entire army from the German intelligence before Operation Uranus.

Operation Uranus is a good example of offensive deep battle. And the battle of Kursk a good example of defensive deep battle.

Here is an interesting conference on the Deep Operation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56N9iPjQDIU

Their military was still suffering horrifying loses. But they were getting better as the war was dragging on.

>>2202323
>Soviet local superiority of everything, more shells, more bombs, more tanks, more planes, more canons, more rockets, more of everything
Another example of pseudohistory.

>>2202335

Anon, I'm not him, but it's pretty well documented that you have a local superiority at the point of breach even if you don't have afrontwide superiority, that's not just something you apply to the Soviets. The French and English had more tanks and artillery than the Germans in 1940, but not at Sedan, where the breakthrough was.

>>2202335
yeah, for example even though russkies outnumbered the germans at kharkov 1943, the germans were sneaky and attacked at places where they heavily outnumbered the russians, basically the point of the so called "blitzkrieg"

>>2202335
Taking the battle of Kursk for example.

Roughly 1.900.000 Soviet against 900.000 Germans.
4900 tanks against 2700 tanks.
20000 canons against 10000.
2700 planes against 2000.

They have clear superiority on everything, except planes, and even then they had 35% more.

It's what I meant by "local" superiority. You bring all your big guns in one place, and smash their shit up. You don't need to have a superiority everywhere to have a local superiority. It's clear that they didn't had two times more of everything on the whole Eastern Front, that would have been a logistical and industrial nightmare.

>>2201710
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBHjmeXfyEs

>>2199321
Some people just want to bring up /pol/ at any opportunity possible

>>2193485
"t-they didn't develop as good as us because [insert excuse]"

>>2202354
Numbers of Soviet tanks are very unreliable. Head of initial research was killed by Stalin for falsifications.
Official Soviet propaganda stated than producing of tanks was huge during 1942-1944, while Ukraine - main source of steel - was occupied by Germany. It also stated that moved factories were working without roofs. Seems like production of North Korean mass mediaa.

>>2202442
So what should we conclude from that? Couldn't they have been able to put enough tanks in one area for their offensive to have more tanks than the Germans in a particular theatre of operation, or was it simply impossible due to industrial limitation and had thrown as many body as possible hoping that the Germans would get tired, bored or tun out of ammos? Or was the Soviet manpower also pseudo-history since Ukraine was also their most densely populated region?

My whole point isn't that they had a literal numerical advantage every single kilometres in the Eastern Front, but when they were putting into practice their Deep Operation, they would concentrate their forces so to achieve a "local" superiority, while not necessary having a strategic superiority everywhere.

>>2202537
Main principle of Soviet army was "more soldiers, less weapons". Most of battles and whole war was won by meatshield.

>>2193513
Can someone explain 1 and 5 to a pleb?

>>2202573
So the Soviet only had a 2:1 casualties against the Germans with almost no rifles, ammo, tanks, planes, artillery, and won at the end. That's not too bad considering there were facing modern weapons. What is even the point of having a modern army when pike square were good enough for them to win? And the Soviet probably exaggerated their losses for propaganda reason, and for the negotiation tables.

>>2202604
1. is WE WUZ KANGZ. Afro-American believe that all North African, in particular Egyptian were black, when in fact it is was not, all of this is explain by their inferiority complex and desperately want to appear civilized.

5. From what I can guess is that Jews intermarried so much with the local population, that Jews as an ethnic group can barely claim to be the descendant of the Israelite.

>>2194660
>family moves to georgia from ireland 1770 something
>treated as less than dirt
>make a farm in backcountry
>nation grows, backcountry no longer backcountry
>can't compete with plantation owners
>sherman burns it down anyway
>most of the family dead, remainder struggles to survive until gramps got accepted into west point
>60 years afterwards rich white girls have the gall to tell me my family was privileged because of slavery

>>2202633
But you didn't explain 1 to me, anon. Where does it say that they weren't black? Since when do we know this? Some book or something please

>>2202633
IICR, initial figure of Soviet losses was 15 millions, then 20. Current is 27, but some historians state its only military losses.
Statement about Soviet weapon supremacy was good for both German and Soviet governments.
German: WE LOST AGAINST BIGGER AND BETTER EQUIPPED ARMY.
Soviet: WE WERE GOOD MANAGERS, PREPARED ARMY, PRODUCING A LOT OF WEAPON, BUT STUPID SOLDIERS WERE DIYING AS LEMMINGS.

>>2200207

they never were homogenous in the first place

the myth of a single "Chinese" ethnicity is shit pushed by the CCP and westerners dont question it

>>2202573
WRONG. Very, very, very wrong.

Soviet manufacturing blew the absolute fuck out of German manufacturing. Soviets understood that the tanks they made were not going to live that long on the battlefield, so they ruthlessly streamlined their design for production efficiency, while the germans kept making overwrought trash in an inefficient manner. the T-34 was already superior to most german armor, and as time went on, the soviets were able to produce vast amounts.

The germans kept trying to fight wars of maneuver and breakthroughs well past the point of usefulness, but the soviets understood it was a war of attrition and logistics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6xLMUifbxQ approx 28 minutes in

>>2202683
Playing with number is just jewing the Germans in being ashamed for being horrible nazi. Remember that they falsified a good number of pictures of the Holocaust, they might as well been doing the same with their own losses.

Still 27 millions is good if only a half of your army is armed with a rifle with a bayonet and an ammo clip. You would have expected that their casualty would have been 100:1.

>>2202664
Sorry I've got no idea, you have to look for yourself.

File: reichsleiter-alfred-rosenberg.jpg (200KB, 500x652px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 500x652px

>all civilized races were descendants of the Nordic Europeans
>Nordic Europeans were the first humans
>Nordics Europeans came from the sunken city of FUCKIN ATLANTIS

Dude was essentially the Nazi version of WE WUZ KANGZ

>in (insert war here), (insert aristocracy fighting for power and wealth here) were the good guys! (insert opposing aristocracy fighting for power and wealth here) were the bad guys!

>>2198032
>Slavery was the motivation for the Civil War
But it was, just not in the way it's usually presented.

>>2202888
*tips*

>>2202888
very edgy, lad

>>2200006
A myriad of issues across hundreds of years.

But specifically the problem with the great migrators isnt something that can be dumbed down to muh immigration, whether good or bad.

Rome was already in a fragile state when the Huns started pushing the various tribes west. Most of them were not welcomed into the Empire, but by that point Rome had little power to stop them.

Some were accepted, namely the Goths, because Rome needed men to fill their legions. Decades of civil wars had made enlisting a shit prospect to the average citizen and as such recruits needed to be found elsewhere.

And things were working out well until Honorius and the Senate decided to murder the Gothic women and children living in Illyria, causing a massive revolt within the army. And instead of defusing the situation when Alaric came to the table, Honorius decided to insult him. Thus Rome gets sacked and loses most of its fighting force.

Majorian actually managed to bring the Suebians into the mix when he retook Spain and planned to utilize them as a fighting force before he was murdered.

In any case, the issue is far more complex than just "immigration killed Rome" and anybody attempting to simplify it that way has an agenda and/or is woefully ignorant of the subject.

>>2194002
>Roberto d'Aubisson
He was never the man in power, he just funded a political party and apparently controlled a (few) death squad(s).

>in [insert war here], the common man was just a tool of the aristocracy and didn't have any independent thought or agency in the war!

>>2193485

White Man's historical revisionism

That America is good.

>>2193870
People have been wrong about other, more important things for longer periods of time.

>>2194116
Chomsky is right in just about every topic in which you disagree with him, /pol/.

>>2203237
t. leftypol

>>2193485
Polish schoolbooks.

>>2203243
Of course I'm leftist from your perspective, it'd be hard to not be to the left of you even if I was a right winger if we disagreed in at least one issue. If you're using the /pol/ part as the insult, at least you're somewhat self aware.

Chomsky just triggers you because he questions the idea of American exceptionalism and that America is the "good guy".

>>2203331
isn't chompsky the same guy who said that pol pot was just a western invention

>>2200207
It's the same as if Napoleon had succeeded in conquering all of Europe and in year 4000 we were talking about 5000 years of continuous of French history (starting with Classical Athens).

>>2203358
That's not what he said.

>>2203358
I don't think so, but even if he said something among those lines, I'd bet all nuance has been stripped away in an effort to make him seem ridiculous.

He is a fierce opponent of American interventionism, though, so he may have said that America created Pol Pot (i.e., created the state of affairs that gave rise to him), and that would be correct. Just like how America created ISIS in more recent history.

>>2203364
More like 5000 years of continuous european history.
People in guangzhou being different from those in beijing doesn't mean you can't call them chinese. Even more when they themselves accept that denomination.

>>2202321
>>2202128
>>2202037
I must thank this retard for making my night.

>>2203437
>>2202256
You guys have never seen Fomenkoism before?

>>2203207
>being too passive-aggressive to even quote my post
wew lad

File: 474243546.jpg (127KB, 509x339px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 509x339px

>wew lad

>>2203431
You missed my point, but I guess I could have elaborated more.

The point is that China is a term coined by outsiders to refer to a group of people as a single thing. Kind of like how some neighbors to the Europeans around the Mediterranean took to calling all Europeans "Franks".

If China wasn't unified, we would be talking about different groups of people who had a common heritage dating back to the Xia/Shang/Zhou just like how we think of Europeans having a common heritage dating back to the Greeks, except they'd be called Franks/French.

>>2203442
I don't think I'd ever seen that term, but I had heard about the concept before. It's still funny to see that people actually believe such stuff, though.

>>2202128
>1. 100 000 or bigger armies wasnt possible with ancient llevel of logistics.

[citation needed]

Depends what you mean by armies, but the Roman military was indisputably greater than 100 000 effectives for almost all the Imperial period. Did they fight as one cohesive blob? No. But the various constituent parts could and did undertake combined arms operations with a firm logistical backing.

The problem wasn't necessarily that logistics were harder than say 18th century Europe, just that the efficiency of production was much lower.

>>2193485
this entire board

>>2203179
Slavery was one factor among many that led to the Civil War

>>2203723
In the same way that pearl harbor was just one factor among many that lead to America joining WW2.

>>2203723
It was the main factor, because the reason the confederate states seceded was a fundamental opposition to the perceived direction that the American economy would take, a topic in which, for the confederates, slavery was basically the most important factor.

So sure, it's not "backwards southerners want to keep oppressing negr- I mean, African Americans - while enlightened northerners want to emancipate them" like it's usually made out to be, but to say that the American Civil War wasn't about slavery is just delusional.

>>2203237

>the khmer rouge aren't killing tons of people guys, trust me, it's american propaganda!

>>2203777
You're the second person to parrot this, yet it doesn't seem like something Chomsky would say. Care to point out when and where he supposedly said this?

File: COzGK1VUsAAOe50.png (346KB, 600x669px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 600x669px

>>2201805
>things were different in the past, the exact time period I live in is when these problems actually matter

Children like you need to fuck off to another board.

>>2203791

>I can't make a google search

Try here
http://jim.com/chomsdis.htm

>>2193982
Communist regimes did kill people you massive idiot

>>2193485
The first thing that comes to mind is all of the occult speculation involving the Third Reich. The Hollow Earth stuff, the concave sky stuff, the Tibetan monks in Berlin during the war, all of that kind of stuff. It's just really fun to read about, and so it's taken on a life of it's own. The Spear of Destiny and Morning of the Magicians are probably the two main primary sources, and now a lot it is "common knowledge" with people.

>>2203841
>I can't make a google search
More like "I don't see a reason to make the legwork for you."

The "rebuttals" offered by that page are nothing short of laughable for the most part, but I admit that Chomsky's article is clearly biased towards skepticism of the Khmer Rouge's atrocities. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in that, at the time, the full extent of the atrocities may no have been widely known and/or there was a reason to be skeptical of their reports. I wish someone would ask him about this nowadays, to see how his opinion has changed (if at all).

That said, you are being disingenuous with your post here >>2203777, as he doesn't make any positive claims like you imply he does. Rather, he argues in favor of skepticism for anything that goes published on the topic if it is favorable to the US (or unfavorable to its enemies) and hammers the fact that America is ultimately responsible for whatever has happened and is happening anyways, which is in line with what I expected from him.

>>2203921

Dude, I get it, you're a smart guy.
Do you know what smart guys do when they look at evidence of something they don't like being true? They don't say "IDGAF" like stupid people, they simply raise the bar for convincing evidence to levels that couldn't possibly be satisfied, and they justify this through elaborate reasoning.
But this doesn't make you become smarter or more knowledgeable, in fact, it makes you a worse person.

>>2193485
. I studied in china for 6 years. What pissed me off to no end was the closed mindedness of the chinese and their unwillingness to admit that they're culture had influences from other cultures. Their mindset is so self centered they refuse to accept new information.

I was reading a 3000 year old text on the Yellow Emperor and was able to discern some new information from it. The text stated that Huangdi was the first ruler from the people, after the previous rulers lost their right to rule and the tribes which they lorded over began to clash. And thus Huangdi after his conquests was given the title Yellow Emperor because he himself was of yellow complexion coming from a lower caste of the earth and not from the ruling class whose complexion is not mentioned but heavily implied to be not yellow. My professor looked at me, said ok and locked the text away. Because it might cause trouble.

Another incident I had was when I was reading the statements of a court clerk during Emperor Qin's reign who was executed after he declared that no man can erase 10,000 years of history. After the Emperor declared the burning of books and burying of scholars. Which also resulted in the erasure of many eons of chinese history we dont know about. I truly and genuinely believe that china is much older than we think. But chinese people are so dead set on the 5000 year old version they've been sold they refuse to accept any new info.

>>2203926
I'm not raising the bar for anything, you were spreading misinformation from the start.

I don't agree with Chomsky on everything. I applaud his stern and well deserved criticism of the US, especially after the fall of the communist block, but I do realize he's far too lenient on the Soviet/communist side of the Cold War formula. However, since "being skeptical of reported atrocities of the Khmer Rouge back in the 70s" and "ultimately blaming the US for the situation in Cambodia" isn't as controversial or eye-catching as "denying Khmer Rouge atrocities", you don't go with that.

>>2203437
Your problem is your belive than state historiography is pure scientific. But its full of propoganda.
Current days: Armenian historians state it was genocide, Turkish historians state it wasnt. Opposite points of view are under hard pressure in this countries. But moderns censorship is much lighter than in absolute monarchies.
Norway became independent in 19 century. What the purpose was assigned to historians? WE WUZ GREAT FOREVER. All 19 century they were "detecting" chronicles about Vikings and other "prooves" of ancient Norway.
Typical attributes of falsification are catastrophes before modern times. There are real documents that country had about 1 million population in X year. How to proove it had a hundred years of history before? Terrible war, hunger, epidemic, genocide. We were developed and had fucken 10 millions in (X-100) year, but failed due to this event. Thats why most of European countries had catastrophes in 15-17 centuries - before first real documents.
>>2203564
Romans had very complicated logistics - roads, stations, storages, camps. Soldiers were hard working in construction. This system was partly used by Austria (Croatians) and Russia (Cossacks) and has nothing common with legends about easy running and fighting of ancient crowds.

>>2203947
Can you tell me anything about the Shanhaijing, chinese-studying anon?

It just seems so discordant to any other classical Chinese work from that era. Are there any older geographies you encountered during your stay?

>>2203977

And there you go again.

>>2203800

Not an argument

>poland spent its history as a helpless battleground trampled by invaders from east and west
>they a victim dindu nothin

They spent the bulk of their history until their sorry state collapsed at the end of the 18th century being assholes and pushing most of eastern Europe around more than Russia ever did.

>>2202023
>>2201990
thanks

>>2202708


>Still 27 millions is good if only a half of your army is armed with a rifle with a bayonet and an ammo clip. You would have expected that their casualty would have been 100:1.


https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_UgkaVaFacSTS1XWjR2VW9xT0E/edit?pli=1


27 million is a total of Soviet population loss from June 22nd 1941 until the start of 1946, and includes things like

>Civilian casualties from Germans
>Emigration
>Deaths due to non-war related causes
>People killed by the Soviet government


The total number of military dead is about 7.3 million in direct combat, and another 3-4 million captured by the Germans and dying in PoW/concentration camps.

>>2199440
I'm thoroughly convinced that the entire movement is just a troll by some bored projects kids.

>>2193485
>you died at age 30 because average is 30 lmoa
Irl age 30 was prime baby-making time. And, if you mapped pre-industrial life expectancy, it would be bimodal, with modes appearing right around zero, and mid-fifty, or so.

the only revisionist that's actually annoyed me is that people seem to have successfully rewritten history to pretend that black people invented techno in detroit in 1988, redefining things like YMO and kraftwerk as "influences of techno", even though they have songs literally called "technopolis" and "techno pop" and shit that pre-date 1988 by years.

most revisionism doesn't bother me that much, but this pisses me off, I think largely because YMO and kraftwerk are magnificent and detroit techno/house is drivel.

>>2203878
I never said they didn't.

File: 1479236581727.png (1MB, 788x872px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 788x872px

>>2202321
>All cities are near water.

>>2203800
WASPs got BTFO though. You can find remnants of their culture in New England but other than that America is a mongrelized mix of continenals with a generic and fading culture and no unified ethnic identity. The damage was somewhat limited because Anglos and Germans/Scandis/etc. are cousins and the legal framework is still based on English law but the fact remains that what the writers were talking about came to pass.

That same dilution process happening with stock removed from western Europe is going to mean the end of western civilization.

>>2203442
>For the New Chronologists, peoples such as the Ukrainians, Belarusians, Mongols, and others who assert their national independence from Russia, are suffering from a historical delusion
at last, I truly see

>>2199219
>the civil war

I dislike it when people are this vague especially in situations like this where there is no context.

>>2204118
Well, yeah, there's no reason to abide by your false accusations.

>>2205552
Welcome to Americanization, where we must assume that when left unspecified, we're talking about the US.

>>2205552
America invented the civil war

>>2205699
No, we invented the AR platform.

>>2205367
America lost its preponderance of WASP culture a while ago but you're deluded if you think there was ever a time when everyone was calm and wasn't desperately pivoting to new societal issues about which to cry doomsday. Framing it as "mongrelization" and "decline" derails the discussion from the onset since it closes off any question of a positive departure from present norms and instead implies that things were necessarily "better" and "purer" in the past, and precludes any pragmatic discussion as to what we see in the real world.

Literally every fucking society ever has been infested with LARPers who retardedly yell "WE NEED TO GO BACK" because of their inherent dissatisfaction with current events and the misplaced belief that people in the past must have been superior to us in some way. It's the same psychological vein that makes people romanticize the idea of traveling back to live in Medieval Europe or Ancient Sumeria even though on a factual level we all know we would prefer living in the present.

>>2198152
>bernie is really a socialist

not really

he wants to implement socialist ideas (healthcare) that have proven successful in Europe

he does not advocate for the workers owning the means of production, nor armed revolution

>>2205834
Some socialists are reformists rather than revolutionaries.

>>2205912
The problem is when retards remove the nuance of whatever opinions they disagree with.

It's not a problem to call Bernie "socialist" if you mean that he wants to focus on social programs and move the US closer to where Europe stands politically, but it certainly is a problem if you mean he's "literally Stalin/Mao".

>>2193485
99.8% of this shieldmaiden bullshit.

It's we wuz kangs except more passive aggressive and embarrassing.

>>2197458
Lmao
t. Farage

>>2193485
>So he we have this recorded massacre of (huge number of (polytheistic religion people) by Muslim conquerors...
>...and then a short time later everyone still living in the area converted to Islam entirely of their own free will. :^)

>>2193513
1. Agree
2.Somewhat agree
3.Agree
4.Agree
5.Disagree. Jews are have substantial levantine ancestry, and the theory they have italian convert ancestry still would mean genetically they're roughly 50% levantine. But we don't know whether the mtdna lineages in jews are neolithic Mediterranean or levantine. The levant was also more genetically similar to europe prior to the islamic invasion. http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316
6. Disagree, this guy said it best >>2195043

File: 1476691913387.jpg (474KB, 661x716px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 661x716px

>>2195952

>>2197816

>>2205741
People don't actually want to go back to the past, they want the white washed Hollywood video game experience of "the past" where you don't have to shit in a bucket and your family isn't dying from plague.

>>2193670
Honestly though, who could say that the height of the Cold War wasn't the Cuban Missile Crisis?

>>2206550
>http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316
That's arguing that due to the introduction of Islam to the region, the Levantine admixture changed via marriage with people in different regions, and cited the Christians and Druze as the archetypal Levantines. However, the same argument could be made for the Crusades or Byzantine rule, they could have had admixture with converts, Crusaders, etc., looking different from the "original" Levantines.

tl;dr we wuz europeans nigga

>>2207060
but Hollywood always portrays the middle ages as being way grimmer than it was.

>>2202703
>The germans kept trying to fight wars of maneuver and breakthroughs well past the point of usefulness, but the soviets understood it was a war of attrition and logistics.
You should post Dr. Citino's other lectures(besides you Kursk one you just posted, yes I know you're talking about the Parshall part) if you're going to make that statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNDhswF1GKk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SdO-btKuds

Good stuff over all.

>>2195497
>>Japanese soldiers took after the ''''honorabru'''' samurai of their 'heritage'
They literally did though.

>>2193557
I hope you killed yourself you spastic cunt

>>2201805
Hasn't Britain let less refugees in than Canada and the US?

>>2194327

Hold the fuck on skippy.

Your second to last paragraph is only relevant if we assume everything in the NT isn't forged/derivatives of earlier works compiled in the NT. Which, since we already know is the case, you're fucking wrong. But if, let's say, everything was true; the parable about the fig tree alone refutes your argument.

Second, your final paragraph is only relevant after the first council was convened to decide what was relevant and what wasn't, circa 150~ AD.

>>2202703
>Soviet manufacturing
You mean US and UK manufacturing?

>>2202703
>Also muh t34
>Muh sloped armor
Fuck off back to videogames faggots, t34s used to get their cramped crew ripped apart by spalling on shots that never even went through, it was so confined in them, and not to mention the terrible quality welds with huge gaps made by uneducated retarded farmers 25 minutes before

>>2203237
Go suck a shitskin dick you apologist faggot
If there's one thing I hate more than retarded right wing cunts it's deluded smug left wing cunts

>>2204665
>Techno
>Invented in the US
Dont you spastics call like 3 - 4 genres of music just EDM? Fuck EDM

>>2205741
Of course people always look for some doom on the horizon. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're only chasing shadows.

>>2194703
>Children on reddit seriously believe this conspiracy.

Do you also believe in ancient aliens? How do you know if all the records were destroyed by the MIB?

>>2193513
I never got the "black legend is wrong," people. Are you saying that the Spanish weren't total dicks? I know history isn't about judging people but the historical record is filled with exampled of them acting in a way that is pretty awful, even if it wasn't terribly worse than what was normal back then.

>>2208309
That's not an argument.

>>2193583
They were in missile systems, mechanical engineering, and so forth. However, not in nuclear development, cryptography, early computing, and certainly not military strategy.