>tfw the enlightenment destroyed European civilization

>>3386104

Was the enlightenment even a real thing? Yeah, it was a movement in literature but did it have ANY real-world impact? Probably not.

>>3386120
>>3386104
Not sure if /pol/, trolling, or both

>>3386104
It actually developed European civilization beyond all others.

File: IMG_1162.png (128KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 400x400px

>>3386139

Europe has fallen so many times - it always returns tho. Bronze Age Collapse, Persian Wars, Fall of Rome, Barbarian Invasions, Arab/Moor invasions, Viking Invasions, Ottoman invasions, Black Death, Religious Wars, Colonial Wars, World Wars, Cold Wars (we're in Cold War II now) modern terrorism and growing civil unrest. Bewildering.

>>3386146
>every arguments I don't like are either leddit, pol, leftypol, sjw, or fedora

File: quote-ideas-have-consequences-richard-m-weaver-133-69-84.jpg (36KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 850x400px

>>3386120
And you don't think real world movements are influenced by literature?

Not only that, it destroyed all other civilizations by spreading the liberal and ultimately Marxist ideology to other civilizations.

RIP Confucian civ

>>3386104

The Enlightenment is the only thing that makes European civilization worthwhile. Without it you may as well be Arabs.

>>3386180
>The Enlightenment is the only thing that makes European civilization worthwhile.

Is this what spending too much time on reddit does to your brain?

>>3386194
*tips pepemaga hat*

>>3386194
>hurr durr reddit XD

>>3386194
fuck off to the levant if you want to live in the modern equivalent to dark ages europe.

>>3386198
>>3386204
Haha, everyone who thinks that pre-Enlightenment European culture is worth preserving is either a kekistani MAGApede or wants to live in the Middle East, am I right?

>>3386223
lmao just stfu you redditor cuck

>>3386180
Yeah, fuck those stupid Ancient Greek, medieval Christian and Renaissance thinkers, they were all barbaric savages, unlike us, enlightened liberals.

>>3386239
>medival Christians
>thinkers
lol

>>3386239
>Ancient Greek
>bunch of pedo faggots

>christians
>thinking

hAhaAA kys right now mah dude

>>3386204
>le Dark Ages
When will this meme die?

File: giphy[1].gif (2MB, 660x512px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 660x512px

>>3386120

>>3386146
wtf I hate America now

File: William_of_Ockham.png (203KB, 271x361px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 271x361px

>>3386243
*cough*

>>3386253
>centuries of cultural oppression and genocide
>I-IT'S JUST A MEME GUYS

>>3386253
You can thank the fedora atheist like Tyson and Dawkins for perpetuating it

>>3386260
Aquinas said nothing of value

>>3386223
pretty much
pre-enlightenment Europe was your average feudal shithole

File: IMG_3893.png (158KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1024x683px

>>3386104
>daily reminder that anyone who opposes modernity is either a naive, idealistic dreamer or a beta cuck demanding the return of unearned social privilege

>>3386104
*created

>>3386279
That's not even Aquinas

When conservatives praise Euro supremacy but reject all modernity, what exactly are they praising? How is medieval Europe better than, say, Japan or Persia, etc?

>>3386393
In their minds it was better because certain light skinned men had it really easy, and if they close their eyes they can imagine themselves, a lily skinned beta cuck with no talents or ambition to speak of, as having access to power, prestige, and a qt wife.

In other words, they are living embodiments of why we 'shouldn't' go back.

File: global-temp-and-co2-1880-2009.gif (49KB, 800x606px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 800x606px

>>3386297

>>3386297
>>NOW THEY EARN 2.1 DOLLARS PER DAY INSTEAD OF 2.0 ISN'T THAT GRAET GOYS

>>3386393
>what exactly are they praising?
Just the previous couple of millennia of history.
Nothing big, anon.

>>3386424

Going from 2.0 dollars to 2.1 would be 5% increase in income, so actually yes.

>>3386433
wow thank you based neoliberalist countries like china and india

>>3386412
Can smell the curry from here.

File: slide_410868_5171972_free.jpg (1MB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x800px

>>3386297
indeed, just look at all the wealth modernity had brought us

>>3386120
>t. john green

>>3386120
This one got me good.

>>3386297
Sure, there's a lower PERCENTAGE that are dirt poor, but still a much higher raw number. How is that better exactly? The net suffering is way way higher. But there's more white leftists sipping on tea and getting foot massages from vietnamese women, so it's an improvement.

>>3386431
but the studying of history, caring about it and learning from it overall reached an entirely new level during the enlightenment era

You're just spouting /pol/ memes at this point

>>3386449
you're cherrypicking. Most of the world lives much much more comfortably, is much more educated and lives longer than let's say a hundred years ago

>>3386473
Yes, that's why literally all of the negative memes about the middle ages were invented during the enlightenment era, they just wanted to study and care previous history.

>>3386431
>Just the previous couple of millennia of history.

Everywhere has history.

>>3386479
>>3386472

>>3386472
a much higher raw number because there are dozens of times more people on this planet than ever before, you idiot

What kind of a world do you people exactly aspire for? I understand opposing materialism but you just seem to want to replace it with an abstract sense of religious indoctrination and belief in something that has never existed outside of your heads. You also overly romanticize the past world all the time and it is more than clear that most of you have never actually studied history and major in completely different subjects

>>3386481

This but unironically. Learning about history gave them ideas about what to emulate and what to avoid. Part of the broader idea that things can be made better than they are, which is modernity is all about and which is the entire reason western civilization has so utterly dominated the world.

>>3386481
Most of the negative memes about middle ages are true.
When we say that medieval people knew that the earth was round, it means that a few scholars who studied Greek philosophers were aware of that.
99% of population, including most nobles, thought that earth was flat

File: 200_s.gif (41KB, 418x200px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 418x200px

>>3386536

>>3386481
nobody who actually studies history thinks of the medieval age as a "dark era" but neither do people who have seriously studied history have such a ridiculously naive sense of the past as /pol/tards do.

The modern world has many many problems but this doesn't mean the human race hasn't managed to tackle many more problems during the past 600 or so years. Even if new problems surface, they will be eventually dealt with but the answer to those problems isn't having a small class of elites handling everything while the others live a more or less shitty life and have been indoctrinated to shit by a strong belief in something otherworldy.

It's a sad case of affairs that the belief in God has been replaced by senseless materialism and degeneracy but at this point there is no going back and there really is no reason to either. What exactly are you aspiring for?

>>3386517
Yes, that is because of the population increase. That was my point, you sperglord.
Jesus pal, calm down. You're really making a lot of assumptions considering what I said. How did you deduce my religious beliefs, political persuasion, and education all at once, via one post on 4chan?
All I'm saying is that those who praise the great improvements of modernity in contrast to the past are somewhat disingenuous when they fail to mention the fact that their increase of the population has multiplied the suffering of third-world nations by an insane degree. The average chink was always pretty horribly poor, but atleast before he was just living on a farm in his mudhut, growing rice and fucking his wife. Now, he, his wife, and his kids are all packed into concrete antfarms, cities filled with noxious gas, their traditions practically destroyed, to work all day in horrible conditions for shit pay, so you can shitpost on a cambodian sewing forum.

>>3386547
>It's a sad case of affairs that delusion has been replaced by realism and personal freedom

>>3386558
Are you saying those are also delusions?

>>3386558
Do you believe in objective morality?
If not, do you believe that some things can be 'right' or 'wrong'?
If so, what determines why those things are 'right' or 'wrong'?

>>3386554
>they fail to mention the fact that their increase of the population has multiplied the suffering of third-world nations by an insane degree.
Not true. Somalia and North Korea are pretty good representation of your average feudal lifestyle. Any country that is doing better tham them is an improvement over medieval standards

File: blackguywithquestionmarksmeme.png (298KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 600x512px

>>3386573
>Somalia and North Korea are pretty good representation of your average feudal lifestyle

>>3386579
Pretty sure they'd kill you if you believe in some kind of higher power and stopped worshiping fat Kimmy in NK

>>3386297
>poverty is measured in money
You fucking idiot, people could live off of what they produced before modernity
Do you not understand what that means? It means GROWING YOUR OWN FOOD AND LIVING OFF OF THAT
Poverty only begun to become an issue with the rise of novel goods. Now people are wasting money on useless china, which means they have to sell more food, or land, or whatever.
You're so stuck in capitalism that you can't imagine economy before it.

>>3386579
The people in those countries havea similar quality of life as medieval peasants.

>>3386150
Whats the next stage? Islamic domination? Nationalism strikes again? Pan Europa? China conquers all? Also why i am getting chinese adds?

>>3386590
NOT TO MENTION THAT MODERNITY TURNS ONCE FERTILE LANDS INTO EITHER A TRASH DUMP, A DESPOILED DESERT, OR ONLY AFFORDABLE TO THE EXTREMELY RICH. EVEN IF THE PEOPLE TRYING TO BUY THE LAND CAN AFFORD TO GO INTO EXTREME DEBT, THEY STILL CANNOT LIVE OFF OF THEIR OWN FOOD BECAUSE THEY THINK IT IS BETTER TO SELL TO GET OUT OF DEBT FASTER
WHY CAN'T YOU STUPID /POL/TARDS UNDERSTAND ECONOMICS

The most ironic of all of this is that people were more "free" in those "dark" medieval times.
More community and free market based.

>>3386594
Quality of life =/= Similarity of lifestyle. Get your argument straight nigger.

>>3386564
people who bitch about materialism are just mad that their sheelpe dont buy their religious bullshit like they used to

>>3386572
>If so, what determines why those things are 'right' or 'wrong'?
certanly not the sky wizard who will torture you forever if you work on saturday

>>3386609
Okay, if not, then what? I'm not even suggesting it's that. What makes something right or wrong? I mean, you seem to believe in such a thing. Is it just what makes you happy vs what makes you angry?

>>3386517
>hahaha there is no le god becuz reddit sed it BUY MORE GADGETS!
'studying' history is for idiots, by the way. It's a complete ideology for children, aimed at narrating the past into a clear message of progress
>>3386536
The Earth is flat.

>>3386590
>Do you not understand what that means? It means GROWING YOUR OWN FOOD AND LIVING OFF OF THAT
And dying when you have famine. Or when you get an easily curable sickness. Or when your neighbour kills you, takes your stuff and rapes your wife.
Sounds like paradise

>>3386547
>there is no reason to
>fucking salvation isn't a reason, BUY MORE SHIT GO INTO MORE DEBT

>>3386615
Every successful society must obey certain rules, in order to function.
Will it be a secular or religious community you are always gonna have some universal laws, like "thou shalt not steal"

>>3386618
haha everything before le CURRENT YEAR was le DISEASE FUCKRAPE MURDERKILL
You need to go back. 10th grade propaganda-education isn't 'studying history'.
Being a 1st year shit in a 'history' major isn't studying history.
You children learn what is popular.

>>3386618
That's not how a community works.Public hanging and executions where there for a fucking reason, you maroon.

>>3386630
>universal laws
Fuck off back to r*ddit you functionalist retard

>>3386630
Okay, but why is functioning a good thing?

>>3386622
way to miss the fucking point. Salvation in your own mind through philosophy and psychology can be achieved without a belief to a non-existant higher power.

The options we have at hand are not just moralism or degenerate materialism but there are way more choices to pick from

>>3386558
realism and personal freedom are not synonyms to materialism, anon. The world is not black and white and it's more than obvious that replacing the void left by nihilism cannot be filled by materialism

>>3386652
>Salvation in your own mind through philosophy and psychology can be achieved without a belief to a non-existant higher power.
That's not salvation you stupid fucking atheist.
>non-existent
Wrong.

>>3386637
not functioning leads to chaos, death and misery. Most people agree that this is not something that is desired, thus they see a functional society as a good thing
Hobbes figured that out like 400 years ago

>>3386616
reddit does not say there is no god. Reddit is filled with normies who believe in mysticism and judge the world through a black and white moral system, much like most /pol/ dwellers

>'studying' history is for idiots, by the way. It's a complete ideology for children, aimed at narrating the past into a clear message of progress
if you are not willing to actually study history, be it on your spare time or in a university/college, you should just keep your mouth shut about the entire subject instead of making bold and stupid claims

I know you're trolling so I don't even know why I bothered to answer

>>3386652
The world is not black and white, but living in a modern developed country is inheritly better than in a feudal society.
That's why we have so many illegal immigrants in Europe and USA

>>3386662
Why is chaos death and misery bad though?

>>3386665
Oh look, more reddit claims
>morality exists becuz i sed so
proof
>history is good becuz /pol/ sed im le smartie not biased person le science xD
Again, 10th grade propaganda-education is not 'studying' history.
>anybody who disagrees with me is le troll REEEEEE NOBODY CAN DISAGREE WIT HME IM FUCKING RIGHT WTF FUCKING NORMIES DISAGREEING WIT HME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>3386662
>most people
Not an argument, retard.

>>3386675
Wrong.

>>3386631
Europe has never known such a long period of peace like now. And even in 1918, over 50 million people died on influenca.
We came pretty far since then

File: this fucking mom.png (148KB, 330x256px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 330x256px

>>3386656
>boohooo muh feelings
summing up your counter-argumets here

Every time people here debate about religion they keep on giving half-rational evidence up until they get totally proven wrong by both philosophical and scientific theories that are based on rationalism. After that they go full on damage control mode and start claiming that you can't explain belief with rationalism, despite trying to do it themselves up until they start losing the argument

I miss /his/ before the /pol/ invasion happened.

>>3386677
Good and bad are subjective terms. Since most people don't like dying and living in misery, they see those things as bad

>>3386685
>Peace
Europeans are being genetically erased from existence

>>3386685
>liberals believe this
>>3386687
>arguments are good because reddit sed it
>rationality is good becuz abloobloo muh fweewings u HAVE 2 FOLLOW RULZ
>misusing rationalism
>sam hyde
Oh, so you're the actual troll here; or just fucking 14.

>>3386675
You do know that I was defending the modern world, right? I was just saying materialism has gotten way out of hand and has to be dealt with if we are to salvage something out of the western civilization

People are more wealthy, healthy and more educated than ever before in human history but this doesn't mean we aren't making major major mistakes and it will eventually lead into a blood bath

>>3386701
European is not a genetic term

File: 9e9a7rfy.png (469KB, 628x426px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 628x426px

>>3386702
you're just shit posting at this point

>>3386707
Sure, materialism might be a problem, but it's not like it is a threat to our civilization
Climate change, globalization and digitalization are all far more serious challenges that we are facing nowadays

>>3386691
So stop calling it good and bad, and start calling it 'beneficial to me' and 'not beneficial to me'.

File: the hard times.gif (489KB, 497x373px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 497x373px

>>3386689
we're still here but we can't be bothered to argue with these mouth breathers all the fucking time because they can never admit of being wrong. We have threads like this every other day and they get flooded by /pol/acks with babby tier levels of historical and philosophical knowledge every. single. time. They're also extremely loud about their opinions

>>3386701
Wrong.

>>3386713
It's not shit posting, it's my established rhetoric, which at this point the mods simply ignore and maybe I'll get a day ban from /his/ or /lit/ if it makes them actually work instead of eat hot pockets and masturbate to Prisma Illya.
The purpose of this rhetoric is to let the other see their argument in the stupidest and most exaggerated tone that I can come up with at that moment. I've been doing this for about four years now, and it seems to work on some. My task is a Socratic task.

>>3386727
>and start calling it 'beneficial to me' and 'not beneficial to me'.
that's the definition of good and bad

>>3386723
yes but all of those are fueled by materialism.

I wouldn't say digitalization is a problem though. I'm optimistic about the future, despite of this all

>>3386736
I think 4chan is just not a really good format for historical discussion, since a /pol/ shitposter has the same level of visibility as an history professor

>>3386393

Conservatives have these weird idea that technological progress is good, but social change is bad. If they were smart, they would realize that technological progress is the most influential vector for social change. If you want to return to the values of the past, then you must bring back the technology of past.

>>3386723

Global warming is the only thing in that list which is an actual threat. Complaining about globalism is basically just "I hate brown people but I don't want to admit it."

>>3386745
In itself, it is not a problem, but it will lead to many problems. It will lead to a situation where many people will become jobless, since computers or robots can do their job cheaper. This will certanly lead to some tensions in society

>>3386759
Literally all the problems we have to day (rise of alt-right, refugee crisis, trade wars) are due to globalism.
Sure, it has many benefits, but also many problems that need to be adressed

>>3386741
>The purpose of this rhetoric is to let the other see their argument in the stupidest and most exaggerated tone that I can come up with at that moment.
That might be but it doesn't suit you well because you've completely missed the points a multiple times and are prone to black and white thinking. You want to see me as some kind of an edgy millenial atheist whereas I actually oppose most of the modern day trends. This is not saying that I believe in out-dated concepts of spirituality and see the past through an extremely romanticized point of view fueled by hatred of modern day society.

>My task is a Socratic task
your task is more egoistic than anything

>>3386104

>tfw Europe only conquered the world following the enlightenment

So the Europe that was able to conquer the world is not the true Europe. It was a mistake?

>>3386769
>projecting your dualism onto others
Back to plebbit
>out-dated
Easy on the edge

>>3386744
For you.

File: first photo of people enjoying alcohol.gif (99KB, 640x455px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 640x455px

>>3386762
but I believe these tensions will be solved and the people of the 1st world will actually have way more spare time than ever before. So what if they're jobless, if they will receive benefits from the state.
All we have to do is make sure they spend their spare time doing mentally productive things that advance both the culture and science instead of just putting all of their money into hedonistical and degenerate purposes

I do understand your point though. Digitalization might lead to a scenario where we'll have a new lower class if the elites of our nations are unwilling to provide these jobless people with money to live and prosper. At worst this would eventually lead to another 1848 but after that the balance of power would be restored (hopefully)

>>3386786
That's how children learn morality.
>touch fire, fire hurts, fire bad
>eat chocolate, chocolate yummy, chocolate good

>>3386689
/his/ was literally founded by a /pol/ invasion

>>3386778
we can continue this shit flinging all night but I will stop now

>>3386801
no it wasn't. People had been requesting a history board for years. /pol/ has just been trying to hijack this place ever since because much of their population are interested in history but only when it serves their purpose. Then they complain that /his/ is a left wing board even though much of its population is certainly not. We're just not retards

>>3386801
We've always been at war with Eastasia

>>3386794
>So what if they're jobless, if they will receive benefits from the state.
Yeah, but how much benefit? Imagine you are a worker who suddenly became useless for society. Obiviously, you would want to have the same lifestyle as before. But your employer won't be too keen on paying taxes for your free benefits, while he has to buy robots and pay their maintenance.
This will inevitably lead to conflicts

>>3386759
>Complaining about globalism is basically just "I hate brown people but I don't want to admit it."
Yes and complaining about global warming is basically just "I hate to wear shorts but I don't want to admit it." right?
You globalists are such disingenuous scum.

>>3386827
but paying for robots and their maintenance will still be much cheaper than paying a human worker and taking care of safety regulations. Thus the workers and society over all would have plenty enough money to give to the now jobless working class

>>3386815
>People had been requesting a history board for years
Yeah and guess what? A lot of those people posted on /pol/.

>>3386841
But I bet they would rather spend the money on themselves and their loved ones, rather than give it to people who contribute nothing to society

>>3386853

But that free money would make people contribute to society. Rich people contribute more because they get regular infusions of what is, to them, free money. Money they did not have to work to gain. The secret to success in business is the ability to fail four times and still try again.

Pro-inheritance is pro-basic income. If you understand why inheritance is good for a society, you should understand why basic income would do the same.

>>3386868
If they would contribute to society, they wouldn't need free money, since they could be payed for their contributions

The term employs traditional light-versus-darkness imagery to contrast the era's "darkness" with earlier and later periods of "light".[3] The concept of a "Dark Age" originated in the 1330s with the Italian scholar Petrarch, who regarded the post-Roman centuries as "dark" compared to the light of classical antiquity.[3][4] The phrase "Dark Age" itself derives from the Latin saeculum obscurum, originally applied by Caesar Baronius in 1602 to a tumultuous period in the 10th and 11th centuries.[5] The concept thus came to characterize the entire Middle Ages as a time of intellectual darkness between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance; this became especially popular during the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment.[3]

>>3386868
Your that autistic fag from the inheritance thread aren't you?

>>3386880

If they had free money they'd be able to contribute to society. Free money doesn't hurt rich people. Why would it hurt poor people?

>>3386885

Not if it was from the last two months.

For the person getting the free money, what is the difference between an inheritance and a basic income?

>>3386898
It won't hurt poor people. It will hurt working people who have to pay that "free money"

>>3386906

Taxes hurt people? We should be super careful to only tax those who can afford it then. Maybe even cease taxing anyone who works entirely. Certainly we shouldn't ever tax poor people who are working.

>>3386917
Yes, taxes hurt people. But they get nice things in return, like roads or a working government.
If working people see taxes wasted on people who don't contribute, they wont like that. We can see it very well when we look at the current refugee crisis

>>3386924

>Yes, taxes hurt people. But they get nice things in return, like roads or a working government.

Okay, but why tax poor people at all if taxes hurt people? Maybe just tax people who won't be hurt by it.

>If working people see taxes wasted on people who don't contribute, they wont like that. We can see it very well when we look at the current refugee crisis

I doubt it would slow people down as much as seeing how free money helps rich people.

>>3386239
Ancient Greece (well, mostly Athens) had some nice philosophy and art, but that was something that only the top 1 percent enjoyed. In general, it was a superstitious, savage, slave owning society with constant skirmishes between city states. Also, Athenian democracy existed for like 150 years.

Medieval Christian and Renaissance thinkers: it's the same story, they were writing about interesting concepts while 95 percent of the population were serfs and half of people died before reaching 16. Not to mention the religion part, a European Medieval community was not very distant from how ISIS is runnig their cities (you could get beaten for skipping church, you get publicly burnt alive if you become an apostate etc.)

It was the enlightenment and the scientific revolution that actually brought comfort, security and freedom to the masses. Almost all achievements in civilization before that were enjoyed only by a few while the wast majority of all people were just starving, backwards peasants.

>>3386934
I dont understand why you are talking about some philosophy of taxing.
People won't like to pay for plebs who dont contribute to society, and this will cause social unrest- They don't give a fuck about your philosopy, as the current refugee crisis shows

>>3386263
That's not what dark ages means you retarded american brainlet

>>3386590
>middle class kid who has never experienced the joys of subsistence farming and teetering on the brink of starvation.
You're no better than radical left college students defending gommunism

>>3386947

It's just that I'm certain people are more salty that they're being taxed in the first place. They'd be happy to get free money instead. And more productive, like rich people already are.

I mean we agree taxes hurt people and free money helps people. So why tax anyone who can't afford it? Why spend revenue in any way but providing free money to people?

>>3386989
You have to tax somebody, how else are you gonna get your money?
And if you don't tax certain people, you will have to tax the rest more, and they wont like it

Does any intellectual movement have a more pretentious and cringeworthy name than "The Enlightenment"?

>>3386944
>It was the enlightenment and the scientific revolution that actually brought comfort, security and freedom to the masses
The masses are the exact same superstitious peasants they always we're and they're every bit as removed from the musings of modern thinkers as their ancient equivalent.
Comfort, security, and freedom?
It's called a sturdy roof over your head, a tight knit community, and you're a fool if you think that could not be achieved prior to the enlightenment.

>>3387003

>You have to tax somebody, how else are you gonna get your money?

I'm saying that since taxes hurt people, we should stop taxing anyone who works, and anyone who is poor.

>And if you don't tax certain people, you will have to tax the rest more, and they wont like it

We could always just stick a flat tax on everything above 100k. I'm not saying tax people I don't personally like, I'm saying tax people who will not be so badly hurt by taxation, or rather, STOP TAXING people who are badly hurt by taxation.


Dude, free money helps everyone who gets it, but taxing everyone hurts those who start with less far more than those who start with more.

>>3386973
Every city person is "teetering on the brink of starvation" they're just too stupid to realize how insecure their position is, and how delicate the system that supports them is.

File: 7948579_123497240543.jpg (12KB, 263x350px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 263x350px

>>3386104
t. Adorno

>>3386798
That's not morality.
>>3386973
>middle class
No, I'm at that odd point where my grandparents are ridiculously wealthy but my parents are lower-middle class at best, and even then only due to debt keeping them afloat.
I'm not a kid, I'm nearly 30.
Farming isn't subsistence farming, there is always abundance when done properly. Monoculture industrial farming is what causes bad harvests, permaculture is incredibly reliable.
The old way of farming was essentially the middle-ground.

No, you idiot, farmers with control over the means of production are the wealthy ones, those that are incredible debt and rely on a single crop of genetically-identical grain or something and virtually no crop rotation, a reliance on herbicides and pesticides which permanently damages the soil, and no use of live manure which not only is nutrient-rich, but also adds to soil biodiversity -- they are the ones that are teetering on starvation. Crop fails? Now you're a few million in debt and have no income for a year. You don't seem to understand that suicide is an epidemic amongst farmers, because their life is a constant teetering between outward wealth and the inescapable hole of debt they are in that is only not killing them because they 'own' land.

>>3386944
Not at all. All the ''Enlightenment'' did was have ideology takes religions place in the West. Religion may have been removed, but religious thinking will never disappear. Humans are inherently religious.
>Ancient Greece (well, mostly Athens) had some nice philosophy and art, but that was something that only the top 1 percent enjoyed. In general, it was a superstitious, savage, slave owning society with constant skirmishes between city states. Also, Athenian democracy existed for like 150 years.
That pretty much describes America from it's founding till 1920.

>>3386944
>Ancient Greece (well, mostly Athens)

Retard

>>3386598
Probably because Google are jews. Or all that Asian Porn you look at, which is funny because women are outnumbered in China by something like 1 women to every 20 men.

>>3387234
>Humans are inherently religious
Wrong, humans are inherently curious. They seek an explanation for everything they see. When they can't find it, they sometimes make up an explanation that sound plausible to them.

Religion started as a way for primitives men to give an explanation to different phenomenon surrounding their world.

>>3386297
Not to mention fewer wars,lower crime rate, shorter working ours,more social mobility etc. etc.

>>3387047
>It's called a sturdy roof over your head, a tight knit community
How will those protect me from diseases?
Tight knit communities? A community can be tight knit and still give birth to individuals who can endanger it. Also most tight knit communities I have seen are usually very small ones that could fall prey to the bigger ones at any moment and that's without talking about the recurrent endoctrination in those that severly limit freedom.

>>3386139
This
>>3386104
>>3386146
You can't be /pol/ if you don't believe in the importance of the enlightenment. It is most definitely the biggest leap in Europe's cultural and technological tradition. Enlightenment is /pol/.

>>3386223
Middle eastern art, architecture, and culture was every bit the equal of European art and architecture at the time. The Enlightenment occupies the time when these differences were made up for. Where the person you reply to makes a mistake is that the Middle East declined after the 17th century.
>>3386239
Ancient Greeks knowledge was largely lost and not expounded upon by Europeans. Not to mention, any and all philosophical, scientific, and mathematic ideas that Christian and Rennaissance thinkers had was equaled in the East...that is until the era of the enlightenment. If you don't wanna call it the enlightenment because it triggers your fedora senses then don't, just stop pretending Europe was some sort of special place 1000 years ago you retarded revisionist.

>>3386120

The enlightment called for the abolition of anything not scientific or logical. It varied but enlightened leaders usually called for the abolition of all customs, traditions, beliefs, religion, regional differences in dialect, clothing, etc. and superstitions.
When public education became the norm, all of this was accomplished further.

File: 1397260603127.gif (2MB, 346x194px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 346x194px

>>3386150
>Europe has fallen so many times - it always returns tho. Bronze Age Collapse
Stopped reading there

>>3386243
Fibonacci.

>>3386759
>social change is bad.
no, they see social change as inevitable but not to be encouraged or engineered.

>If you want to return to the values of the past, then you must bring back the technology of past.
clearly faulty logic here

>>3386536
>99% of population, including most nobles, thought that earth was flat
you have no way of substantiating this assertion because it probably isn't true.

>>3386279
>file name "William of Ockham"
>FUCKING AQUINAS IS NOTHING

>>3388882

To add further. The enlightment destroyed european "traditional culture". A lot of countries stopped using their own traditional clothing, hairdesses, etc. in this time. (i.e Russia, Poland).

But it also put euros ahead of everyone else in terms of technology and tought. Until then, the chinese, the hindus and the muslems were a match for them, but afterwards they were BLEACHED .

>>3387299
>i heard it in muh anthrocuck class so its troo

>>3386846
Lmao that faggot didn't respond. I for o e remember those threads on /pol/ anon. Honestly this board should be deleted and we should go back to those halcyon times

>>3389261
>if i say cuck its not troo

>>3387079
Ahh yes another """"expert"""" on agriculture produced by the Michael Pollan school. People who used "the old way of farming" needed money too, my guy. You fail to grasp that the modern food system came about for a reason and that reverting to 'muh old ways' isn't a plausible solution. Famines and crop failures happened before industrialization and were far from uncommon.

>>3386393
>When conservatives...

Which "conservatives"? In Europe at least some conservatives praise the enlightenment as the "good old days", not the period before.

>>3389261
That's something I thought myself actually. Death was both the biggest mystery and the biggest source of fear for primitive men ( still is actually). They most likely wanted an optimistic answer to that and thus came up with their idea of what could be the afterlife.