>there are people on /pol/ who genuinely believe this You

File: apex think.jpg (50KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 680x680px

Seriously, the USSR had at least 3 generations of men, since 1917. 1937, 1957, and 1977. These people lived through hard times, and should have created good times.
But there was never any good times in the Soviet union.
If the hard times are supposed to make good times, why after 3-4 generations of these hard times, why did nothing change?

>>136108928
It's known as the vodka exception

>>136108824
This.

The true redpill is recognizing that weak men create strong women

>>136108928
Communism is an abnormal system. And once implemented nearly impossible to get rid of, I would say give it another 30 years for the Russkies and check on their progress.

File: WorldMap.jpg (2MB, 1949x1710px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1949x1710px

Hell, what about Africa in general?
If hard times create strong men and strong men create good time, why is Africa so shit for hundreds of years?
If you have multiple generations of hard times, shouldn't there be strong men that make it not shit?

>>136109022

kek

>>136108824
I believe that, and Drumpf is a perfect example of the second lowest and lowest scenarios.

>>136109080
It doesn't work if they're stupid.

>>136108824
are you done making shit threads ? i know youre the same canadian makign all these shitty threads go kill yourself

File: no food.png (114KB, 644x598px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 644x598px

>>136109079
But again, the soviet union dissolved in 1991 entirely, since then there's been a generation. Why would we need 30 years to check? Shouldn't the men who grew up in those hard times be making good times long before then?

>>136109033
>strong
>women

>>136109080
That's actually part of the economic argument about why Africa didn't develop.

The amount of natural abudance in tropical Africa meant that if you need to eat you simply took food off the trees. Everything was nearby and easy. You didn't have to do calculations to survive the winter. And there were no outside steppe nomads to have to worry about. Most of Africa got really good at eating, sleeping, and having some minimum housing in their environment. They didn't have the pressures of the flooding rivers of Mesopotamia or the cold winters of europe to contend with.

Now take that and combine with a geography that works against development in every way and yeah, the times in Africa were not hard in the way that demands improvement.

>>136108928
Ok the state must also let the individual flourish. If not you will just have several generations of men in hard times that stay stagnant, see feudalism

>>136108928

lel, let me tell you about my country

during the 50ties there were food shortages, not enough housing, poor as fuck health care and political repressions, in the late 80ties, there were book clubs, maket maker movements and genuine excess of basic good, although not near the levels of the west, the gray people starving while being watched by big brother was western propaganda for the most part, at least here

when the end came, people were so confused and naive the country went to total shit for the next 10-15 years and over 2 million people fled

File: ss (2017-08-04 at 03.24.56).png (154KB, 1365x445px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1365x445px

>>136109193
Okay, then what about Switzerland?
They've had multiple generations of good times, at least 3 as well.
Where are their weak men/hard times?

>>136109080
>Africa
you need a civilization first

>>136109248
I would say at minimum 3 generations need to be raised without communist influence.

>>136108824

Believing this is better than the alternative, which is believing in nothing at all. Go rake yourself, you Chinese bastard.

File: thinks.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>>136109446
If this is what you're saying, it's a massive conditional statement that is never brought up, and undermines the point of the statement.
Because it allows the cycle to be broken very easily

>>136109505

Ever heard of "Exception that proves the rule"?

>>136109505

they have generally high IQs and stubborn culture, also they are not inviting vulchers to eat their ancestors created wealth, the constant fear of having your larger neighbor marching in and annexing you is keeping them tense

Switzerland is one of the few exceptions of the general rule.

Look at sweden and UK for examples.

File: Fallacy.jpg (102KB, 644x574px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 644x574px

>>136109603
That's a clear fallacy.
False Dichotomy, you are saying either believe one theory or nothing at all.
There all kinds of alternative theories that could be believed.

>>136108928
>>136108928
>pic covering centuries of ancient Rome history
>this means changes happen over a generation
>here let me take the example of a less than century Russian history as a rebuttal
You're going to have a hard time believing it but creating good times is the hardest and less likely thing to happen. Even with strong men.

>>136108928
You think the paradigm is generational. Fucking leaf.

>>136109704
nah, not really

File: 1501818205803.png (554KB, 719x1588px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 719x1588px

>>136108824
Chuck Shumer and the Dems trying to steal Trump's platform.

They've copied his platform verbatim in an attempt to dupe people who voted for him in to voting for Democrats instead. It's shameless plagiarism and the fact that they are doing it instead of just wholesale pushing Russia shows how terrified the Democrats are. They have no message, no ideas of their own. Labeling their opponents as bigoted racists or the new label of Russian colluder is not working. They need an actual plan for America now, but they do not have one.

This needs to be pointed out to normies and likely Trump voters even that the Democrats are trying to pull a fast one on them. If they didn't believe in these positions before Trump, they certainly don't believe in them after. They're attempting a bait and switch.

>>136109716
>>136109743
There is exceptions of good times not leading to weak men, in Swizterland
There is exceptions of hard times not leading to strong men, like USSR, Africa, Haiti.
There are exceptions of several generations remaining stagnant even in white Europe, in the form of Feudalism as he brought up >>136109446
When there are so many holes, exceptions, and the timing doesn't line up generationally, what exactly are you believing?

>>136108928
Communism is antithetical to creating good times. It is a system of devolution to lowest common denominator in a society. If the Soviet state had faced a world filled with aggressive states instead of placating democracies, it would have fallen very quickly. They were barely able to hold out against the Germans.

>>136109505
Switzerland is in a state of all time war
Gotta protect that gold
You can see it reflected in their politics, they are the only european country that dares to oppose the muslim soumission
They banned minaret like 10 years ago

>>136109991
Still adding generational restriction to disprove the pattern. Knocking down a strawman toughguy.

>>136109248
You do realize that the pictures posted on the OP cover centuries ?
Let say the first pictures is Ceasar it would thenrange from 55 BC(Gaul conquest) to circa 400 AC
Stop making a fool of yourself

File: think.png (173KB, 2688x2688px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 2688x2688px

>>136109812
>>136109804
But the statement itself implies that it is generational.
Because it's saying hard times create strong men, and those strong men create good times.
That means men who grow up in hard times, become strong men. If you grow up in 20 years of hard times why wouldn't you create good times? Or are you saying that there's exceptions and these strong men don't create good times? Or that these men brought up during hard times aren't strong men?
At which point again, unless this can be lined up generationally the statement it is making falls apart

>>136109991
Why are you so triggered by what is at the end of the day a simple maxim?

Do you go to such lengths to discredit the phrase “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” because WELL AKCHUALLY in these X, Y and Z cases an individual was given power and did not succumb to corruption so it's all nonsense!

The point of such phrases are short, pithy phrase to embody a larger message, without all the historical context and baggage you're going out of your way to apply to it.

>>136110299
>/pol/ told me to cook pasta you had to boil them
> I took boiling water I put my pasta in it
> I wait 30 second I get them back and they still are hard and uncooked
>Did /pol/ lied to me about pasta ?
This is how you sound retard

>>136110299
How good is good? How bad is bad? Quantify how strong you must be to overcome bad.

Anecdote out of this one.

>>136110255
Then what the fuck is the point of the statement? If there were 400 years of hard times, that means 20 generations of men were raised in the mean time.
Why didn't those strong men create good times in the 400 years?

>>136110455
So what happened to those men who grew up during the hard times?
10 years pass, they're in their 30s, made their mark on the world, these are the strong men, why aren't the times good?

>>136110299
but they did
The soviet union dissolved, and now times are better than before. Not "good times" yet, but definitely better.

>>136110473
I don't know how good is good or how bad is bad.
The statement is broad and vague and doesn't specify.

>>136110591

> Societal change on par with the fall of fucking rome occurs every 10 years.

Day of the fucking rake when.

>>136110591
"Generation" short circuit. Egocentric thinking.

>>136110663
I am not saying that it happens on that scale. But we are taking about 20 generations of men.
If 20 generations of men are growing up in hard times over 400 years, what are all these strong men doing? Aren't they supposed to be creating good times?

>>136110611
Yes, which is why in this post I didn't list >>136108928 generations past
1977.
Why didn't the generations that grew up after the 1932-1933 famine, or after the terrible second world war become strong men, that led to good times?

>>136110801
Do you understand the difference between a civilizational collapse and relatively difficult times?

>>136109022
Is that roughly similar to the Tequila Exception?

File: thinki.png (163KB, 452x452px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 452x452px

>>136110422
Mental shortcuts lead to fallacies and assumptions in thinking. The problem with the statement is that it can be unfalsfiable. Your interpretation about the length of the good times and hard times can fit broad or narrow time periods, which doesn't logically add up because it undermines the point the message is trying to make.
This is an "omnitool" that can be used to "analyze" situations, but cannot be proven false because of how broadly it can be used. That's why I am arguing against it

So the alternative is to not create good times?

>>136111028
Yes.
But again, I ask, what were these strong men doing?
How can there be generations of hard times? Why aren't the strong men turning them into good times?

>>136111433
Projection. "Generation" is assumption.

>>136111634
No, that's wrong again.
>>136109774
The alternative is to make a narrower argument that uses more specific points related to what you are trying to say, and evidence to back it up, instead of broad maxims.

>>136111651
I am using Generations as a measurement, as a means of forcing the statement to not be as broad or narrow as would favor your argument, saying that good times can last 20-400 years, and bad times can last 20-400 years.
Because it goes back to the statement I've been repeating, how can you have hundreds of years of bad times? The statement says that they should make strong men that turn it into good times, but you have all these men who are born live their entire life and die during hard times.

>>136109080
>Africa
>Men

*Apes* are what Africa has. they don't do anything except make Hard Times.

File: Aachen_Cathedral.jpg (275KB, 1280x914px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1280x914px

>>136109446
>>136109991
>feudalism
>stagnant

>>136111638
It's about competitiveness. Civilizations fall when they lose their competitive edge to other rising powers.

Hard times refers to extreme darwinistic factors acting on a society to where it must adapt or be destroyed. The Soviet was in a bubble that kept it from reaching hard times.

>>136108824
Rome
>Hard times
753 BC - 27 BC
36 generations
>good times
27 BC - 476 AD
25 generations

The transition between good times and hard times is not sudden but it is rather slow.
In hard times the society focuses on military rather than produce and trade mainly because there are strong men all around you that won't let you do that stuff without being conquered.
In the end of the hard times, all the enemies are defeated so the population can start improving their lives by starting to produce and do trade. Of course, the times are still hard in this period but for each generation, life becomes easier so militarily is deprioritized. In the late period, the times are abundant, life is decadent and the enemies are returning slowly. All military traditions have eroded, they haven't adapted to the military changes that have occurred in the last generations and the population doesn't know how to do cruelties. Eventually, the civilization is destroyed and the hard times and strong men are reborn.

>>136108824
"Hard times create strong men" - World War 1 and 2
"Strong men create good times" - 1950's - 1960's
"Good times create weak men" - 1970's and 1980's
"Weak men create hard times" - NOW

>>136112041
Prove weak men create good times. Define good. Define weak.
Your assumption is a generational clockwork, not human nature.
Your win condition will not be granted.

>>136109022
Except these multi-generational gaps are noted everywhere. The Carolingian renaissance didn't happen 20 years after Rome fell, the world didn't go through any major shifts in quality of life after the 30 years war except people were no longer dying in the 30 years war. This "trend" is just people noticing that when things are good they were previously worse, and when things are bad they were previously better.

>>136112752
>This "trend" is just people noticing that when things are good they were previously worse, and when things are bad they were previously better.
That's a perfect way of summarizing it.

>>136108928
>These people lived through hard times, and should have created good times.
They did, Russia was never as good as it is in modern times.

>But there was never any good times in the Soviet union.
That just shows you don't really know the history of the SU as there certainly were good and bad times.

File: 1501079207922.jpg (35KB, 480x624px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x624px

I guess everyone responding believes the pic :/

just because it could be observed in one case doesn't make it true for all cases.

Our timeline
>476 - 1066 AD hard times create strong men
Rome has fallen, the survivors are faced with hard times. The same goes for their provinces and all of unconquered Europe that has known nothing but hard times.
With the fall of the empire, Europe faces external enemies and internal conflicts which create a civilization of warriors.
The situation calms down in 1066 when William the conqueror takes England. It is hard to figure out exactly when the new period begins and it is more like a spectrum.
>1066 - 1799 AD Strong men create good times
The times are still hard, but the strong men hold back invaders, keep the peace and the society starts to focus more and more on trade and produce. Cities are formed, churches are built and the country is defended by the strong men inhabiting it.
>Good times create weak men 1789 - present
For each generation, danger seems more like a thing of the past. Hi, we are now the rulers of our previous enemies and we can afford some rights to the commons as well. Every generation becomes more decadent and weaker, they don't care for fighting but some do, the strong men abroad

>>136113258
Do you believe that overcoming adversity builds up character?

>>136113733
it can if the person's proclivities are to be the strongest or their ego is a positive factor. their are others that respond differently. after climbing over the biggest hurdle in their life, they end up traumatised and avoid the subject and its reminders forever.

File: point.jpg (58KB, 741x430px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 741x430px

LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT HARD TIMES.

File: 1433424754324.jpg (8KB, 209x200px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 209x200px

>>136111433
>Take highschool philosophy
>Believe that if you find a fallacy in something it magically becomes untrue.

Like clockwork

>>136113991
Now you see how adverstiy weeds out mentally weak people and selects for daring. Apply that on macro level over few generations and you've got a recipe for a very capable population.

File: IMG_1415.jpg (87KB, 576x720px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 576x720px

>>136108824
The meme you posted is just a simplified version of what actually happens. The Greeks had it figured out thousands of years ago

File: manifesd desdiny spurdo 1493224308088.gif (1005KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 600x600px

>>136114339
no argument there, i'm quite the proponent of such thinking. however to add to that, i believe that the challenges will always manifest themselves in different ways. for example, the left vs right tug of war. assuming the left achieves its current objectives, then it means the right was the weakest link in this era. in time a new challenger will appear to the lefts establishment. but let's be clear that things can never be the same regardless of which ideology wins.

also, be mindful that this philosophy contradicts the pic in ops post, since his pic demonstrates a vicious cycle that is supposedly meant to bring "good" times. i don't think one can look at it this subjectively.

that's why i'm here. otherwise i have no business in this thread.

>>136110476
They kept getting stronger.

>>136108824
this very true, and you see it clearly in the west now

Good thread OP I don't think you deserve to be ridiculed. Its easy for alot of us to fall into a nihilistic trap and philosophically/politically "throw our hands in the air" and admit defeat:

> "well we're in good times now the bad times will come lets welcome them as a clockwork cycle"

Bad times can be avoided but at what cost. I feel this country is going to be in the gutter for a long time with the majority believing its unfixable or intact there isn't any problems to begin with. Born in the shit, die in the shit.

File: 1468136368146.jpg (40KB, 640x628px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x628px

>>136108824
>>136108928
you absolute fuck, do you think rome rose and fell in 4 generations?

do you really think times don't change, that people aren't conditioned by the times in which they live, and that times can't be retrospectively observed and generally characterized with terms like "good" or "bad"?

did you really think you were on to something so good you had to copy and paste your shit from another thread and create a new one? what the fuck, leaf?

File: 2017.jpg (787KB, 2028x960px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 2028x960px

Pic related happens for a reason.

>>136109505
It's a process of centuries not generations, Chang.

>>136115252
>then it means the right was the weakest link in this era. in time a new challenger will appear to the lefts establishment.
I agree with that. And that new challenger is going to be a nativist populism and if it were to fail islamic radicalism will take its place.

>be mindful that this philosophy contradicts the pic in ops post
Not necessarily as it doesn't imply which men will emerge on top after the hard times. Just like in the case of Rome it was the barbarians that took up the the task of "creating good times" and before Romans did the same with Greeks.

>>136108824
>Hard times necessitate cooperation
>Cooperation enables exploitation
>Exploitation leads to mistrust
>Mistrust leads to corruption and a breakdown of trust
>Corruption leads to hard times
http://ncase.me/trust/
English and German soldiers celebrated Christmas together during the battle of Verdun, today I don't trust anyone.

>>136108928
the image implies that none faggots realize how hard is to be around stupid people like you and start a massive cultural clean up.

>>136116115
this is a very easy to understand flowchart
thanks senpai

File: jutyhgf.jpg (18KB, 255x255px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 255x255px

>>136108928
>I have assumed that 'times' = 'generation'
>why don't I understand anything
>hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

retard

>hard times create reagan
>reagan creates good times
>good times create bush clinton bush obongo
>bush clinton bush obongo create hard times
>hard times create trump

sounds about right

>>136108824
Not a concept made by /pol/

File: e581ab29749b576d3a2fa099e54f0138.jpg (16KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 236x236px

>>136108824
Did Ancient Rome use the Communist system? No, so the same rules do not apply.

>>136109033
>weak men create strong women
>strong women create weak civilization
>weak civilization gets taken over by strong civilization
>strong civilization creates weak women

>>136108928
It did create strong men though. They had enough military power that they managed to push back the Reich.

>>136108928
That's because there is no good times under communism or socialism.

File: Theodore_Kaczynski.jpg (139KB, 555x414px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 555x414px

>>136110023
This

Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one’s power.

It didnt take 30 years to destroy the Roman Empire, dumb leaf.

>>136108928
because slavs are genetically inferior