/his/ - History

>>22144

or greate pier maybe?

>>12674

more like plagiarizing pseudo scientist einstein

>>22109

Nice work m8

>hr thread 207 images

https://boards.4chan.org/hr/thread/2307865

>>16137

Thank you Tasr Alexander II

>>19138

Surely it's better than today's SJW ridden shithole.

>>18951

Indeed.

>>19209

It is, but we're not allowed to think that.

>Tfw you'll never be a filipino american in the seventies and befriend a kung fu loving black kid and romance a shy but intelligent seventies librarian.

>Tfw you'll never experience the magic of seeing man land on the moon for the first time in all of human history

Why?

America died in the 70s.

>>22156

America died in 1957

>>21075

It's Královec not some jewish "berg" and it was named after Czech King

>>22021

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>22021

I feel so dirty now. Time to reinstall EU3 and absorb one French minor after another.

>>21086

well, Lenin killed Kulaks during the Red Terror but I guess the New Economic Policy to temporarily help the peasants and to have the support of peasants. Stalin then decided that rapid industrialisation was the key to success, so the destruction of the Kulaks and the general oppression of the peasant class meant that the working class population grew. However, this meant importation of grain by Stalin but it was an overall success

>>21073

British were not so worried about rapid industrialisation of the Germans, it was more the fact that Belgium and its ports were being threatened. Also, the Germans started the war because of the threat from Russia and France, they wanted to strike first rather than be wiped out. They didn't really have much choice

If we're going down the route of "x wouldnt have even come along if not for y" then you might as well say Bismark.

>>21073

the only reason his plans failed was becouse he dieded

>>22111

well you are kind of right, woud be interresting to see the world without him

>>21335

Their nationalism for the history of success scorched earth brought them is always there, but they had ambition under communism, and the party definitely wanted to make some further moves in Europe. They had over 6 million riflemen and Europe was in shambles, if not for nukes they could've just walked into Europe and named every country a communist vassal.

>>21338

>>21210

Also like this anon says, we only had enough nukes to level a few of their cities, their army easily could've just tanked their nation getting destroyed, marched into Europe and sought quarters with countries they helped liberate from Germany.

Ehh, they didn't like communism but the big industrial boom that America was going through in the 1930's was very similar to Russia's during the Five Year Plans; working conditions were quite shit and both countries were just really quite similar. I don't think this was a reason to not go to war though.

>The Usa and the SU werent friendly, and they were just politically different, but with a similar ideology.

http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2015/6/4/our-kind-of-enemy

US Gov hated commies and other leftists enough to deport a bunch of them in the 20s

>>21870

>teotihuacan

>nignogs

Actual ningnogs would have wished of even achieving half of what the proud mesoamerican people ever did.

ROMA AETERNAM EST

>>21913

*AETERNA

Well yeah. Constantinople is the best example of this. I don't know shit bout asians during that time though.

>>21913

this,

Don't put the meso americans on the same level as nignogs, nignogs were in the stone age, mesos were in the stone age and built shit even the Romans would have found difficult while in the fucking stone age, now don't get started on the fucking inca.

baghdad

So you want to dramatize some historical conflict then, but with a focus on multiple PoVs of different warring households and factions?

GoT is already just fantasy War of the Roses so you wouldn't get something unique there. Just the same but without dragons and ice zombies.

>>22004

I've always had a problem with this channel going beyond even the obvious bias and haphazard use of personal belief and prejudice with both primary and secondary source reading. I wouldn't have minded so much if he was any other politically opinionated talking head, but in claiming to be a trained historian the channel ends up pandering to his audience that funds him believing he speaks with authority others don't have - especially if said others hold a contrary political opinion.

I held out for a while, but gave up altogether after his Assassin's Creed video where he just loses it and decided to surround himself with the echo chamber he's cultivated by then.

He's become an insufferable, unfunny cunt, too, just not one that pretended to have a sense of humor like Green in the first place.

Now the only channel I'm still subscribed to even vaguely history related is Matt Easton's ScholaGladatoria for the purity of his focus and intent, and an attitude that doesn't immediately sour the atmosphere if we were in a room together casually drinking like Green's juvenile act or RCH and lindybeige's passive aggressiveness.

>>21993

Something about his voice sounds awkward or even autistic, but he doesn't seem so bad. Thanks, I'll give him a shot this week.

>>21395

>Take identity politics to the trash

>Assimilate to my culture

>Identify as marxist

>Assimilate to marxism

Yeah fuck off m8

>>22096

>what is context

>what are jokes

>not reading the thread

>>22102

>same as above

>mrw

backtoreddit.jpg

Great funposting everyone!

>>22066

Hey anon, i dint go to any history classes at uni, and any people i know that did are unavailable, sadly. Its just a topic that not a lot of kids i work with want to learn. Could you perhaps enlighten me on the subject?

He also dosent want to be an activist, i talked to him about your points, and hes polished his ideas to working with people in other academic areas in order to provide context to those areas that need it (Ex: The economic history of Costa Rica during the Federal Republic of Central America)

>>22100

Well, it's been a while but from what I remember the freshmen courses are generally just continuation of high school where everyone reads from a textbook and memorizes facts for a test. But by 3000 and 4000 level courses you start doing courses that break away from this and start going into history as an academic discipline: understanding source bias, writing papers, reading lots of primary and secondary sources, presentation and discussion on select topics, and research for your senior thesis.

I'm only speaking from a US perspective of course, I can't speak for how history is taught elsewhere.

It sounds like he wants to be something of a sociologist instead of historian or archivist, but at this point he should meet a few teachers from different departments like history, teaching, sociology and so on to get a better grasp of what he wants to do with whatever degree he'll work toward.

I'd also wait for some more input from other anons here since I'm myself a CS major but I've taken enough history courses on my own time and interest outside of that over the years and read enough books and primary texts to consider throwing a minor in History on top. I can't tell him exactly how graduate life will be for history, I'm just reiterating a few points I've heard from friends in the department and a few historians young and old I follow online.

Wiki says it might be related to 'De optimo senatore' written by a Polish thinker and published around the time into English.

Bump

>atrocities/war crimes

I got a time machine. I brought back Alexander the Great to ask him your question.

He didn't know what atrocities and war crimes were.

>>21905

No. The Greeks were a free thinking, civilized people, and there are condemnations of Alexander's actions dating to the era following his death.

>>21436

>alexander

>fellow greeks

REMOVE MACEDONIAN

They don't know what the fuck they're talking about and don't know shit about their own culture, because MUH SLAVERY can't still stop you from learning what your ancestors did.

Why even engage in the first place? The internet has nurtured countless webrings and echo chambers that whatever you post, no matter the level of scrutiny or even diplomatic civility, will be drowned out by next week.

zs

Don't go to tumblr. Seriously why would you go there? I only have gone a couple of times to search porn gifs.

>>21936

Any sources to back this up? Specifically

>The inquisitions (all of them, in fact - Spanish, Italian et al) actually DRASTICALLY REDUCED witch hunting, because of their sensible, centralised and highly regulated nature.

And when did the Church stop deeming witchcraft a satanic fantasy of crazy peasants?

I like this news a lot, Catholic Church is best church, Luther-Antichrist a shit

>>21940

The book title is something like "witchcraft in early modern europe" by A. Pickering - part of british AS level history (so not actually a degree, oy vey). It's got a lot of interesting collated information (and a lot of teeth-grinding bullshit as well - entire chapters on feminist revisionist history…)

I'm not sure if it's a recent development, but it was an integral part of the course, IMO - What I took away from it (ie my personal interpretation of witchhunting) was that centralization and beaurocracy were the top reasons for the reduction in witchcraft over time.

I can't link actual web sources to you because witchcraft is such a saturated subject that literally every result for the search I tried turned up such quality sites as "gendercide.com" :/.