Is this scene really what race relations looked like in school in the 1970s? Both black and white students being equally being racist to each other, rather than black students being passive victims like in earlier decades, or white students in later decades? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HebzsG7hGqk
these are the haplotypes:I22613.AG R-P312 U5b2b1a1I22614.AG R-P312 U5b1f1aI22615.AG G-L166 N1a1a1I22616.AG R-P312 H1e1I22617.AG U5a1+@16192I22618.AG G-Z6901 T2c1eI22619.AG R-P312 H1I22620.AG K1c1acrazy that actual nordics entered italy in the early bronze age
>>18523442Modern Iberians overlap with southern French in many cases too so it's irrelevant
>>18523573And it is Yamnaya R1b-z2103, PF756 and J2b-l283 found in cetina culture. 2 out 3 found in Etruscan samples = real etruscans. Any P312 are proto Celtic and literal Celtic intruders. One anon posted Germanic R1b-U106 as proof of basically nothing because it was dated to Cimbri war and any P312 haplos of Etruscans are not etruscans but slaves and bandits.
>>18523941no it's not, it's p312, there's not a single R1b-z2103 etruscanhttps://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7673>To investigate the potential influence of sex biases in these genomic transformations, we computed the frequency of uniparental markers through time. The mtDNA diversity does not seem to change substantially before and after year 1 CE (fig. S5A). By contrast, the newly reported central Italian individuals from 800 to 1 BCE show ~75% frequency of the Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b, mostly represented by the R1b-P312 polymorphism and its derived R1b-L2, that diffused across Europe alongside steppe-related ancestry in association with the Bell Beaker complex (16). This suggests that this R1b Y-chromosome lineage spread into the Italian peninsula with steppe-related movements during the Bronze Age.
>>18523968Dog, the fact remains that Etruscan language comes from Lemnos and the Bronze Age Balkans lack P312 results at all. Meanwhile, Balkan Bronze Age genes are found in Etruscan samples. It’s quite clearly that aegeans transmitted their genes on the Italian mainland. Your only claim to etruscans is that the real elites of aegeans ruled over bell beakers who previously massacred and rape the farmers of the Italian peninsula. The Etruscans and Romans both came from the Balkan Aegean area and ruled as warrior elites.
>>18524105>Genome-wide studies of Iron Age individuals from Tuscany and Lazio show that Etruscans were genetically similar to their Latin neighbors, despite linguistic differences.[71] Both groups carried Steppe-related ancestry, introduced via migrations in the 2nd millennium BCE, likely associated with the Bell Beaker culture.[61] A 2021 study found no signal of recent admixture from Anatolia or the Eastern Mediterranean, supporting the Etruscans' autochthonous origin.[61] The large majority of Etruscan males belonged to the haplogroup R1b-M269 (75%), particularly R1b-P312 and its derivative R1b-L2 (descendant of R1b-U152), while mtDNA was dominated by haplogroup H.[61] Overall, Iron Age Etruscans from central Italy could be modelled as deriving 50% of their ancestry from Central European Bell Beakers (represented by Germany Bell Beaker), with around 25-30% steppe ancestry. Two Etruscan samples were modelled as having 80% Germany Bell Beaker ancestry.[61]>A 2024 study on individuals from Tarquinia (9th–7th century BC) confirmed earlier results: ancestry was 84–92% Italy Bell Beaker with additional 8–26% Steppe admixture. Two males carried haplogroup J2b, and maternal haplogroups matched post-Neolithic European patterns. Physical traits included pale to intermediate skin tones, light/dark brown hair, blue and brown eyes.[72]
Marx believed that the proletariat and the bourgeoisie had interests that were irreconcilably opposed to one another, and that the only way of resolving class conflict is through class war and the abolition of class society. Do you think this is true, or do you think the state could potentially act as a mediator above class that resolves or at least greatly diminishes class conflict?
>>18523961ad hominem
>>18524163stratagem 3: generalize a specific statement
>>18523961Based on what you've read I'm telling you truly and unironically: read Kapital. Not some youtube video, not some other persons opinion on it. Read Kapital. What you have stated as the things that interest you are level 1 of his thought. You, personally, would immensely benefit from engaging with the rest of it
>>18524175ad hominem
>>18523961>Christians are to be eradicatedWhere does he mention that? In "On The Jewish Question" he takes the opposite stance against Bauer, that religion isn't the primary cause of contradiction in society
Why hasn't it been refuted?We've all been thereYou're spending your saturday at the zoo and you see a remarkable chimpanzee.You both make eye contactYou're groin responds amicably, it's all right since humans and apes are genetically similar.But wait, according to the law of the west, sex with monkeys is illegalHow can this be if we're their decendants? Essentially one and the same.How does the atheist confront this?
I prefer this version of the copypasta, thank you GervaisChad
>>18524219>gervaisfag is still posting hereThis board is too gay and brown for funny posts like this.
>>18524219I read all of these in Ricky's voice Just imagining that he has a twin brother who's a devout Catholic who says insane shit like this
What's even the point of being interested in history, if you logically have to condemn and hate every single person in history you read about, because they have bigoted, non-liberal views?Like the solution to every religious question is always "priests should have no state authority, everyone should be free to choose their own religion".The solution to every Civil War is "people should be free to choose the leader they prefer and also campaign themselves to become Roman Emperors, if they want to". The solution to every single war is "war is mean, everyone should dismantle their military, melt their swords into farming equipment and be peaceful". Like what the actual fuck? How can this be your opinion? You not only should know better, YOU DO KNOW BETTER, if you are interesting in history. You know how this works out. I genuinely don't understand people, who are obsessed with history, but are left-wing or liberal. You have to have an insane double-think going on to make that work. I for that matter am not interested in learning about the entire history of drag queens, transsexual brothels and secret homosexual sign language just to hate on them.
>>18523853What do you mean by "knowing better," given that you seem to be applying your own present-day values to judge what the correct lessons of history should be?
>>18523855>What do you mean by "knowing better," I literally speak of this in the OP.Like imagine reading about a Roman Civil War and your only opinion on this is:>they are all evil, bigoted slave owners and should have decided who should rule by fair elections of all men and women in the Empire and not warOr this:>you should only ever fight a defensive war>taken too long, because of a Civil War and the Turks settled in Anatolia with their families?>Well, now it's their territory and it would be evil to conquer them, so you should just make peace with them and engage in mutually beneficial tradeLike this completely naive thinking that ANY authority illegitimate, that wars of aggression are always wrong (except against Germany in WW2) and so on. These modern Liberal values, which make all historical person from even just a few decades ago into bigoted monsters (if they take them seriously)
>>18523937But if you're arguing that judging historical figures by modern values is naive, aren't you also judging those modern liberals by your values which, by your own logic, a historian from the future would find equally parochial and limited?
>>18523953>But if you're arguing that judging historical figures by modern values is naiveNot naive. I actually can't comprehend their position. I can't put myself in their shoes. There is something fundamentally missing, which I do not understand about them. Like how do you, as a history professor, create a little roleplay scenario, where students argue on behalf of say the founding fathers, but you completely ignore the history of race, gender, slavery, etc in that exercise, because you are afraid of offending someone or alternatively end the exercise by all reminding them they just roleplayed as literally Hitler and should remember to shun the opinion of the people they just roleplay as.>aren't you also judging those modern liberals by your values which, by your own logic, a historian from the future would find equally parochial and limited?No. If you just applied "my logic" without any further context, then the historians of the future are hypocrites, who have retarded libtard values, but for some reason make an exception for me, despite me having very anti-liberal values and beliefs. Of course I don't actually believe that, because I think they make an exception for people born after 1945, since the second World War is the secular founding myth of modern Liberalism.
Could it have won the war?
>>18522774>no heilpicGutless. Hitler would spit on you.
>>18522760Even if escorted you could still destroy it somehow. If bombing from above doesn't work then you use artillery, land mines, etc.
>>18522066sure, as long as you are capable of paving a runway in front of it wherever it needs to go.
>>18522775I posted a heilpic you ape.That's me in the photo.>>18524151If it doesnt work on battleships it doesnt work on landcruezers.
>>18522775>>18522753>erm you need to dox yourself so we can ruin your life
How do Christians explain Barbarossa dying before reaching the Holy Land, thus dooming the Third Crusade?How could this possibly be part of God's plan?
>>18523332mass baby rape happening every day forever is all part of the gods plan bro, trust the plan. its true.
>>18523420I'm not the one who claims everything is God's will
If Bismarck had done everything the same, except not annexed Alsace-Lorraine, could the hatred between France and Germany been avoided, and France at least kept neutral while Germany attempted to conquer Eastern Europe in a "WWI but try to convince France to sit it out" scenario?
>>18523973>So your argument is just that they were anti-HRE in the 17th century and switched to an anti-British policy in the 18th?It's not an argument it's a fact.Every single great war in the 18th century was fought against Britain with maybe one rare exemption, and every geopolitical decision was made with the intention to undermine British influence.>I don't see how that contradicts mine.Because they're not focusing on HRE anymore. Not a single fuck was given.> Obviously the French defeat of the HREHRE doesnt freaking exist like that you absolute donkey. It's not a state. It's not a united entity. Name me a single war where HRE has fought united against a common enemy. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. You dont know what HRE was so stop pretending. Everything you say reveals this. They were fighting to oppose Habsburg influence, which came from its seat in Spain. Stupid fucking amerimutt. Stick to civil war history.>is what opened the door for them to compete with England in the colonial sphere.And why should they bother with a English rivalry if according to you their foreign policy was obssessing about German states? Shouldnt they be focusing on Austria then?Do you even realise that Austria was the main ally of France during this time period? How does that serve your argument?
>>18523985>It's not a state. It's not a united entityYou're half-right in the sense it wasn't a modern nation state, but neither was France at the time. Modern nation states are a product of the French Revolution and prior to that states were simply a collection of lords and vassalages.>Do you even realise that Austria was the main ally of France during this time periodTheir ally against Prussia, because balancing the Prussian/Austrian rivalry is what became important to France after the 30 years war.Again, I will ignore the low effort insults out of consideration for you but if you keep this up I fear that any attempt at understanding between us will be completely fruitless.
I see you've finally stopped replying. Very well. I won't be insolent enough to declare victory, to be honest I'm just happy I don't have to engage with this nonsense any longer. That was perhaps the most worthless conversation I've ever had, but I suppose your ability to draw it out was admirable. Good day.
>>18523800And now Germany is reunited and a total dud, what a waste of a century.
>>18524207Well to be fair, France is also a dud. Everyone lost to America
How did the Anglo ruling class develop such an extreme (to the point of genocidal) hatred of their working classes? Rich and powerful anglos almost seem gleeful at the sight of their poorer kin be disenfranchised, demoralized, driven to desperation, or even killed.
>>18514292Where did you get this from?
>>18520770
>>18520082>. The billionaires, are the ones flooding this country with broThey aren't upper class. Only people with hereditary noble titles are upper class.
>>18516417frankly the modern british aristocracy barely retains any of the true historical antipathy aristocracies had for their subjects, no doubt due to the fact they've spent the past two centuries being forced to mingle with the nouveau riche simply to survive. that's not to say there's no classism but it would be on par with what a rich old(ish) money american would display toohonestly a 3rd generation chaebol or chinese young master would have far greater contempt for the common folk than them nowadays.
>>18520089>The upper class and the working class famously get on with and respect each otherThey famously don't hahaha wtf are you smoking you stupid cunt Thatcher is the epitome of Middle Class Golem who is glorified and showered with rewards by the upper class, she got a fucking Baroness title and state funeral for fucks sake. Meanwhile if you praise Thatcher in northern England or Scotland or Wales, you'll get a broken nose.>>18520114You must be American
Japanese always beat amerimutt pigs into submission.Why is the historical cause of this?
>>18523665What about that one time with the... you know... and then... now Japan isn't allowed to really have a military anymore so they focus on the entertainment industry instead... yeah... lol.
>>18523665>if your enemy nukes you, you win>t. Jasuten Churudou
>>18523665Based
>>18523665>glorious Nippon arwuys beat amerimutt pigs into submisson.Wii is the historicaro cause of this?
If various European people groups really had proto-writing from as far back as 40,000 years all the way to the neolithic "Old Europe" / Vinčan settlements, why did they never invent writing? Were they truly incapable? Is there evidence to the contrary? Are runes the best they could do?
>>18523114This seems like a non-answer to me. "In those days"... in what "days"? Contemporary civilizations invented writing. Writing is obviously an extremely useful tool. There'd have been PLENTY of things to write about that I'm sure were simply passed down earlier.Now sure, maybe Europeans really were just so spread out and tribalistic that writing didn't spread in the same way as it did in other places around the world. That would definitely be a welcomed truth. Though if there is evidence of that, I haven't found it yet.Could there have been a conscious effort among those people groups to NOT write things down? That doesn't seem reasonable, yet the fact that there is no independently developed European writing system at all is likewise baffling.
>>18524087>Could there have been a conscious effort among those people groups to NOT write things down?Possibly. The Vedas in India were and still are traditionally passed down orally because they believed the sounds possessed spiritual value so writing them down would limit their power. The oldest myths and poetry we know of today have their origin in oral cultures where illiterate bards composed songs and stories, most of them extemporaneous and so without the need or use for writing. Writing only started for recording long boring lists and numbers by merchants and traders, not as a way to preserve stories, laws, morality, myths or other cultural ideas. And oral culture was a huge thing in most civilizations until relatively recently when literacy became widespread.
Indo europeans had a god of writing ogmios/hermes which indicates they probably had writing. It would have mainly been used for religious purposes by the priest class.
>>18522153Greeks did but they forgot it.
>>18522153>why did they never invent writing?They did.
Why is the church evil in japanese media? Is it a reversal of the yellow peril trope?
Probably because the Church, as the Japanese experienced, it was an insidious influence that corrupted the populace by turning them against their gods and their proper rulers, and sowed political division throughout the land wherever it gained a foothold, and forced Japanese people to kneel before foreign priests to beg for absolution?There's a reason the Japanese were suspicious, and ultimately outlawed Christianity. They could see it for the tool of control and deception that it was.
>>18523827latinx powerscalling countries gives me an aneurysm.>HURR DURR EYY ESE UM EL GEE DEE PEE SII AMIGO AND ULL MINIMUS 1 POINT DIFRENCE EYYYi cannot find words to describe the hate i feel for latinxroaches. even if there were, they would not be enough. they would not even be a quarter of the hate i feel. there is no bigger mistake in the planet than latinxes: useless, take up space, take up breathing air, are loud, stupid, obnoxious, and active obstacle, derail things, produce auditive contamination, won't let a retarded braindead religion die, are squatting over precious ruins and former high cultures, are squatting over *current* high cultures; what is worse in this planet than the latinx? your mere existence is a disgrace
>>18521016>Borderline
>>18522762YHWH the rapist god doesn't sound like the father of Jesus
>>18520257They hated him because he told the truth.
In what world is there infinite wine, but not infinite bread?
>>18524112A good one
>reading about Serbian shenanigans pre-1914>slowly starting to think the Austrians were completely justified in finally snapping and chimping out on them Genuinely these cunts were playing with fire too much- would any other country tolerate having a hostile nationalist cabal constantly funding terrorists and funnelling arms into your territory to purposefully stir the pot and provoke a war?
>>18524041Serbs only exist because of Russian interventionism and imperialism.
In Terry v. Ohio (1968) the Supreme Court ruled that police can stop and frisk a suspect they have reasonable suspicion was involved in a crime and it does not violate the 4th Amendment. On Halloween 1963, Cleveland PD detective Martin McFadden was conducting a plainclothes patrol in the downtown of the Ohio city. McFadden, 62, was a veteran cop with many decades of service; he had joined the CPD all the way back in 1924, was promoted to detective in 1928, and had been on the same beat hunting down shoplifters and pickpockets since 1933. On this fall afternoon, he observed John Terry and Richard Chilton on Huron Road and Euclid Avenue. Terry peered into a shop window, walked a few paces down the street, came back, and peered in the window again. He did this a couple of times after which Chilton did the same. A third man joined them and the three headed towards the store.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, Terry being the petitioner as Chilton had since died, and ruled 8-1 that it was allowable for a police officer to pat down a suspect if he has reasonable suspicion that he has a weapon and is, did, or could commit a crime. Chief Justice Warren wrote the majority opinion. He argued that seizure of a weapon during a pat down was not unreasonable under the 4th Amendment. It was probable that some police actions did violate the 4th, but that did not render it responsive to the exclusionary rule. Warren added that it was not disputed that police sometimes engaged in undue harrassment of minority groups, especially African-Americans, and this would not be prevented by excluding evidence from a trial. Yet a rigid application of the exclusionary rule may result in many unnecessary injuries and make it difficult for police to perform their duties.
Merely walking down a street corner and peering into a store window would not in of itself be cause for suspicion, but the actions of Terry, Chilton, and Katz were certainly unusual and it was within reason for an experienced burglary detective to suppose they were up to no good, especially the reactions and body language of the three when confronted by McFadden and their refusal to give their names. FBI statistics showed that 57 police officers in the United States were killed in the line of duty during 1966 and there were also 23,851 assaults on officers with 9,113 resulting in an injury to the officer. Of the 57 officer fatalities in 1966, all but two died of gunshot wounds. A total of 335 officers were killed since 1960.Justice Douglas dissented and argued that it was not disputable that the search had violated the 4th Amendment. He thought McFadden had no reason to suppose they had any ill intent and the men were not arrested or charged with burglary or robbery, but merely for concealed weapons.
>>18523742>>18523744so were they black or not?
>>18523747>Warren added that it was not disputed that police sometimes engaged in undue harrassment of minority groups, especially African-Americans, andBeing Earl Warren, of course he had to go there. Of course.
>>18523742pretty sure nowadays it's standard for cops to retire at 55. guess it was different back then.
