/int/ – No shittings during wörktime
„There is no place like home“

File (max. 4)
Return to
(optional)
  • Allowed file extensions (max. size 25 MB or specified)
    Images:  BMP, GIF, JPG, PNG, PSD   Videos:  FLV, MP4, WEBM  
    Archives:  7Z, RAR, ZIP   Audio:  FLAC, MP3, OGG, OPUS  
    Documents:  DJVU (50 MB), EPUB, MOBI, PDF (50 MB)  
  • Please read the Rules before posting.
  • Make sure you are familiar with the Guide to Anonymous Posting.

No. 7555
1,1 MB, 1920 × 1152
95 kB, 719 × 536
1,5 MB, 2560 × 1060
211 kB, 640 × 473
In previous was.. not very much interest in science exept history, so from now it just history thread.
Previous thread systemcontra but before it died, you may read interesting things here (I think it will not be archived, so hurry!):
>>9
>>
No. 7561
24 kB, 352 × 205
69 kB, 800 × 591
83 kB, 800 × 556
Did Ernst know that it was not Hitler but the Weimar authorities who started rebuilding the army in secret even though they were not allowed to do so by the treaty of Versailles? They built both light and heavy tank prototypes and tested them in the USSR. To be honest, the relationship between Weimar and the Soviet Union as a whole is very interesting to study. Hell, the Weimar army in general is such a fascinating topic I think I've found a new outlet for my assburger syndrome.
>>
No. 7562
81 kB, 535 × 670
>>7561
Yes, the harshness of the Versailles Treaty is fairly exagerated due to how lenient its enforcement was de facto. The Weimar government set up all sorts of paramilitary group that should have been forbidden by the Versailles Treaty.

My favourite part of the story if the dummy companies that the nazis made to rebuild their military:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEFO

In the terms of 30s Soviet military projects, you might wanna check this out if you haven't already:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletank
>>
No. 7564
>>7561
that is true, in fact the west could easily crush germany before 1935 but they just didn't want to at time.

Also since there was restrictions about plane productions the germans opened up plane factories in Turkey, later we learned how to make planes from them. That was during weimar germany and Atatürk was still alive.

>>7562
it's not exaggarated, there was massive soviet hysteria for valid reasons in the west and they want germany attack SU and crush both when weakened. Until Germany messed with France there were lots of Nazi parties actively working in the west.
>>
No. 7569
>>7562
Teletanks were a novel idea but were the equivalent of free kills even if the tank didn't die because it took another tank out of the offensive by needing it to be a command tank. Add in that they didn't have the ability to see from the forward tank and you've got a highly observable but unwieldy weapon. Just putting more regular tanks out there was, as they discovered, a better use of resources both human and mechanical.
>>
No. 7606
>>7561
Yeah, they had proxy companies developing weaponry in many countries like submarines in Finland and Soviet Union. Ever since the WW1 ended another war was inevitable and people knew it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetehinen-class_submarine
Germans using a Dutch proxy company to develop submarines for us. I think they did the same with the soviets even before nazis but at least during the 30s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_S-class_submarine
>The history of the S-class represents quite an interesting turn in warship development. It was a result of international collaboration between Soviet and German engineers that resulted in two different (but nevertheless related) classes of submarines often pitted against each other in the war.

Even between Nazis and Soviets the relationships weren't as cold as people like to think. Smug "edutaiment" youtubers etc like to mock the molotov-ribbentrop pact but I think even an alliance between nazis and soviets wasn't completely out of question in the 30s.
>>
No. 7793
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iU66wzMy3Y

Damn this channel is nice. Some BR recommended it on KC I think some time ago. Strategy stuff for the high ranking armchair generals.
>>
No. 7816
413 kB, 1510 × 1198
32 kB, 359 × 515
>Diary of a Soviet Officer on the Eastern Front

>The regimental commander has maps and orders from above, while I have nothing but a rifle, a pistol, and an entrenching tool. As such, they have the burden of giving orders, while I must see those orders enforced. Somewhere up above a general looks at a map and it seems reasonable to him to change the front line. He sends down an order.

>"At such and such a point, move 5 kilometers forward."

>Well, as luck would have it there turns out to be a river just at that point, the White Sturgeon. It's deep and swift, in open terrain. It would be convenient and relatively safe to dig some trenches and sit behind this natural obstacle. But an order is an order, and I can't say that it's technically impossible to cross here, even though from a sane man's point of view it is indeed impossible to cross; we have no boats, nor planks, nor are there nearby trees to cut into rafts. Another predicament lies in the fact that all the soldiers in my regiment come from the steppes. Not only can they not swim, but I'd wager that they've never even seen a river in their entire lives.

>I let out a sigh and shake my head. I know what I must do. Orders are orders. We've all seen the price paid for the slightest insubordination. Those men who are executed on the battlefield are the lucky ones. Knowing my luck, if I disobeyed my orders it wouldn't be as simple as a pistol behind the ear. No, they might make an example of me and my relatives. I shudder as I recall the stories told in the officer's tent at mess time. Dark places with damp concrete floors. A room with a single metal chair soaked in old blood, and a pile of human tongues, noses, and ears, torn from the bodies of men unlucky enough to disobey orders or to be born to the wrong family.

>Shaking my head to dispel that unpleasant imagery from my mind, I relay the orders to advance the front to the men under my command. Looking confusedly at the rushing river and each other, one of the slanteyes that speaks Russian hesitantly approaches me.

>"Comrade Lt. Sir, I can't go in the water. I don't know how to swim." He looks back at the others, and they nod their agreement.

>I can't allow myself to be moved to pity. I know that it's better to drown a soldier than to show irresoluteness or insubordination to orders given from a commanding officer. Even if they all have to drown, it's better than what could happen to us all if we disobey an order. Besides, I already reported to the Major upon receiving the order that there are no boats. He told me to do it anyway. Steeling myself for what I must do, I pull out my service revolver, cock it, and point it at the face of the cucumber in front of me.

>"Get in the water you son of a bitch! I'll give you to the count of 3 to get in there, or you'll never go anywhere else."

>The soldier starts sweating. With a worried look on his face he glances from me to the other men. I shove the gun into his face and yell for him to hurry up. He quickly turns and hustles to the river bank. Holding his pack up above his head in one hand and his rifle in the other, he steps into the water, evidently trying to wade across. Of course the strong current immediately seizes him and carries him down the river as he ineffectually thrashes about. He disappears under the water and is swept downstream, apparently drowning.

>Some of the others don't speak Russian, but they understand when I point my pistol at them that they must also wade into the river.

>All the rest of the cucumbers that I force into the river drown.

>Having done my duty, I adjust my hat and dust my uniform off as best I can. Taking a deep breath, I walk into the Major's tent, where he sits examining lists of supplies, equipment, and other such logistical paperwork. He looks up at me as I enter. He has a resigned look to his eyes. It's a look that some men get when they get their first taste of combat and discover it's not as glorious as they believed. The stupid ones can fool themselves longer.

>"What do you have to report Comrade?"

>I straighten my back, raise my head and salute. Holding my salute, I keep my eyes locked on a point on the far canvas wall of the tent.

"Comrade Major, there are only 5 men left in my company." The Major, of course, is furious. His weariness seems to be wiped away as he comes roaring to his feet.

>"WHAT!? What did you do to them!? I didn't hear a single shot!" Without lowering my salute, I force myself to respectfully lock eyes with him.

>"They all drowned crossing the river, Comrade Major.'' He looks surprised and disgusted, as if I hadn't told him this would happen just a few hours ago.

>"What do you mean 'drowned'!? I'll shoot you right here like a dog!" I keep my face impassive.

>"As you will Comrade Major, but I did report to you that there were no planks or logs to be found in the area, that the river is deep and swift, that it can't be forded. You told me to stop arguing and to just obey orders."

>"You blockhead! What a stupid way to destroy a whole company!" Having said this, his anger clearly deflates. I lower my arm to my side and relax a bit. I know that he and I both have done our duty and followed our orders. Now the Major must report this debacle to his superior officer. The Major clearly feels that he bears some fault for losing most of our men (imagine that) as he visibly steels himself for the call he has to make. Calling over a communications man, he places a call to the Colonel, his regimental commander.

>The Colonel arrives shortly in a groundcar.

>"I gave you five hours to cross the river!" he shouts as he enters. "Have you carried out the order!?" Looking like a mirror image of myself not half an hour before, the Major stands, salutes, and straightens his back.

>"No, Comrade Colonel, we've sustained heavy losses."

>"Losses?" The Colonel immediately calms down. He puts a hand to the stubble on his chin, looking thoughtful. "Well. That's fine. If there weren't any losses our heads would roll. What happened? Everything's quiet, I didn't hear a single shot from over here. Did they all get knifed or what?"

>"No. Drowned. The company that was to cross over were all slanteyes. Never saw a river before. Naturally they drowned, since there was nothing to float on." The Colonel is incensed at this.

>"You son of a bitch! Why didn't you take some pontoons? We've been dragging a whole transport of pontoons around! I could give you as many as you want!"

>"I no longer need them Comrade Colonel. There are five cucumbers left in the first company, ten in the second, maybe twenty in the third. There's no one left to cross." The Colonel ponders for a moment.

>"Well, you'll just have to cross anyway. What counts is the fact that the order has been carried out, even if only one man makes it."
>>
No. 7827
>>7816
This is actually why autists should absolutely never be in charge of men
>>
No. 7828
>>7606
All of Mein Kampf was Hitler basically ranting about the Bolsheviks. He hated them more than Jews it seemed, in fact the main reason he even seemed to truly despise Jews to begin with was their association with the Bolsheviks. I don't actually understand the hate strategically though in that the Soviets actually helped not hindered the Germans from what I can gather.

The thing is they were both moral pragmatists, Stalin and Hitler, although Stalin never seemed like he gave a shit about ideology whereas Hitler certainly did. For numerous reasons I think the Russian-German war was inevitable.
>>
No. 7833
>>
No. 7834
46 kB, 590 × 525
>>7816
Thanks, had a good laugh at the anecdote.
>>
No. 7841
>>7828
stalin&hitler waging war agains the west would be pretty dystopic, regardless of consequences I'm glad that didn't happen.
>>
No. 7845
38 kB, 640 × 475
>>7827
I don't think it is a question of anyone being involved being an assburger, but as much as everyone in the chain of command being afraid of getting executed and their families punished for not following orders.
>>
No. 7941
3,8 MB, 4543 × 7052
Here is a book with a very unique perspective on the Civil War. For those who haven't heard of Herman Haupt, the bottom line is that he won the war by revolutionising Union logistics, particularly in railroad usage. It's actually pretty exciting to read despite being the memoirs of the continent's premier railroad autist because of just how damn good the guy was at his job. For example:

GENERAL ORDERS,
No. 23.

All railroads, and especially the Orange & Alexandria Railroad, within the limits of the Army of Virginia, are placed under the exclusive charge of Colonel Herman Haupt. No other officer, whatever be his rank, shall give any orders to any employee of the road, whether conductor, engineer, or other agent. No
orders respecting the running of the trains, construction or repair of the roads, transportation of supplies or troops, shall be given, except by authority of these Headquarters through Colonel Haupt. All persons now employed in any way on these railroads will immediately report to him, and will hereafter receive instructions from him only. All requisitions for transportation, and all applications for construction or repair of roads, will be. made directly to him at Alexandria, Va. All passes given by him to employes will be respected as if issued from these Headquarters.

By command of Major-General Pope.
GEO. D. RUGGLES,
Colonel and Chief of Staff.

That's from the chapter on Second Bull Run and it's an absolute gem to read. If you read nothing else, that chapter alone should get you hooked enough to go back and try again.

https://archive.org/details/reminiscencesofg00hauprich

t. logistics appreciator
>>
No. 7949
>>7555

We found one statue and some frescoes and now they think all Minoan nobility went around with their tits out like that?
>>
No. 8120
263 kB, 1200 × 976
946 kB, 820 × 712
493 kB, 1059 × 496
I was browsing internationl press and just stumbled over this report from the early European neolithic period:

Evidence found for earliest European cheese production by 5200 BC - 7200 years ago in two neolithic villages close to the Croatian coast

The main thesis based on the new evidence:

Milk and cheese production among Europe’s early farmers reduced infant mortality (adults were still lactose intolerant), and supposedely helped stimulate demographic growth that propelled farming communities to expand to northern latitudes.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202807
>>
No. 8124
>>8120
>>8120
why the second map only points out asia minor+europe?
>>
No. 8125
86 kB, 400 × 233
>>7949
I bet it's like the great 'egg-eater' prejudice episode. The one where palaeontologists found one skeleton amongst some eggs and suddenly they're all "mean old Mr. Oviraptor was eating those eggs. Glad he's dead!" They then used that lie to a raise a whole generation of children to hate the entire species.

Of course they later admitted that he dindu nuffin. He was just bringing some groceries back to his children, being a good dad while working as an assistant tree pusher. Certainly didn't advertise it though, did they?
>>
No. 8128
167 kB, 935 × 466
>>8124
I don't know. Most likely because they focus on the development on Europe or maybe because there was no cheese invented outside this region.

After all in the fertile crescent region they had similar benefits from grains consumption and were not forced to switch to milk and cheese that much? Most people are still lactose intolerant there today.
>>
No. 8129
>>8128
>>8128
well hattis or göbekli tepe civilazation are not euro. göbekli tepe is actually close/inside of fertile crescent. it's that dot in south east of the map. what you say might be true considering the fact europeans are less lactose intolerant than, let's say amerindians. I wonder why every livestock dependent culture have such thing? Or maybe they have?
>>
No. 8131
>>7949
We do't know about Minoan much. There was a lot flasifications and not enough proper evidences for a lot of stuff, there more myseries than known about minonian, but this art give me boner
>>
No. 8151
>>8129
They include CatalHuyuk and another location in eastern direction in that map and their thesis says that dairy product consumption spread (a process that took millenia) from there (Asia minor) towards the Mediterranean and then towards northern European latitudes.
>>
No. 8159
>>8131
>>8151
hmm I never heard that before, sounds interesting.
>>
No. 8397 Kontra
>>8382
>>8383
Begone, /pol/lack, leave our history threads pure.
>>
No. 8441 Kontra
44 kB, 634 × 418
>>8397
I just discovered it myself no thanks to KC
>>
No. 8522
294 kB, 1199 × 709
71 kB, 700 × 454
403 kB, 767 × 952
There's something very fantasy book like on the story of the cossacks, I can see why both Russia and The Ukraine would romanticize it.
The idea of serfs escaping their bondage and joining these roaming free militia communities is pretty cool, even more so with them then becoming a military force that would shape the events of Russian and Polish history.
I also found it interesting that the cossacks weren't able to settle the most fertile regions of the Ukraine due to Tatar slave raids.
>>
No. 8530 Kontra
>>8529
What is it with you and one liner posts with irrelevant youtube links?
>>
No. 8532
52 kB, 474 × 474
>>8530
It wasn't irrelevant, it was an example of what you mentioned
>>
No. 8535
>>8522
>I also found it interesting that the cossacks weren't able to settle the most fertile regions of the Ukraine due to Tatar slave raids.
If you're interested in that, you should find something on Bukhara. That's where most of them ended up. There was nowhere near as much domestic use of slaves up there as there was down towards Iran. It's one of the key points in what triggers me about so many maps of the regions involved through the nineteenth century. They paint it all as the Russian Empire but there was close to zero control over those territories. The slave trafficking was going on well into the second half of said century. I wish more maps did it like maps of British India where local kingdoms still functioned to some degree even though broadly speaking they were under the British Crown. At least in regional maps. It'd satisfy my burgers a lot more tbh.
>>
No. 8536
38 kB, 800 × 532
136 kB, 1024 × 768
>>8535
Yes, I know something about Bukhara In its relation to the Great Game, none of its golden period and it really comes down to enslaved Russians. There was even one particular British mission to Bukhara that was involved in the freeing of Russian slaves so that the Russian Empire wouldn't have a reason to bring Bukhara into its sphere of influence proper.

>"A young Russian (up to 25 years of age) fetches from fifty to eighty tillas. The Persian slaves are much cheaper. Of the latter there may be 30 thousand in Khiva, but there are not more than 300 Russian slaves there. The Persians...come into the market in batches of five, ten, and even thirty at a time. Their captors do not trouble themselves about them on the road and if they get exhausted, leave them without compunction to die on the steppe. On arrival at Khiva the owner sets himself down with them in the market, and purchasers surround him, inspecting and examining the poor wretches and haggling about their price as if they were horses... masters have the power of putting their slaves to death, but seldom avail themselves of this right from economical considerations

On Russian control, it's hard to set a defining year in which these territories became fully under the control of Russia. As the link below puts it, it wouldn't be until the 1920s that slavery ended in Khiva. Ultimate such depictions work in the favor of laziness of the author, as well as in a geopolitical purpose. "Here be Russia", is more complicated than drawing all the varying degrees of control that Russia had over different territories in Central Asia. After all, there was a similar situation in Caucasus, and it's usually portrayed as a neat division between the Ottomans, Russians and Persians.

>However, this was by no means the end of the slave trade in Khiva. Although around four hundred Russians had been released, over three thousand Persian and Kurdish slaves remained, and the practice of slave trading was to continue up until the beginning of the twentieth century. In the 1860's, twenty years after Shakespear had freed the Russian slaves, the Turkomans were still capturing Russians. Arminius Vambery, whilst in disguise and hosted by Turkoman tribesmen the encountered an unfortunate Russian sailor who had been captured by his host. "It was here in Etrek, in the tent of a distinguished Turkoman named Kotchak Khan, that I encountered a Russian, formerly a sailor in the naval station at Ashourada." The slave was hauled in front of Vambery and ordered to kiss his feet. Vambery made an excuse about not wanting to be rendered unclean by contact with an unbeliever. It transpired that two Russian sailors had been abducted by the Etrek Turkomans who had asked the Russian government for an exorbitant ransom which the Russians refused, not wishing them to become accustomed to such large lucrative trade in Russians. As a result both Russian sailors were to die in captivity as slaves.
>}t was not until as late as the 1920's that the remaining slaves were freed as part of the People's Revolution.
http://www.khiva.info/gb/history/freeings.htm
>>
No. 8537
>>8536
It's golden age can be read in a good amount of Islamic mathematicians and astronomers. It's not a coincidence that the greatest Muslim minds of the time tended to congregate at the furthest ends of the Islamic world. The Caliph's tolerance for people who could undermine his authority by being too smart for their own good was very finite it seems :-DD

There is also Ibn Battuta who I shill a lot for because it's a very different perspective to the East than what you get with people like Marco Polo because a lot of where he traveled was within the Arab cultural sphere. It'd be like if both Marco Polo and he did books about travelling Christian Europe. They'd have very different ways of looking at the same thing based on whether it was relatively understandable or just plain foreign.

Also, I mean even in regional maps about that specific topic, it always just shows it as blobbing (tbh, it even triggers me with maps of Colonial Australia when I was researching it for another subject, it shows perfect control from East to West but lots of inland homesteads had firing slits built into them and shit because there was no law to protect you out there).
>>
No. 8566
79 kB, 420 × 640
156 kB, 802 × 1024
76 kB, 732 × 447
87 kB, 800 × 487
>>8522
Well what know about coasscas have history even before tataric invasions. However, there different groups that you wil find information much less, like so called "ryazan' cossacs" who not related to classic cosscas at all. And roles, style and meaning of coasscas changed from times. Nowdays they are total loosers X---DDD
>>
No. 8599 Kontra
>>8598
Oh how interesting

Can other people may agree that we should ban him forever or something? Belorussian poster suspected that he is some kind of autist. Potugal poster aslo pointed out that he probable not native english speaker. I say that he already was there.. (or on other ernstchan?) and after months he learned nothing. All he do is making 4cancer/pol-tier one-liners with random links, sometimes creating shitpost thredas same way. I may suspect that he will continue do so.
>>
No. 8602
33 kB, 486 × 350
>>8566
>Well what know about coasscas have history even before tataric invasions. However, there different groups that you wil find information much less, like so called "ryazan' cossacs" who not related to classic cosscas at all.
I really have no idea about earlier cossack history, I just have some idea about the cossack rebellions, the Don cossacks and their hetmanate in general. I guess this is mostly because of their famous time being this era, what with it being a crucial moment for Polish and Russian history.

>Nowdays they are total loosers X---DDD
Hey! Watch it, Liberast, or you'll get whippenings. They really do seem like a cosplay militia.

>>8599
Yes, it would be for the best.
>>
No. 8604
>>8599
Yes it is interesting, what is your problem elitist scum, too good for it? Rate the theory like I asked or if you don't know then shut up. This is a history thread, stop injecting your insults into every topic.
>>
No. 8614
I am a bit too late, i see some bragging itt. But can you post this lecture about arabic invasion again. I am actually like to discuss it. Tired of russia.
>>8604
Sorry for assuming you're autistic, thought that the answers are from another american
>>
No. 8622 Kontra
>>8604
Fuck off poltard
Your scum killed krautchan and then you killed EC. You should be shot on site and dumped in a chemical barrel.
>>
No. 8641
246 kB, 825 × 566
>The Taron were first discovered by outsiders in the 1960s. At the time, there were four dozen or so Taron, and researchers believed that the population was large enough to sustain itself for at least a few more generations. But genetic disorders were very common, likely in large part due to the amount of inbreeding within the community. The population dwindled as the number of viable births plummeted. As one surviving Taron, a man named Dawi, told a wildlife scientist by the name of Alan Rabinowitz (through interpreters), “for many years the Taron only marry each other. But when we have babies, the babies have small brains and small bodies. It was no good.” That was in 2003 or 2004.

>With birth defects the norm, the Taron leaders decided to simply stop continuing the ethnic bloodlines. Dawi continued: “We don’t want Taron babies anymore. Long ago, the Taron decided not to have babies with each other. Only with [a neighboring ethnic group called the] Htalu. [ . . .] There are few Taron left. Many die alone.” Dawi, the youngest pure-blood Taron in his village, 39 at the time of the interview, was likely to die alone — and likely to be the last of his people.
>>
No. 8644
>>8641
>“We don’t want Taron babies anymore. Long ago, the Taron decided not to have babies with each other. Only with [a neighboring ethnic group called the] Htalu.
Dang, it's interesting how when ethnic identity is doomed, species identity takes precedence.

Nature finds a way.
>>
No. 8651
>>8644
Well when it is genetic defects actively destroying your own babies, yeah of course. Because by that time the bloodlines are dead anyway.
>>
No. 8669
>>8651
It just confirms my point that tribalism, in all forms, is largely utilitarian. And when the utility of tribalism is not relevant, tribalism itself is not relevant.

If tribalism was an Ideological position, then such trifle as mutant babies wouldn't budge its position. The phenomenal has no authority over the ideological. Principles and stuff.

But when a tribalist is faced with options of either extinction, or mingling with another tribe (no matter how distant), he will choose the latter.

Ain't implying anything, but that's my dry analysis. Ideologies aren't concerned with pragmatic issues such as survival. Pragmatic impulses will sacrifice ideals for the sake of survival.

Such cases.
>>
No. 8670
58 kB, 640 × 640
"During the Iron Age, and later during Roman and Germanic rule, Southern Gallaecia—today north Portugal and south Galicia—was the more dynamic, urbanized, and richest area of Gallaecia. This role was assumed by the rural north during the Early and High Middle Ages, as a consequence not only of the Islamic invasion, but as the final result of a continental wide urban crisis.

The old bishoprics of Braga, Ourense, Tui, Lamego, and others, were either discontinued, or re-established in the north, under the protection of Lugo—which was now a stronghold due to its Roman walls—and Iria. Dumio was re-established by the Bay of Biscay in Mondoñedo, Lugo assumed the role of Braga, and the bishops of Lamego and Tui sought refugee in Iria, where they received generous territorial grants. During the 9th, 10th, and 11th centuries most of these bishoprics were re-established in their historical sees, but at this time the bishops of Lugo, Mondoñedo, and Iria became major political players; not just as religious figures, but also as wealthy, and sometimes mighty secular powers. In particular, the bishops of Iria and Compostela were notorious warlords, due to the many fortresses and military resources they controlled as heads of a military Norman mark, as well as due to the wealth that the pilgrimages and royal grants brought to their lands."

I've been dwelling into the medieval history of galicia as of late. For a long time studied the pre-roman history of the said region wich proved a difficult task due to the scarcity of documents.
The medieval history of galicia is amazing and incredibly rich, i'm enjoying greatly learning more about it. It's a shame that portuguese history curriculum overlooks galiza so much even tough it's 100% interlinked to the formation of portugal and its culture (specially in the northern regions)

Was also reading about the "revoltas irmandinhas" wich were, quite fierce, popular revolts against the noblemen in galiza in the same way of the "jacqueries" in France. From what i've been reading till now, the medieval history of galiza seems way more tumultous than the portuguese one (mostly due to the fact that Portugal centralized the power in the king quite soon and as such there wasn't a typical fuedal regime as the one that could be observed in France or even Spain)
>>
No. 8690
>Importation of diseases to the Americas was not just one-way deal: the Europeans got syphilis as an exchange. Whilst there had been similar diseases earlier in Europe, the American strand was extremely virulent, and it killed a lot of people, and rendered even more sterile. The majority of old European Medieval noble families died out and several royal houses (Valois, Tudor, Trastamara, Rurik) became extinct. The syphilis meant also a drastic change on sexual behavior - and, unfortunately, hygiene. Since Treponema pallidium thrived in public baths and saunas, they all but disappeared in Europe. The following centuries were the real Dung Ages, not Middle Ages.
Wait wut

First of all, is this true, and second of all, who the hell are these people? I only ever heard of the Tudors.
>The majority of old European Medieval noble families died out and several royal houses (Valois, Tudor, Trastamara, Rurik) became extinct
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rurik_dynasty
Valois
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Trast%C3%A1mara
I never heard of these people. What other huge European dynasties were wiped out by plagues? I know nothing on this claim.
>>
No. 8696
>>8690
>plagues
>>
No. 8700
>>8696
Sorry for that
>>8690
This families didn't just died out from plagues, but from several reasons. Political rise to power led to a wars between family members. Ryuriki suffered from the stupid inheritance laws. At a moment when family lose it's power to other families they start to decline by being included in more powerful families.
And the final strike is a "blue" aristocratic blood. They didn't had such diversity and were inbreed with each other. So these families suffered from genetic diseases. Romanovs would be probably extinct by this moment anyway.
And syphilis came from China or Indonesia as i recall.
>>
No. 8701
>>8700
>And syphilis came from China or Indonesia as i recall.
The Americas. That's where the face melting strains came from.
>>
No. 8707
>>8690
>First of all, is this true, and second of all, who the hell are these people? I only ever heard of the Tudors.
>>The majority of old European Medieval noble families died out and several royal houses (Valois, Tudor, Trastamara, Rurik) became extinct

These four are pretty important royal families, but they didn't die out due to plague.
>>
No. 9128
202 kB, 787 × 646
Here is the history thread OP

>I would like to hear stories from people who had relatives live in the USSR. I want to know what they think now when they look back too, if possible.

>Also literature recommendations as to the workings of the Soviet economy would be very welcome
>>
No. 9141
>>9128
Sorry again gentlemen.
I'd also be interested in literature about the Nazi economy
>>
No. 9311
14,6 MB, 2605 × 2178
876 kB, 2560 × 1440
1,5 MB, 1600 × 995
426 kB, 1280 × 960
Because this is the best thread in Ernstchan, I'll translate some things on the Siege of Diu.

Since 1509, that the Ottomans and regional allies had attempted to dislodge the Portuguese from India. The Portuguese managed to gain the support of some local rulers who wanted greater autonomy/independency and were okay with the Portuguese setting up trading stations.

The Sultan of Gujarat granted the Portuguese the city of Diu in exchange for protection should the Mughals attack him. After there was no threat of no the Mughals attacking him, he decided to negotiate a withdrawal of the Portuguese from Diu, who had already built a fort. One that still stands today, see pic 2.

The Sultan of Gujarat entered a Portuguese ship to conduct diplomatic negotiations, and after they went sour, a couple of drunk Portuguese sailors smashed his head in with a row, causing the Sultan to fall to the water and drown.

This was in 1537, but in 1536, this same Sultan had sent an envoy with a large sum of gold to the Ottomans in order to secure Ottoman assistance in removing these catholics. The Ottomans arrive in 1538 with 80 vessels and 6.000 men. This force was led by Hadim Suleiman Pasha, a eunuch Pasha of Egypt.

By this point, all the local muslim rulers were understandably pretty upset at the Portuguese, so the Ottomans had no problem recruiting more local help. The combined Ottoman-Gujarati armies numbered from 18.000 to 22.000 men.

The small Portuguese force defending this fort numbered 600 men, commanded by one António Silveira.

Suleiman Pasha wrote a letter to António Silveira, offering him and his compatriots free passage for themselves and their belongings should they choose to vacate the fort. He also wrote that he would skin the local garrison alive, should they not take such a generous offer. He bragged about his ranks being full of men who were veterans of conquests of Europe, men who took Belgrade and the island of Rhodes. He asked António Silveira how he planned to "defend such a corral with such little cattle".

António Silveira requested a ink and paper from his men to reply to the "castrated dog" and wrote back the following letter:

>Great and Honourable Captain Pasha, I have read the words of your letter. If in Rhodes there had been the knights that are present in this corral, you would not have taken it. I'll have you know that there are Portuguese here, well used to slaying many moors and whose captain is António Silveira, a man who has a pair of balls that are stronger than the balls of your cannons. I'll also have you know that every man here has a pair of balls and they are not afraid of those don't.

In the following four month long siege, the Portuguese forces had lost 560 men, whilst the Ottoman-Gujarati forces had lost 6.000 men before retreating. Only 40 Portuguese survived.

Diu would remain in possession of Portugal until 1961.
>>
No. 9312
>>9128
Probably answered this on kohl before. Anyway ask your questions, i am still in SU and remember some things from there.
Here is another story, more unusual than average. My Grandad was middle level government official in transport department. He had possibility to become deputy minister of transport but refused since he was religious and well people knew that he dislikes communists. That was quite obvious since my grandma was from kulak family. Basically after stalin people didn't care about how communist you are, but still used that as excuse for their personal gains, also they started to care about their day to day life, not only about "grater good". System became more about how others like you, not about your opinion. Anyway he had good relationships with kgb agents in his town and was described as good communist in one book made by known writer, so my family was quite safe.
So SU had huge dark economy for officials and it was legal. Example: truck goes from one town to another, it receives certain amount of fuel to do it, then if some fuel left it's out of system. Food, cloth, furniture is made not according to standards it goes out of the system. Officials had this "little notebook" with list of available "bad" goods. And this worked not only among officials, officials just were more organised. And everyone was aware of this. Real economy was built around the bugs and glitches of official planned system. Self organisation was impossible in legal SU, you couldn't just see that something ain't working and fix it. You should rework dozens of plans and pass through huge bureaucracy. There was no troubles with achieving the plan, but it was impossible to grow over it.
Now imagine how ineffective this system was.
>>
No. 9313
>>9312
If someone is interested i can later proceed and describe how government and political camps in ussr worked according to my granddad.
>>
No. 9315
>>9313
I am interested. Personal accounts are always very interesting.
>>
No. 9316
>>9311
moral of the story geography+good vessels>an eunuch with veterans

geography is literally the most important aspect of both strategy and tactics. the portugese travelled all africa and attacked an ottoman owned sea and the so called 'magnificent' suleiman didn't even had any idea wtf was going on. suleiman was extraordinarlily ignorant about it meanwhile the portugese were extraordinarily good about it.

if you dig about turco-mongol conquests and great expansions you'll see how they were mastered about geography and map making. the sultan suleiman sent some envoys to indonesia as well but none of them resarched the geography and geology. they didnt even returned with different kind of stones and whatnot.
but then we had piri reis he had good aspects about those but his talents are wasted thanks to the 'magnificent'.
>>
No. 9333
>>9315
So... There was one party and one leader in ussr, but that's doesn't mean government wasn't divided. It's very similar to modern China or Russia. People often compare it to Byzantium, but money meant nothing in ussr.
First of all there was a division on loyal camps. One guy puts another guy on higher position, new guy owns it to his new boss. Not only about loyalty it's always good to have people who actually do something. So there was kinda fight for smartass workaholics(not the story of my Granddad, he received his position for being a close friend of one minister).
Off course this creates several classes of officials:
-Guy with connections. Just a guy who know everyone and drunk with them. Quite useful and will eventually rise up to a higher position, might be even the highest position.
-guys who actually do all the work. Will stay on their position unless a guy with connections will not take him
-in Belarus it was called "samasui" or "samahui"(самахуй). From the words "himself" and "to put", simply translate it as "Put in", fits quite well. Literally the stupidest guy who does nothing and always licks butts so hard his boss moves him higher just to take him away. Always ends up in ideology department.
So what's really mattered in ussr was connections. And connections were formed through a higher education. So this led to creation of several branches of connections or parties if you want. Borders between this branches were liquid and uncertain and they are more of classification, than the actual wings. Obviously all these branches were formed around certain persons. My granddad said that the only reason ussr divided was because Shushkevic and Kravchuk were more respected among functioners than Eltsin, but Eltsin had power in Russia, so they agreed on divide.
So branches according to some article that I forgot:
-let's call it the retail branch(торгаши). Literally the cancer of ussr. Ring of people that had work in retail and bosses of food production factories, cloth, import, export, infrastructure. They formed in economy, non-stem and agrarian universities. As i said earlier they had special "notebooks" where they list all the good stuff. Depending from their level of trust people received access to special notebooks. First book listed where you can get the good stuff for money, second listed free stuff, third listed connections. Since there was lack of everything in ussr it was quite hard to get meat at any day, so the first book was the most valuable. One of the reasons there was always a lack of everything was exactly that fucking notebook. I heard that in Moscow they just had special store for it. They also had special judges, special policeguys, special kgb guys inside of this ring. So if someone is busted it goes smooth for him. They all were undercover billionaires. Funny that in this scheme only that notebooks were illegal. They never had real power, but many of them became oligarchs after the fall of ussr.
-agrarian wing. Formed in agrarian universities. Directors of kolhozes. Bribes in self made products are priceless. Atleast these guys did what they were asked for.
-kgb, police, army, foreign ministry wings- speaks for itself.
-propaganda wing-literally whole culture. Students that succeeded in ideology and "samosuis". They never had any actually big influence.
Technocrats-directors of factories and people from polytechnics. People obsessed with S-P-A-C-E, T-A-N-K-S, T-R-A-C-T-O-R-S, S-C-I-E-N-C-E. Pride of ussr, but definitely they are the cause of many troubles.
I will proceed a little bit later
>>
No. 9336
>>9333
This branches influenced society in quite hilarious way.
I'll give an example of my faculty. It was machine building in polytechnic university. Faculty had machine building specialties, economic, ideology and somehow design and math. Guess what economic and ideology departments were doing. Obviously it was intended to support factories with managers, but actually the idea was to bring economy specialists in technocratic ruling branch. And now in Belarus machine builders control economy and economists control machine building. And my faculty has the best economy faculty, while economy university has the best manager faculty.
You can see leftovers of this in whole post-USSR.
Now i also remember the part that might be surreal to you. Obviously my granddad was quite rich compared to others. This caused inferiority complex in my dad and his obsessive hate to USSR. He went out of family when he was 17 and never talked to them up until i was born, even after it we had contacts with our 100yo grand grand mother, but not with granddad for some period of time. My grandma told me the story that my father was bullied in school quite hard for his nice jacket. Kids were throwing rocks at him and called him "Bourgeoisie". Several girls refused him because he was rich. On the good side, at least my father made himself in life on his own and our conscience is pure. actually i took my granddad library of history and sci-fi books, so mine is not so pure
>>
No. 9390
>>9316
Yes, the Ottomans really did blunder it. They had the theoretical advantage and should have stopped the Portuguese takeover of the spice trade and prevent the establishment of the trade route around Africa.

The Portuguese had actually sent a lot of spies to India and Arabia in order to study the political systems, figure out local weaknesses and trade routes. All of this before the caravels sailed over.

The Portuguese were also experts in minimizing the numerical advantage of their oponents, forcing fights into chokepoints and an expert use of artillery to devastate the enemy at close quarters. The use of small forces being ferried over the sea into forts was the modus operandi for the past century.

The Ottomans didn't seem to take the threat seriously until it was too late to simply dislodge the Portuguese from India.

>>9333
Interesting posts. Rise and Fall of Communism does go into a lot of what you wrote, a crypto market in which commodities and favours are exchanged. Things like ballet tickets could ensure that a production plant got its supplies on time. It even explains how this underhanded form of doing business proved crucial to go around the shortsightedness of central planning. How often these favors or commodities that were exchanged were to gain products that would be necessary to keep a factory running, but that simply weren't in that year's budget. Given that the managers didn't want to go through the apparatchiki circles and file a bunch of pages, they'd go over their head and directly contact the supplier.

Very macabre how the system was so broken that corruption was necessary to keep it alive.
>>
No. 9393
>>9390
It's also kind of ebin that it is ironically an extremely pure form of capitalism where capital in all its forms can be bartered with from social to material, social to social etc. and that having a high net social worth allowed access to more exclusive trading circles with higher potential for profit. It's capitalism without the limitations of granular currency.
>>
No. 9409
>>9393
>>9390
Oh guys,i am probably described it too colorfully. In fact they were trading with panties, salo, caviar sometimes, deer or horse meat, or products that were in excess anyway.
A place in a query was viable for soviet union and date of delivery was viable too. If you had money you couldn't buy anything that you want. People had to stand in query on flats, cars, dachas, anything in demand particularly. Or had to wait to delivery date. Common products had delivery dates 3 times a week(bread, meat, cereals, milk), products that can be stored had delivery dates 2 times per month(sugar, cereals, alcohol), exotic products had delivery dates near a holidays. Particularly everyone had mandarins on new year, sometimes caviar or exotic fish on 1 and 9 may. The fact that i can still tell you this dates, even though i was a kid back then and 27 years passed shows how it was important back then.
So this notebooks contained mostly delivery dates or free query places. Officials still had to stand in official lines to buy something, they just had access to inside. So when there is a free place, they had to take it faster than others.
This all created this special soviet consumer culture. When someone hears a rumor that there will be no sugar next week and people buy tons of sugar. At some moment they buy 2 years norm of sugar for their whole family, go to shop and to see empty stores and "see told ya". Here is the proofs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRcI4QF1r9s
> Things like ballet tickets could ensure that a production plant got its supplies on time.
I understand why this is bad and that technically it's a corruption, but this is just a business etiquette. It's more about non-western cultures, than SU. It's just brilliantly worked in SU because of uncontrolled bureaucracy. Probably i will write about it later and about production too.
>>
No. 9414
324 kB, 1152 × 789
546 kB, 1250 × 760
36 kB, 500 × 277
>>9409
So the post about industry and production in ussr. Troubles with production are highly overrated in SU. In fact they always produced exact the same amount they thought they need. And here is the thing i noticed many people don't get
> Things like ballet tickets could ensure that a production plant got its supplies on time
SU didn't had subcontractors system you used to. They were creating a full production lines inside of huge walled areas inside of their cities. So for example factory which i have been produced guiding systems for missiles. They had full production line inside. Even CPU with it's own architecture. These areas had everything from their own food and energy production to underground transport systems.
This system obviously had many flaws and benefits. From one point infrastructure and supplies were not that important for them. They receive huge bars of metal, store it and could made anything from it, since they have proper equipment. So small serial production was thriving in quality and numbers, but it was only military equipment or other non-civil product lines. From another point they could produce civil products in big numbers, but quality suffered a lot.
Workers come at the gates in a morning, then they go to their workplace, receive daily plan, make it and go smoke and drink tea after it. Or just unadjust their equipment and do nothing for the whole day, because adjuster is always drunk and someone else will do everything instead. Development bureaus were in the same building with production or near it. Since it was hard to fire people not everyone worked there too. Also many people used production equipment for their own purposes.
So to prove it better, welcome to one of many detroits of eastern Europe. See pic one. Grey areas are production "cities inside of a city"
Legend:
1) Full production line for tractors. From bolts to engines. It had around of 80-100k workers inside during it's best era.
2) Bus production. 40k workers during it's best era
3) Electronics area. It had enough power to copy apple computers from scratch
4) Same, but IBM
5) Optics and lasers
6) Heating equipment
7) Trucks and world of tanks
8) Gopniks and household appliances
9) Machine tools
I missed a lot, but i don't know what they're doing actually. You can see on pic 2 that's these areas are packed quite tight.
Another things that people always miss is how everything was fixed, reused or saved in SU. Soviets had huge factories and organizations that were doing only repairs.
>>
No. 9417
84 kB, 600 × 800
>>9414
Sure, some things worked efficiently as is to be expected in a state that is essentially mobilized in for key industries in which the customer would be the state.
However, the bureaucratic nightmare was present in things that in a more liberal society would be immediately solved.
In general, whilst it is feasible for the state to organize itself to achieve set goals and set out a rational process to do so, the Soviet Union seems to have opened cracks in the system that could only be efficiently fixed in underhanded and corrupt ways. As time went on, these cracks became more apparent and I believe severely shaped the mentality of people who lived in former soviet/gommie states.
The thing that I find that really sets apart the corruption in the former Soviet Union and Friends is that this form of corruption wasn't wasteful spending as it happens in liberal economies, but in itself a valuable and necessary tool to keep the gears of the system spinning.
I suppose I'm not telling you anything new, I'm sure you're well aware of the three keywords thar defined the Soviet economy: Блат, связи и толкаш
>>
No. 9419
>>9414
Also, would you mind to post more about SU's industrial layout in regards to city planning?
I remember trying to research this topic before and finding little to no answers, some former CCCP Bernds would just tell me that cities simply had an "industrial belt", but I need to know more.
>>
No. 9421
>>9417
>pic related
Аахахаха блять, годно, в первый раз за долгое время проорал с картинки. Сохронил.
>>
No. 9422
936 kB, 644 × 644
>>9417
>However, the bureaucratic nightmare was present in things that in a more liberal society would be immediately solved.
Where do you think i am now?
>the Soviet Union seems to have opened cracks in the system that could only be efficiently fixed in underhanded and corrupt ways
They couldn't be. In fact even USSR faults are somehow results of the previous mistakes and mainly were the fastest possible solution at the time.
>The thing that I find that really sets apart the corruption in the former Soviet Union and Friends is that this form of corruption wasn't wasteful spending as it happens in liberal economies, but in itself a valuable and necessary tool to keep the gears of the system spinning.
The system did what it was intended to do. But when it's actually created some equality, completed industrialization and won the war, Union didn't know what to do else. It became the same historical inertia it was fighting against. People didn't see what else they can get from the union and communism
>I suppose I'm not telling you anything new, I'm sure you're well aware of the three keywords thar defined the Soviet economy: Блат, связи и толкаш
I would say that USSR had average normal corruption, less than in many western countries, but it was still ineffective. People cared especially about corruption, since it's always hard to tell what is actually wrong, especially when you have only that feel.
Here is youtube just recommended me one of my favorite bands. Always reminds of USSR, not only because it is about it, but because i remember like my father loved this song and somehow sound of this band songs over the wheat field is the brightest memory i have about USSR. Search for the translations of lyrics too, it's probably can't be fully translated, but still
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0mKkzqMyns
>Also, would you mind to post more about SU's industrial layout in regards to city planning?
Sure, but later
>>
No. 9578
62 kB, 163 × 166
>tfw reading Nazi occupation newspapers
D-g, this shit for brains gets me really hard.
Although, it's convenient to "think about fates of Motherland" in a cosy environment. I lack context of that time lived by myself, so I don't know, how would I behave if I were living at that time.
Neither I wish to know.
>>
No. 9579
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Protasova
>She replaced Countess Praskovja Bruce as confidante and first maid-of-honor in 1779. She became lady-in-waiting in 1785. Catherine entrusted her with her most intimate personal affairs. She is most known in history as "l'éprouveuse", the role she played in Catherine's love life. According to legend, she was to "test" the prospective lovers sexually before they became the lovers of Catherine, after they had been suggested by Potemkin, chosen by Catherine, and examined by a doctor for venereal disease. This very same unconfirmed role has also been attributed to her predecessor as lady-in-waiting, Praskovja Bruce. She accompanied Catherine on all her trips and journeys. Protasova is mentioned as "l'éprouveuse" in the poems of Byron.
So basically, this is like asking your secretary to fuck people to find out if they're good enough to bother with fucking. Do current Russian leaders do a thing like this? Is a sense of prostitution for lands and titles a Russian political tradition?
>>
No. 9595
60 kB, 800 × 522
>>9578
Some levels of hardship are better to be never known again.
Save for direct death, I think one of the worst common fates possible in WW2 would be to be a Soviet soldier who gets captured during, for example, the first Battle of Kiev.
You'd be stuck in a bloody battle that your side has absolutely no chance of winning, but it gets worse.
Not only would you see a very macabre dose fighting, seeing your friends die and possibly being wounded, you get captured by Germans and sent into a slave labour camp, under horrible conditions.

A few years later, you're rescued by your fellow Red Army soldiers, only to then be sent into a labor camp due to being a traitor who surrender Also your family that stayed home was also punished for your cowardice.
>>
No. 9616
>>9595
>Save for direct death, I think one of the worst common fates possible in WW2 would be to be a Soviet soldier who gets captured during, for example, the first Battle of Kiev.
>You'd be stuck in a bloody battle that your side has absolutely no chance of winning, but it gets worse.
>Not only would you see a very macabre dose fighting, seeing your friends die and possibly being wounded, you get captured by Germans and sent into a slave labour camp, under horrible conditions.
That's my grandad
>A few years later, you're rescued by your fellow Red Army soldiers, only to then be sent into a labor camp due to being a traitor who surrender Also your family that stayed home was also punished for your cowardice.
Nope, you would be transfered to another city, because you relatives are probably already transfered too. With no options to find them. Kiev battle was before the order 227.
>>9419
>Also, would you mind to post more about SU's industrial layout in regards to city planning?
Soviets had only industrial, science or military cities. City planning was pretty simple. If it wasn't, than a city was build before the revolution.
Factories had and still have their special industrial zones with only one enter(checkpoint). Zone is guarded and dogs patrol a wall around it at nights. People are using public transport public transport, cause cities and towns were often build around the factory and factories had parking lots only for bosses. They all have small markets near that checkpoint, where babushkas are trading with stuff from TV-shops and socks. There can be several factories inside of this town, cafe, institutes, colleges, development bureaus and even concert halls. And well it's often build near a huge road or railroad. It's really all i can tell, since there is not much to tell at all.
Fun stuff: City services don't have free access into this zones. And one of this services is to catch cats. So cats form huge colonies inside of this industrial zones and go out in packs at night.
>>
No. 9626
253 kB, 1000 × 1084
46 kB, 602 × 399
>>9616
Not before order 270 though, which already set forward the no surrender under any conditions rules, as well as setting penalties for it, although I checked up again and it seems 270 was primarily directed for officers. It makes sense since the memoir I read was of an officer who got the treatment I posted in the previous post.
Either way, the Soviet Union's enforcement of punishments were highly erratic during the period.

The Battle of Kiev itself is pretty sad, Soviet troops who had no possibility of surviving encirclement, being ordered not to break out. A tremendous blunder by the Soviet leadership.
Although in its own way, it helped defeating nadsies since it contributed to Hitler's megalomania. It was another case of Hitler going against what all of his Generals advised, and the result being spectacular.

Also such comfortable Portugal chairs when no harrowing tales of a war and suffering in my family.
>>
No. 9627 Kontra
>>9626
Also thanks for posting a bit on industrial cities. It still fascinates me that today Russia has closed cities.
>>
No. 9630
>>9627
>>9626
>Not before order 270 though, which already set forward the no surrender under any conditions rules, as well as setting penalties for it, although I checked up again and it seems 270 was primarily directed for officers. It makes sense since the memoir I read was of an officer who got the treatment I posted in the previous post.Either way, the Soviet Union's enforcement of punishments were highly erratic during the period.
Who cares. All pows were resettled forcefully or not, mainly because they didn't had an easy way to return people back. Even gulag would be overcrowded. Mandatory gulag for pows is kinda a myth based on survivor mistake. My Grandad told only bullshit to everyone about it. I know for sure that most survivors actually just were resettled.
>>9627
>It still fascinates me that today Russia has closed cities.
Closed cities are closed mostly geographically nowadays.
>>
No. 9664
24 kB, 276 × 280
>reading some russian emigrant's blog
>hurr look how everyone in Western Europe knows English latest 70 years and how they use English everywhere but only russians don't try to study this language and how people in Eastern Europe catch up to studying English
>mfw
[wewuzkangs]
First 40 years from latest 70 years those Europeans learned Russian as much as English, because we were stronk and they bowed to us. Russian man learning the English language and using it in everyday life is an act of bowing down to Anglo-Saxon world. We must protect our independence by not learning English.
[/wewuzkangs]
>>
No. 9665
>>9664
It's not like most of them know much Russian, or use it for that matter.
>>
No. 9667
62 kB, 567 × 438
>>9664
>First 40 years from latest 70 years those Europeans learned Russian as much as English
In western Europe? I have serious doubts. Substantiate your claims.
>>
No. 9668
>>9665
Well, yeah. Closed borders (for Russia and with Russia) certainly didn't help that case.
>>
No. 9671
>>9668
I'd say it wasn't a natural lingua franca, so it never went anywhere.
I rarely see Russian book at antiquaries for example, while German stuff is plenty, and so is English.
Most teachers who knew Russian quickly changed their main expertise into English (Sounds like a disaster and it actually was)
Kinda sad to see that there are so many monolinguals here. (I guess it's different in Slavic countries where the languages are somewhat similar to Russian)
>>
No. 9801
>>9664
As I know, germans not learning english as much as other nations. I think it just show how relevenat for people to learn foreign languages. Russia have hell lot of native speakers, almost all media translates into russian, I think there not much reason for majority of russians learn english that much.
>>
No. 9802
>>9801
As I know, germans not learning english as much as other nations.
Most Germans do speak English. They generally think very low of their native tongue for some reason. At least that is what I've heard.
Don't know why. It's a really expressive language.
>>
No. 9827
>>9801
>As I know, germans not learning english as much as other nations.

Everyone has to learn English from 5th grade onwards in Germany.
>>
No. 9835
>>9827
Everyone in russsia learn it in school nowdays, some even from 1rst or 2nd grade, but this not mean they know it
>>
No. 9915
>>9802
It is perceived as uneducated if one is not able to hold a simple conversation at ages below 50.

Germans are still quite sure that they speak one of the best languages there are. IMO only Hindi is slightly better.
>>
No. 9927
>>9915
It truly is one of the best language around.
It's expressive and has limitless combinatory potential to produce words that you can use to express your abstract ideas.
At least that's how I see it as a (mediocre) speaker of German.
>>
No. 9932
55 kB, 600 × 450
>>7816
>>7827
>>7834
>>7845
>TFW the men follow orders too the letter.
>>
No. 9945
>>7828
I heard that 11 out of the 12 leaders of the German Communist party at the time were Jewish.
>>
No. 9959 Kontra
>>9945
>I heard that
Which in other words sounds like some poltard artifact riddled jpg

Great proofs
>>
No. 10381
I found this super interesting
https://www.damninteresting.com/this-place-is-not-a-place-of-honor/
>Before one can communicate with unknown future societies about deadly nuclear waste, it is important to consider with whom precisely one is trying to communicate. Such people may be part of a highly advanced civilization, they may be a society much less advanced than our own, or they may have comparable technology to that which we have today. Further, they may not be directly descended from local cultures. Messages will thus need to communicate to anyone— regardless of their culture, technology, or political structure— that intruding upon the repository is not in their best interest.

>The ideas that sprang from the panel were varied and interesting. It was decided that the markers would need to be designed to impart multiple levels of information, ranging from the rudimentary— something made by humans is here— to the more complex, such as the exact composition of the waste. This approach, coupled with redundancy, was hoped to allow future discoverers to realize that the site was significant, but also providing detailed information should future society have the means to read the data. They also pointed out that the markers should be made of ordinary materials and absent of beauty, lest the finders see value in removing the markers from the site.

>Panelists described culture-independent ideas which are intended to trigger the danger reflex in all of humanity. One example indicated a massive “landscape of thorns,” made up of fifty-foot-high concrete spires with sharp points jutting out at all angles. Another intriguing idea was an arrangement of gigantic, black, “forbidding blocks” which are too close together and too hot to provide shelter.
But of course
>Ultimately, the decision for the WIPP markers was motivated by cost-effectiveness. Current plans call for the area over the waste storage panels to be outlined by “earthen berms,” which is another way of saying “large piles of dirt.” These berms will be jagged in shape and will radiate out from a central, generally square area. The jagged nature of the berms is meant to convey a sense of foreboding, and the exact size, shape, and configuration of the berms will be such that they will not quickly be eroded or covered. The four corner berms will be higher than the others to provide vantage points to see the area as a whole.
It truly would make a great dystopian non-fiction that the great civilization 7,000 years ago decided rather than actually warning people explicitly just made a bunch of dirt piles because they were too fucking cheap for anything else.
>>
No. 10669
80 kB, 800 × 617
135 kB, 800 × 556
191 kB, 557 × 405
Time to revive this thread with more Russia posting.

I'll post about how the Muscovite, and early Russian Tsars picked brides until Peter I abolished the practice.

It's important to understand that Muscovy was riddled with a very unique form of clan factionism, which according to my analysis primarily created due to the system of Rota and various forms of succession by seniority. This would plague Muscovy and Russia until the 17th century.

Muscovy/Russia had problems with acquiring foreign royal brides to marry the Tsar/Tsarevich due how much of a backwards frozen shithole isolated land it was. Likewise, due to the complicated clan intrigues and the urge of the Tsar to maintain the balance between various boyar rivalries. Additionally, there was the problem that any bride to be would have to convert to Orthodox Christianity.

In 1505, Vasili III of Moscow decided to copy a Bizantine Ritual and instate it as practice to select a bridge. Across the land, virgin noblewomen from low-middle nobility families were selected. Hundreds were brought to the court, inspected by doctors, priests and courtiers. They checked their health, beauty and most importantly how cut off their noble families were from the main clans of Moscow.

No matter how far apart these soon to be brides were from the most important family lines of the Russian court, families would attempt to push the ones that were more closely related to them up the "contest". Out of this period of pre-selection, a dozen or so women were brought to live in a palace in Moscow. They would present themselves to the Tsar, who would meet them before making his final choice. With his mind made up, he would hand the soon to be Tsarina a golden ring.

Their lives would be quite different to other European queens, as Tsarinas (like other upper class Muscovite women) lived lives of seclusion, never seeing the outside world in an harem like condition in the Terem Palace.
>>
No. 10682
>>10669
>It's important to understand that Muscovy was riddled with a very unique form of clan factionism
I don't say we was THAT unique and THAT isolated. A lot of maariage between european and asian royal families still happened, during different peiod of time many principaties have their connections with Poland, Lithuania, Moldova, Byzantine or other states. Same if you look at rzeczpospolita or grand principality of lithuania you may see some similar goverment elements here.

If we talk about state evolution as more big theme of disscution, creation of Rus as state was way different from all other civilisations and for different reasons. Same as you will look at start and reasons and look of our feudal period- concenquences and elements are similar to europe, but reasons and look is different. It sometimes feels almost like it is happened "accidentily" that russian history before Ptere I in some ways have similarities with Europe when there was only accidential similarities, but this question is far more complicated and it was actualy one of the most important political-philosophical quesion in russia in XIX centuary, with Westernizer and Slavophilia factions barking at each other russia is europe or it's unique shit between west and east with it's own path.
>>
No. 10686
>>10682
>I don't say we was THAT unique and THAT isolated.

I see it as fairly unique. Not that clans and rivalries didn't exist but the Rota system seems to have created a unique dynamic in my opinion.
As far as I know, no other state had to purposely avoid having the royal family marry into high nobility.
>>
No. 11074
https://www.opendemocracy.net/johann-hari/japan-place-with-strangest-drug-debate-in-world
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2014/04/19/lifestyle/cannabis-the-fiber-of-japan/
https://apjjf.org/2014/12/49/Jon-Mitchell/4231.html

Interesting. Is this true? It pretty much claims that Cannabis held a central role in Japan for centuries if not millenia until being stamped out by the US occupation at the end of WWII.
>>
No. 11143
1,2 MB, 2899 × 2019
ebin
>>
No. 11183
In meantime, Hitler as homo.
As if we had any doubts :DDDD
CIA published his file.
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/HITLER%2C%20ADOLF_0001.pdf
>>
No. 11189
>>11183
>SPEECH-MAKING TECHNIQUE
wow this promises to be absolutely golden, this is the most fascinating aspect of an otherwise mediocre leader.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpU2Vtzwh80
>>
No. 11198
>>11143
Wait, why would Vercingetorix wear roman armor? What am I missing?
>>
No. 11200 Kontra
>>11183
>He loves the circus. The thrill of underpaid performers risking their lives Is a real pleasure to him.

The report does not give sources for most claims I think. I did not check on the homo sex lifestyle and many other points that can be seen in the table of contents. Also some sentences read like (pseudo) freudian analysis.
>>
No. 11225
4,1 MB, 100 pages
Here is pdf of the previous thread
>>
No. 11236
>>11225
>PDFs of EC threads
Good work, I like that.
>>
No. 11266
Where would be the best place to start, if I wanted to read about the interwar period.
With focus and economy and empires.
Focus European.
>>
No. 11317
>>11266
An introductory book about the interwar period could get you the classic literature to certain topics, usually they have a set of literature at the end of every introductory chapter to a certain topic of the interwar period

I quickly consulted my unis library search engine:

Anti-imperial metropolis : interwar Paris and the seeds of Third World nationalism / Michael Goebel, Cambridge University Press, 2015

Interwar Britain : a social and economic history / Sean Glynn and John Oxborrow, 1976

The European economy between the wars / Charles H. Feinstein ; Peter Temin ; Gianni Toniolo, Oxford Univ. Press, 1997

The world economy between the world wars / Charles H. Feinstein ; Peter Temin ; Gianni Toniolo , Oxford Univ. Press, 2008

The role of banks in the interwar economy / ed. by Harold James, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991

The French empire between the wars : imperialism, politics and society / Martin Thomas, Manchester Univ. Press, 2007

I could deliver more books concerning empire perhaps if you specify what you are interested in...also I did not look for journal articles which will be another big heap of possible info

t. history student
>>
No. 11320
206 kB, 22 pages
>>11266
>>11317
some random journal articles

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43855011

http://vs.ucpress.edu/content/2/1/19

pdf can be had via sci-hub, example attached and perhaps interesting for you
>>
No. 11321 Kontra
>>11320

also when I wrote a small paper about the democratic subject in Weimar Germany I stumbled across papers that sum up current research concerning Weimar Germany, these papers talk about the latest books and their approaches and methods in research. But I don't know how to find them, they must exist for more topics than just Weimar Germany, like interwar empires e.g.
>>
No. 11322 Kontra
159 kB, 13 pages
312 kB, 39 pages
>>11321
As an example and just in case somebody is interested in Weimar Germany and wants to go behind already known facts and old close postwar narratives

Perhaps their are other review essays for your most loved topic in history.
>>
No. 11331
>>11198

He squared off against the chaddiest primus pilus of IC's army, who decided to gift him his armor as a gesture of humility.
>>
No. 11366
>>11317
Thanks I will look over these later.
Any personal recommendations.
>>
No. 11401
>>11366
I don't know them. Maybe the Oxford Press books are are good since they seem to cover the matter in a more general approach.

Concerning empire you have to be more precise I think.

Here you can look for articles
https://www.tandfonline.com/

just get the DOI and go to sci-hub if you find one that is promising
>>
No. 11405
>>11331
Wait, seriously? Where can I find out more about this event?
>>
No. 11618
13,4 MB, 480 × 360, 7:46
Why are Russians so memeworthy?

Although maybe this should just go into a webm thread instead if someone wants to make one.
>>
No. 12383
24 kB, 266 × 354
I found out about this guy while reading about John Bell Hood in Georgia/Tennessee and just remembered him again. Thought EC might appreciate this gem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_Rights_Gist

I really love how his father was autismus maximus enough to name his son States Rights because he liked the doctrine of states' rights.
>>
No. 12407
>>12383
It famous thing when new political regime or social structure changed, people want name their kids in some "new" way that can be attached to current political events. Things like "Vladlen" which is abbreviation of "Vladimir Lenin". For some reason this guy is also reminds me of "American McGee".
Can you make more interesting and long posts about interesting things about Confederate heroes and some civil war events? I recently readed and watched some videos about Confederate equipment and weapons, some rare and interesting examples of wierd and cheaply produced revolvers and rifles by small enterprises, some of which is now forgotten or have very little information on them.
>>
No. 12409
22 kB, 740 × 218
>>12383
I wonder if he was ever tempted to join the Union cause in rebellion :DDDD

>>12407
>Can you make more interesting and long posts about interesting things about Confederate heroes and some civil war events? I recently readed and watched some videos about Confederate equipment and weapons, some rare and interesting examples of wierd and cheaply produced revolvers and rifles by small enterprises, some of which is now forgotten or have very little information on them.

When I see information about this stuff I often find myself wondering how it would play out in the modern world. All the advanced and plastic complicated weapons we have these days would never last more than a few months in a total war setting. Maybe we'd see a rebirth of SLRs and other battle rifles.
>>
No. 12410
48 kB, 599 × 407
24 kB, 778 × 341
17 kB, 512 × 239
248 kB, 1500 × 334
>>12409
Problem is, that now world filled with firearm weapons. Everywhere, in most shitty african country you can find chienese AKs, older german rifles like G3, hell lot of still working WW2 equipment, which obvious, that all produced hell lot of shit in WW2 and after WW2 most of it was throwed out in third world, or more modern equipment that was send in third/fourth world during cold war by all sides in hope local ogga-booga tribes convers communism/start eating free burgers, so there is not actual need to produced weapons in storage massively, when during civil war in USA mostly agrocultural south had real shortage in weapons, it was still times before modern wars, there was still a think "a guy on horse with spike".

However, I remember some funny cases of weapons of different eras meeting.

One is, when Papua New Guinea become kind of independed from Hetherlands and it was INSTANTLY invided by Indonesia who wanted MORE CLAY. While Indonesian army have to at least some degree modern ammunition, at least for post WW2 standarts... Papuases corps of poorly trained volonteers was armed by Dutch with FUCKING MAUSER 98K POLICE CARABINES with NATO 7.62mm. Of cource, they failed.

Second is situation that kinda similar to confederation one - at start of Jugoslavian wars, Choratia had shortage of weapons and appropriate mmilitary manufacturing so they builded a great amount of so called Šokac submachine guns, which is basicly kid of PPSh-41 copy made on most simple tolling on different factories that not produced weapons before war. There a couple of variants I have on 2-4 pictures. I wonder why they not did more advanced and usable, but yet much more simple PPS-42/43 which was in original build in most terrible conditions from most simple materials by most simple tools, kind of like some british weapons like STEN but this in some ways was TOO simple to be that much usefull guns, with this shit that replace pistol grip but well, I honestely don't much about story of it's production and usage, maybe it was better for them.
>>
No. 12411 Kontra
>>12410
>Hetherlands
Nederlands of cource, sorry for typo
>>
No. 12426
>>12407
I feel like it's slightly different to make a kludged name and naming someone after the thing itself. It'd be like someone called their kid 'War Communism'. It's pretty damn bizarre.

>>Can you make more interesting and long posts about interesting things about Confederate heroes and some civil war events?
Maybe when I feel more motivated. Doing other projects on the side right now that eats up my will to write.

>>12410
>when during civil war in USA mostly agrocultural south had real shortage in weapons

At the outbreak of the war, both sides didn't have enough guns. The US had to buy back a lot of guns from the civilian population at a loss even. If anything, April 1861 saw the Confederacy in a superior position in arms quantity but an inferior one in potential to build more arms. Throughout the war, their biggest problem was food though, guns could be captured and plenty enough were imported by the blockade runners to plug the gaps. As the war went on, the fact that their arms wore out and couldn't really be replaced without capturing more, and their foundries produced inferior cannon and cartridges at smaller numbers than the northern ones meant that their equipment quality tended to degrade doesn't change that they usually had enough in the weapons department, even if it wasn't an ideal amount. They couldn't feed a large army and they even had to reduce their count of artillery because they couldn't feed the horses. It was definitely in the rations part of logistics that they suffered.

>it was still times before modern wars, there was still a think "a guy on horse with spike".
It was the first modern war. The lancers you're thinking of were a pair of tiny Texan units that made one action with their lances at Valverde where they got butchered and the survivors threw down the lances and never used them again. Standard regimented cavalry was used either for scouting or as mounted infantry that would dismount and fight. Scouts did see fighting but it was skirmishing rather than pitched battle. There was also the use of very modern artillery including breach-loaders, rifled artillery, exploding shell, case, shrapnel etc. The armies were moved and supplied on an industrial scale with railroads and waterways where possible, arms were manufactured identically and in vast quantities, and by 1864, it was trench warfare and nothing less.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdukjMdp1-w
>>
No. 12427
>>12383
Maximum freedoms
>>
No. 12572
151 kB, 959 × 639
What are the best resources to gain a better understanding of the interwar period. In particular, I'm interested in the politics of the period and the various (new) political groups that were starting to gain steam in the period, such as national socialism and communism.
>>
No. 12575
Watch Babylon Berlin.
>>
No. 12581 Kontra
159 kB, 13 pages
312 kB, 39 pages
Huh, go to the history thread, I answered HK how to research a historic topic.

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/14747.html

It's criticized from a German historian as the old Weimar narrative sum up tho.

Do you have access to university library? Just use their search engine.

I put two review essays as pdf. They go thru Weimar research of the last decades and contextualize publications

Thsi thread should be merged with the history thread...
>>
No. 12592
>>12575
That actually was the inspiration for the question if you will
>>
No. 12625
>>12581
Have you heard anything about „the death of democracy" by Hett?
>>
No. 12628
>>12625
No, but it sounds, alright. I remember my teacher in highschool quoting someone who said: within months we will have him (Hitler) squeaking in a corner. So it's not a groundbreaking argument he brings up.

But Weimar is more than Hitler gaining power. One history book won't be enough to understand that whole period, which is a construction anyway, yes the Weimar Republic existed on paper from 1918-1933. But processes in society don't go along such dates.
Anyway, coming back to the issues of one explanation: it's just not enough, that's the crux of history, you have many arguments that agree with each other or don't, in the end it's an amalgam of different explanations that lets you get closer to what has been, but don't expect to find an ultimate truth to a such a complex, a sociality which I losely define as discourses and practices within a society
>>
No. 12629
>>12628
Naturally I didn't mean to imply that one book, especially when it's only 250 pages, could give a complete picture. I asked mostly because it's on sale on Amazon. However, if its main argument is something that is not really taken seriously by teachers in German high schools then I don't know if it's worth it. And I'm very much less interested in how the Nazis came to power and instead am more interested in learning about how society was such that the Nazis could come to power. I'm sure it's more complex than Versailles.
I see that the book by Weitz is available for a reasonable price as well. I particularly like that it seemingly gives thought to the social aspects of Weimar Germany.

Anyway, I'll stop bothering you after asking this: Are there any other academics that specialize in this period that come to mind?

Thanks for the help
>>
No. 12631
>>12629
>Are there any other academics that specialize in this period that come to mind?

There sure a some in the anglosphere. I can only think of Anthony McElligot, just take a look at the review essays I posted, they list the books before the article begins. I highly advice you reading the whole Hung article btw. as it touches upon the topic you are interested in.
Also Peter Fritzsche is dropped in this article and he was some important scholar on Weimar Germany it seems, his books are also available in English? Try to find out.

>instead am more interested in learning about how society was such that the Nazis could come to power

perfectly fine! my take on the things is similar.

You could read The Salaried Masses by S. Kracauer, it was written in 1929 and gives an interesting image on white collar jobs in Weimar Germany

https://www.versobooks.com/books/734-the-salaried-masses

Also Kracauers Ornament of the masses is well known in the anglosphere as well

Maybe look up some of these journal publishers like taylor and francis and search for weimar germany / interwar germany and mass culture, some introductory book in German had the subtitle "the breakthrough of modernity", so mass culture is an important point
>>
No. 12632
>>12629
>>12631
A paratext for salaried masses from verso

>First published in 1930, Siegfried Kracauer’s work was greeted with great acclaim and soon attained the status of a classic. The object of his inquiry was the new class of salaried employees who populated the cities of Weimar Germany.

>Spiritually homeless, divorced from all custom and tradition, these white-collar workers sought refuge in entertainment—or the “distraction industries,” as Kracauer put it—but, only three years later, were to flee into the arms of Adolf Hitler. Eschewing the instruments of traditional sociological scholarship, but without collapsing into mere journalistic reportage, Kracauer explores the contradictions of this caste. Drawing on conversations, newspapers, adverts and personal correspondence, he charts the bland horror of the everyday. In the process he succeeds in writing not just a prescient account of the declining days of the Weimar Republic, but also a path-breaking exercise in the sociology of culture which has sharp relevance for today.
>>
No. 12633
>>12629
> if its main argument is something that is not really taken seriously by teachers in German high schools then I don't know if it's worth it

it was taken seriously by my teacher, it's an important argument even, but it's not groundbreaking as this must have been in 2011/2012 and was known by then to some degree at least.

Maybe McElligotts Rethinking the Weimar Republic: Authority and Authoritarianism, 1916-1936 is more interesting to you then:
https://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1636
>>
No. 12637
>>7561
I watched Babylon Berlin the other day and the Social Democrats in the German government were trying to arrest the top dogs in the German army by sending planes out to Russia and taking air pictures of these air strips and tank testing grounds in Russia.

It's still a mystery to me on why Hitler decided to invade USSR when they could basically own all of Western Europe at will.
>>
No. 12638
3,5 MB, 6713 × 4004
>>12637
You realize that Babylon Berlin is fictional, right?

As for why the Nazis invaded Russia, it was, most importantly, because of their realization that Britain wouldn't surrender and tangentially because the clash with the ussr was inevitable eventually. The Nazis realized that Britain was holding out hope that they could ally with Russia to attack Germany; this was Britain's only hope and despite the Nazis attempts to make peace with London, London wouldn't have it. So, Hitler decided to invade Russia under the assumption that they'd be able to win easily and then force Britain to surrender. It is fairly clear (though the histiography may disagree) that the Nazis genuinely didn't want war with Britain and the attack on Russia was with a dual objective - to smash the soviets and to bring about peace with Britain. This is of course ignoring tactical failures of the Nazis (especially in Africa) but pretty clear.

To be certain, I am far from an expert and my only real sourcing comes from Shirer's the rise and fall of the third Reich (itself is fairly heavily biased in tone towards the allies but nonetheless a pretty good account of Nazi Germany). If you're genuinely interested in this then read the book. From what I understand about it, modern historians think it outdated and somewhat bad (i will ask >>12633 again for clarity as he seems to have a knowledge of academia) but I think that this is mostly because Shirer's tone is that which isn't entirely politically correct (his treatment of poles in particular is that of a man who sees Poland as a failed people) moreso than his bias towards the allies which I'm sure is still common albeit in a more underhanded way in modern texts. In short, I'd say that it's pretty good history so long as the reader is able to think critically and challenge some of Shirer's biases, but that doesn't fly in modern day history where everything must be such that everyone that opposed the Nazis are equal and good.
>>
No. 12642
If we are talking about weimar i have a question too.
There was a popular opinion in SU, that stalin could support German communists and this would start communistic revolution. But stalin didn't helped them, due to his isolationism. While it's a fact that stalin had his hands in German politics, i don't know about his influence on it. Was his threat to German politics real?
>>
No. 12645
>>12638
>in modern day history where everything must be such that everyone that opposed the Nazis are equal and good.

You don't celebrate in modern day history, that is unprofessional. I'm sure there are lots books that have a critical standpoint on history of the UK, US and Soviets and so on. E.g it has long been debunked that the German division is the soviets fault. A calm tone that does not try to take sides with anything is what should be the ideal. Overly poetic writing is frowned upon. Most historians will be pro democratic society tho, but that should not stop them from debunking a common narrative that came into being by whomever. I remember a text about factory work in Nazi Germany and they never said oh evil nadsis doing bad stuff with workers. The text just stated that the nazis took up on Taylorism that was already a thing in Weimar Germany. That means that they also debunk nazi propaganda at the same time tho.

Again, there won't be just one explanation but different factors that come into play why Germany started to invade Russia.
>>
No. 12647
777 kB, 1199 × 878
249 kB, 1200 × 900
>>12642
By the time Stalin came to power, the worst had passed for the Germans, and the threat of a communist takeover was far smaller than it had been just a few years ago.
The Russians did support these 1918-1919 communist uprisings, although their ability to do so was certainly lessed to the absolute mess that Russia was at this point in the civil war.
If anything, Lenin certainly seemed to have the belief that a "proletariat revolution" revolution was imminent in Germany, so that could have played into a possible lack of urgency. Additionally, the Bolsheviks didn't really like the brand of communism espoused by the German communists.

Overall I'd say that Lenin blew it by genuinely believing the revolution in Europe was imminent, something that would really hurt Russia in her peace treaties, and arguably the German communists too. One can't blame him for not giving more support, as Russia was in пиздец mode. The criticism levied at Stalin stems from a later Torskyist rendition of Stalin's Socialism in One Country, something that Lenin had accepted since Trotsky roped the Red Army into the Polish war fiasco.
>>
No. 12672
>>12647
I am starting to have to pay attention that I see the difference between your ball and Belarus.

Thing is though, the "world proletarian revolution" is partly what seems to have unified Western Europe in fear, and what allowed Hitler to rise in addition to economics. Had the Soviets taken a more active role in German politics wouldn't that have played into Hitler's hands? It always struck me that seemingly his primary target never even was the Jews but the Bolsheviks, and that the only reason he truly hated the Jews was seemingly as a corollary of his hatred for Bolshevism. At the very least his language in Mein Kampf and elsewhere seemed to be more actively passionate in his hatred of Bolshevism than anything else, and seemed his primary fixation at least until just immediately prior to the war years in like 1938-39 and 1940s.
>>
No. 12679
49 kB, 600 × 338
76 kB, 505 × 700
60 kB, 799 × 489
53 kB, 600 × 300
>>12426
Sorry for late replay, but well, I'am not an Civil War expert, and indeed you know more about it than I - however I aware of blockade runners - and I know that initially both sides had shortage of weapons, since it was first time in USA histroy when they making so large scale military operations, and unlike Independance and 1812 wars it was something much more modern.

However, as you said yourself basicly - "amount of guns" is more therm of how fast and how quality you can constantly replanish, build thins guns, made ammunition. North had advantage on sea as I know and recived much more amoun of ammunition than south, north have industrial areas when south was agrocultural country. North initially had problems with conscription and standartisation of manufacturing, but they resolved this problmes much more fast - and south honestely never managed to do it.

South armies for most part of war had basicly whtever ammunition they can get - not very standartisated, often outdated and low quality. Exept rare exeptions, most of their equipment was from low scale production initiatives, who build simble, outdated, poor quality guns in small ammouns - like guy in field just build small factory in wooden storage and maded like 300 black powder revolvers untill he failed his buisness or untill north just burned this storage to ground.

And in modern world there most times no such situation - even in most terrible countries, like central africa, afghanistan and others with constant wars there so many china/west europe/middle east production AKs, PPSh/PPS, FALs, other leftovers from vietnam war/WW2/Ygolavian wars etc. so basicly all ooga booga tribes can immideatly be equiped with mid-XX centuary assult weapons. So such problem as was with south back than - basicly non exist nowdays exept extreme cases.

However I remember case about north - guy created kinda nice carabine but was bancrupt or something and basicly Mayor of New Yourk bought his factory and started producing this guns, but then started civil war, and hell lot of angry people during New York draft riot burned down this factory with almost all already produced carabines that was still not delivered anywhere lol
http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_417026

On topic about this was fist MODERN war - kinda yes but I'd don't say that there is physical mark where you can place end of old style wars and begining of new ones. Like I may say that first true modern war was Franco-Prussian War - with it's significant usage of many modern technologies that was not used in this scale in USA civil war, like trains for transportation and many other things. Some other people will say that first world war was truley 100% modern war where was used first time most of important parts of modern warfare - airplanes, air carriers, submarines, automatic rifles, cars and tanks etc in significant scale.

>>12642
Stalin supported germany communist political movments, not in a way that they created a revolution - but more or less as political movment. They was kind of major power - Рот Фронт (Rote Front) may be familiar thing for you. However, Stalin actually came to power from result of fail of Trotsky with uprisings of Workers in England, and proposed his doctrine of "socialism in dedicated country". I don't remember correctly, if it was actual Stalin thing that England protests failed (because SU don't help helped this uprising) or it was resolved by itself - capitalist owners tricked this loosers to stop riots and continue working as slaves, but anyway, Stalin won and USSR become isolationist totalitaric country.
And existance of experience of civil war in russia and becomeing it just semi-totalitaric kinda-empire not played on popularity of stalin-backed commie organisations around the world. Nazis was also not that popular honestely, but was more lucky and more active/aggresive.
>>
No. 12682
92 kB, 1000 × 529
>>12679
The problems the Confederate industry had were scale and quality control. They always had enough guns, even if the logistics got awkward when half a corps had .58 rifles and the others had .55 rifles. They couldn't produce enough local arms to standardise though, this is the scale problem, and it also manifested as the inability to be overly picky with what they did make so some lower-quality pieces slipped through which didn't really happen in the northern factories which had production surplus. They also had some older (but not outdated) production methods such as at Tredegar Iron Works which made artillery. It was modern artillery like Parrott rifles but they were made using workarounds so they were the same design but a bit bulkier than northern designs. Same with ammunition, they were making the same stuff. The Burton bullet that was being used by both sides was invented in Harper's Ferry in Virginia even and the Confederacy inherited that armoury which was one of the most advanced in the world at that stage. It's not like they were making smoothbores and round shot to fight the north. They were using the same technology but with the problems that a less-developed industrial base brings. With things on large-run production you had poor quality control, but their small-run production like in Fayetteville, NC and Richmond, VA, was more known for above average to very high quality armaments with the downside of them being hard to get in large numbers.
>>
No. 12736
202 kB, 1200 × 1737
406 kB, 1000 × 750
168 kB, 1000 × 541
30 kB, 467 × 320
>>12679
>However, Stalin actually came to power from result of fail of Trotsky with uprisings of Workers in England, and proposed his doctrine of "socialism in dedicated country".
>Stalin won and USSR become isolationist totalitaric country.
>And existance of experience of civil war in russia and becomeing it just semi-totalitaric kinda-empire not played on popularity of stalin-backed commie organisations around the world. Nazis was also not that popular honestely, but was more lucky and more active/aggresive.

If there is one particularly insidious bit of Trotskyism that seems to seep into most of the evaluations of Stalin's rule, from the Trotskyite's rendition of Stalin as a traitor of the proletariat to the most amateur of simplifications that Stalin was merely the particularly most violent of Soviet dictators, it is the one that Stalin decided to throw out the Marxist ideal of proletarian revolution.

It is important that to remember that this is a criticism of Stalin that Trotsky would pen while in exile, far away from the cold pragmatism of running a state. In this position, Trotsky was able to criticise the Soviet Union's present form by appealing to traditional Marxism. It is accurate that under what Marx wrote, the idea of a nation attempting to maintain itself with a "proletarian" regime would be an exercise that would end in failure. As the saying goes, only a worldwide revolution would overthrow a worldwide system.

There are many more venues through which one can criticize the Soviet Union from an "orthodox" Marxist perspective, though. The most damning of which, in my humble opinion, is that a socialist revolution within the Russian Empire would not happen at all. After all, the crisis of capitalism would reach first and foremost the industrialized capitalist nations of the globe. Marx put them as Britain, the United States, France and Germany. In his view, these would be the nations in which the proletarian revolution would hatch, and spread into the more backwards, less economically advanced nations.

Given this premise, the Bolsheviks found themselves in the position of needing to justify how it was that Russia was the first of nations to enter a revolutionary period. The explanations put forward were several, from Russia's unique position - how the reactionary nature of the Tsarist regime created particularly progressive revolutionary class, to Russia's early "exit" of the war via popular unrest - due to the Tsarist's regime weak hold power and even the Bolshevik party line that peasants had gained class consciousness and could be seen as allies in the revolutionary struggle.

At the outbreak of the revolution, the Bolshevik party operated with the assumption that their revolution was the first of many to come within the next few years in Europe. The end of capitalism was nigh, and now was the time to strike at its heart. From my understanding of writings of Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky and writings about Kamanev, it seems that everyone was fairly on board and unanimous with this premise. This would be a mistake that would severely harm Russia in the leading up the Brest-Litovsk treaty. Lenin particularly did not see a considerable point in squabbling with Germany over territory, given that in a few years Germany too would be a proletariat state.

As the years progressed, it became increasingly clear that great European after WWI would not come along. That Russia would stand alone as the sole red power in Europe. Lenin in particular, took a fairly pragmatic position on this claiming that the Soviet Union should not predicate its existence in "fairy tales". It is worth noting that is the same man who a couple of years previously had claimed that without a revolution in Germany, the Soviet state would collapse. Lenin had no qualms with reversing policy at key issues should the situation call for it, the introduction of the NEP is a good example. Once the Kronstadt rebellion broke out, Lenin would reluctantly introduce something he greatly opposed in order to secure stability.

Trotsky was far more of an idealist than a pragmatist, but he eventually would fall in line with Lenin. After the grand fiasco that was the Soviet-Polish war, it was clear to anyone who was not blinded by the ideological kool-aid that the Red Army had no chance to following the ideal of sparking the revolutionary flame that would engulf Europe. Likewise, the falling into place of a new interwar status quo would help drive the nail into the coffin of a proletariat revolution seizing Europe. Lenin himself would write to dispel the notion that now was the time for the Soviet Union to spearhead a grand revolution across the continent.

Stalin's "Socialism in one country" was nothing more than the setting into stone of a pre-existing governmental policy. If one were to follow the purely Marxist narrative, the Soviet Union should either sacrifice its dwindling resources into one final great push against worldwide capitalism, or the Bolsheviks should step down from power and offer Russia to a capitalist liberal clique since the Marxist would simply be that the world's material conditions were not yet ripe for revolution.

Once in exile however, Trotsky, no longer bound by the cold reality of being within a position of power in the game of nations, was able to levy all sorts of accusations against Stalin. He would necromance the theory of permanent revolution that he had not touched since the Bolshevik revolution broke out, and write down how the ideal true socialist revolution would go. As Lenin wrote down the April thesis, denouncing the idea that the Bolsheviks should onto state power while giving capitalist control of the economy, Trotsky stayed quiet. Now in exile he was once again free to write as he pleased, without any check from reality. The man would go so far as to write how minor logistical mistakes prevented the Polish proletariat to rally to the red army's flag during the Soviet-Polish fiasco.

Mind you that not withstanding Stalin's position, it was still under him that the Soviet Union would reach its revolutionary apex. Before the Sino-Sopviet split one could see that this rainbow of different ideologies united under ideological orthodoxy spread from Berlin to Beijing.

On a final note, to say that it was Stalin who began pushing the Soviet Union into "semi-totalitarianism" is absurd. The Bolshevik was a totalitarian enterprise from the start, no matter how hard the final carrot of a complete communism of democracy and plenty was dangled over the Russian starving masses.
>>
No. 12749
569 kB, 945 × 1170
>Byzantinian Christianity was chosen by Vladimir because it was the fanciest and the richest among Roman Christianity, Islam and Judaism
ebin :DDD
>>
No. 12799
>>12749
This is from myph of "choise of fate"
In reality it was just most basic politics.