/lit/ - Literature

>>7030399
>you will never kill your friend in a drunken rage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LsrkWDCvxg

look on the bright side, you will probably live past 32 and its not like you can't still study Aristotle.

Do you think Aristotle tapped his sweet boipussy?

>>7030440
I thought /lit/ hated this guy?

>>7030454
Mos def.

soon m8 when VR is advanced

>>7030447

>Look at single volume 'Complete Aristotle'
>Think about the library at Alexandria
>Stare off into the middle distance thinking about all that lost wisdom

>Alexander
>Great

Caesar > Alexander

>>7030464
retard

>>7030526
Cyrus>Caesar

>>7030548
Hannibal>everyone else

>>7030526
Caesar thought Alexander greater than you.

>>7030526

Caesar was defeated in battle by barbarians on multiple ocasions. Also, he was defeated by Pompey, whom Sertorius and Lucculus thought was a smuck before finally defeated Pompey at Pharsalus.

Alexander was defeated by.... Wait, no one!

>>7030562
Suvorov>Hannibal

>>7030562
Scipio>Hannibal

>>7030600
>Caesar was defeated in battle by barbarians on multiple ocasions. Also, he was defeated by Pompey
So much wrong with this.

>>7030440
Why is this shit allowed?

>>7030399
At least I'm not a faggot or a Greek. And his empire fell apart after he died. Mediocre!!

>>7030702
It fractured into three slightly smaller empires and started western civilization as we know it.

>>7030719
You could draw the line anywhere as to which empire or who started western civilization, or even when. He was a phenomenal conqueror but not much of an administrator. He would have been a better general than an emperor.

>>7030526
>conquering fucking gaul
>more impressive than conquering the whole known world

Kick a stool faggot

>>7030719
>and started western civilization as we know it.
No it didn't.

>>7030728
>He was a phenomenal conqueror but not much of an administrator
hahaha, retard

>>7030742
Yes he did.

>>7030399
tfw no great leader to follow

>>7030672

He lost twice in his conquests of Gaul.

>>7030733
To be fair, defeating gauls in battle would probably have been a greater accomplishment than defeating Persians. They were probably far more ferocious and dangerous infantry, a role which Persians were never especially renowned for, and their decentralized tribal society required the subjugation of every tribe and their territory in turn, whereas as soon as the Persian King died his entire empire changed hands in an instant.

Also Alexander did not conqueror the whole world, was subject to bouts of megalomania and cruelty, could not avert a mutiny of his troops, and fought less field battles than Caesar. Caesar's military accomplishments go beyond merely conquering territory. He travelled all over the Republic in his campaigns, fighting in three continents.

>>7030761
No it/he didn't.

>>7030781
*fighting in three continents too.

>>7030761
No he didn't.

He was quite influential, but he and his army, dead and living, and all the parading potentates, generals and the like did that heavy lifting. He was merely the leader who took a bunch of men into the desert to die for his own idealism, his "glory" and all of your erections today.
>untainted by failure.
Pretty failure in my book, as influential as he was.

>>7030770
No he didn't. The closest thing to a defeat in Gaul Caesar ever came to was when he disengaged from a siege on one occasion when some of his soldiers engaged against his wishes and were repulsed.

>>7030399
Got some kickass nachos going.

>>7030399
>You will never give birth to western civilization by allowing Greek and Persian cultures to intermingle.

>>7030615
>That 'wanna fight ?' stare

He's like the smug Voltaire of warfare

>>7030865
It's more of a 'is this nigga serious' expression.

Am I the only one who liked the Oliver Stone movie?

>tfw you will never be a Companion Cavalryman and fight in Asia with Alexander

>>7030464
it's been like 2500 years since aristotle

wisdom is practically lying around like moldy newspapers in the house of a hoarder compared to back then

>>7030818
fuck off whore

>>7030896

Literally the only person it the world.

While the two battle scenes are good they're about the only thing which is in that film.

>>7030842
>allowing

>>7030781
>Alexander did not conqueror the whole world

Hence why I said 'known' world. The Greeks at that time didn't know of anything further east than persia.

Gauls were disorganized and constantly feuding with each other. They may have been fierce individual warriors but they had no concept of battlefield tactics and thus were usually encircled and slaughtered. The persians on the other hand had a sense of tactics on a similar level as the Greeks, plus a ton of manpower. Not to mention, Alexander managed to inspire enough loyalty in his troops to take the same group of men from Greece to India. That is absolutely ridiculous if you think about it. And he would've gone further if it weren't for them finally saying theyd had enough. Also his megalomania and other vices only came to the surface after he took a break from conquest. By all accounts, he was the most impressive man of antiquity. Caesar was great as well, but just not quite on the same level

>>7031041
Alexander didn't take over any of Italy, Spain or the South of France

>>7031041
The disorganization of the Gauls was precisely what made conquering each separate tribe necessary and thus a more impressive feat. That they were 'usually encircled and slaughtered' is simply made up; they could field extremely large armies, and to be encircled by a numerically smaller opponent such as Caesar only goes to show his skill.

As for Alexander, that he didn't go further in his conquests was due to his inability to satisfy his men and prevent a mutiny; Caesar was faced with a mutiny by soldiers whom he had led for nearly twice as long as Alexander had led his own, and Caesar famously quashed it in an instant. Alexander's cruelty was displayed during his conquests, such as when he crucified and slaughtered citizens of Tyre simply because they had displayed such determination in resisting his siege. His megalomania came to surface due to the success of his conquests, not because his conquests were somehow keeping a reign on them.

In truth, the entire concept of genuinely and honestly 'ranking' generals of Caesar's and Alexander's calibre is ridiculous; the closest anyone will ever get to objectively comparing the two of them is recognizing that they were two amongst an elite. Anyone saying one is greater doesn't know enough about the other. They each achieved things the other didn't, things that could constantly be used to one-up each other. My above points weren't in favour of Caesar as the objectively better general, but to show how hard it is to put the two scenarios side by side. The two men existed in and faced different conditions, situations, and periods that prevent easy comparison. Using conquered territory as the ultimate criterion for skill in a general is silly and potentially very misleading. It would discount other superb generals like Hannibal and Scipio.

>>7031151
*rein on them.

>>7031151
His troops lost motivation after the sack of Persepolis tbh. But Alexander's megalomania didn't occur until after he retreated from india. After that he started calling himself a god and so on. Caesar was also a megalomaniac to a degree.

The gauls were all fragmented with no central leadership as I said and no tactics beyond sending in waves of assaults. The romans had their legion system. No central leadership is NOT a good thing because it meant that they often werent willing to cooperate and fight effectively or in a coordinated fashion, which led to massive defeats when they far outnumbered the romans.

>>7031187
>The gauls were all fragmented with no central leadership
Until this guy came along with his mammoth army. Also politically fragmented entities make for more difficult opponents on the strategic level.

>>7031187
The Romans defeating larger armies was due to their skill, not whether their enemies were fragmented or unified. That isn't a factor that has any influence on battlefield success.

do you think we will ever see a truly great man ever again?

>>7031242
Just wait till the Great War of Caucasus

>>7030399
>You will never wake up in the arms of your general, Hephaestion

>>7031242

>>7030434

He was asking for it, tbh. Plus Alexander, like, moped for a whole week afterwards.

>>7031041

The Greeks knew about India long before Alexander. As did the Phoenicians and most of the Mediterranean.

>>7030615
Charlemagne > Suvorov

>>7031289
he hasn't fought any wars and is high off the fumes of past glory tbh

>>7030440
just christ that was awful

>>7030769
He is so beautiful.

>all these faggots content with incomplete victories

>>7030728
>He was a phenomenal conqueror but not much of an administrator. He would have been a better general than an emperor.

He never got a real chance to rule his empire tbh

>>7031502

Other conquerors - e.g. the Romans, managed to put in place administrative structures extremely quickly. If Alexander had the ambition and drive to do all that he did, he could have found the time to replace the administrative structures he destroyed.

The Diadochoi managed to just that in a few short years after his death, in their respective kingdoms. Even Seleucus.

>>7031515
True. I am just saying that he was a very one purpose-driven man. He died before he could move all his attention from war to empire building

>>7030399
>you will never drink with Socrates in the symposium and watch him chug wine and soberly debate philosophy
>you will never become a sophist and tour ancient Greece
>you will never make enough of an impact in any culture that people will actively want to execute you

>>7031527
>you will never have Socrates slide his thick meaty cock into your tight boythighs until he comes on your ass

>>7030826
But... but... can't we say we still won Gergovia?

>>7030440
>Historians disagree over whether his tactics were truly brilliant or if his army had better technology.

This whole video just makes me rage. Fuck this guy. He clearly made himself look like an idiot saying that Napoleon was short.

>>7031566

But they do disagree about this tbh.

>>7031589
All of history is wrong! Praise John Green the true source of all historic knowledge!

And American tax dollars are paying for this cuck to brainwash students. Bravo.

>>7030440
>>«First, maybe Alexander was great because of his accomplishments. This is an extension of the idea that history is the record of the deeds of great man. Now, of course, that's ridiculous. For one thing, half of people are woman for another, there are lots of historic events that no one can take responsibility for, like intsance the Black Plauge.

What is this shit?
What mean the story of plumber and Kardashian?
HIStory?
Do anybody remember to Green the existence of ἱστορία?

>>7031611

There is so much wrong with what you've just said. You could honestly learn a lot from what John Green said in his discussion of Alexander the Great. You have clearly never studied history but have decided that /lit/'s retarded muh objective history is possible meme is correct.

>>7030399
>dies
>not failure

fucking mortal plebs

>>7030440
> Putting Alex into a Judeo-Christian ethical context
Seriously, what's so wrong about conquering land and butchering people ? They live only for 80y anyway, much less in those days. And he likely killed less people than the Bush Jr administration, and at least he succeeded in getting more turf than anyone before him.

>>7031923
he does this for every (white) culture

>>7031923
Green differentiates a "positive" expansionism based on commerce from a "negative" expansionism based on war.
This is evident in the video on Renaissance.

It is the ground of Green's historical narration.

>>7031932
Yet the Mongol horde, perhaps the largest killing and raping train in all of human history, gets a pass.
You'd think killing over 40 million people, raping about as many, and fucking up Islam for the next 600 years would elicit SJW rage, but since they are POC it's okay.

>>7031988
You'd think that people who work for more rights for certain groups in our current society would care more about something that happened 800 years ago!

>>7030464
>lost wisdom

you think they didn't fucking make copies of books back in those days too?

>>7031366
He turned Checnia from hostile dissident territory into faithful militia reserveland. Gotta give him that. But we're past the era of sweeping land contest. Just look at how much trouble litteraly the most powerful army in history had keeping in check a bunch of Afghan rebels.
>>7031358
Napoleon>Charlemagne

I WANT TO SERVE UNDER A GREAT MAN AND SPREAD A GREAT SOCIETY AND CRUSH INFERIOR CULTURES AND DIE FOR HIM
IT'S NOT FAIR

>>7031991
I don't disagree about having to make amends for what happened centuries ago.
What I don't like is how just because something was done by white Europeans it's inherently still important, and ergo they must apologize. Using your logic, whats the difference between 800 years (events that are still relevant in China, Russia, and The Middle East) and 600 years when the conquering of the Aztec Empire occurred? What about the crusades, which was about 1000 years ago?

It's hypocrisy at it's finest

>>7032022
But anon, there's a big difference between what Americans did back then and what Genghis Khan did. The violence done by Americans against Native Americans, for example, was one of the ways the US rose to current power.

Genghis Khan's empire, on the other hand, has disappeared, which is why no-one cares.

Also, who asked for an apology for the crusades? I think you're fighting strawmen here

>>7031041
The Greeks had calculated the rough curcumference of Earth you doppelniger

>>7032047
You can do that by travelling from Samos to Athens though. No need for India there.

>>7032040
whenever current Islamic violence is brought up I've often seen people go "but what about the Crusades huh?"
it's stupid but it happens

>>7032040
>difference between what Americans did
Spaniard Conquistadors destroyed the Aztec Empire (with help from our good friend Smallpox and subjugated tribes under Aztec dominion), not Americans. The Spanish Empire is gone, is it not?

>Crusades
There's constant lambasting Crusaders as being proto-imperialistic monsters (a foreshadowing of history to come), and how Medieval Islam as the greatest and most peaceful thing ever despite being just as internally divided and violent as much as Western Christian Europeans were, albeit with better medicine and a taxing system akin to the Byzantines.

>>7032058
That's a different thing - these people are talking about violence as an inherent quality of a religion. Group A says "Islam is violent", to which group B replies "Christianity is violent, look at the crusades". No-one's asking for an apology for the crusades.

both are oversimplifying the point

>>7032056
>thinking that people who had a rough understanding of global geography assumed everything else in the world was water

>>7030399
in that time you were more likely to be a dirt poor nobody or dead in some war, not the one in a million guy who's doing the actual conquering just a mook whose job it was

>>7032056

See >>7031300

>>7030818
Butters, I love you, but you are dead wrong right here.

It's pretty well accepted that his conquest of Persia started the Hellenistic age which was the birth of western civilization. Plato and Socrates would not have been remembered had Aristotle not had Alexander as a patron.

>>7030992
Well, I think we could use more of that kind of allowing these days.

Imagine how Alexander would resolve the Isreal Palestine conflict. He'd like, have half of them put to death, and have everyone else marry somebody from the other side. Would be glorious.

>>7031566
I normally defend Green, but this video was pretty dumb. Trying to deconstruct Great man History while talking about Alexander is so fucking stupid.

>>7033590
What I'm saying there is that he was only a small part of it, and his part, no matter how central, wasn't the greatest. Would the Romans not have liked the Greek as much if Philip had had a girl instead?

>>7031981
Yeah but Negative expansionism leads to Positive expansionism. He even admits that Alexander started the Hellenistic age.

Even he recognizes that Alexander was great, but he's too embarrassed because Great man history does not mesh with his narrative.

>>7032021
Alexander adopted Persian customs and had his men marry Persian women. He didn't crush inferior cultures, he created superior ones through assimilation.

His men actually mutinied a lot because this freaked them out. He might have even been assassinated for that reason (or he just died of a fever because germs don't care how great you are) If you are a /pol/tard you would not have had fun in Alexander's army.

>>7032077
That's not what I'm thinking. And it's not entirely impossible that they believe the known world was surrounded by water.

>>7032210
See >>7032056 and realize your post was besides the point.

Reading comprehension is declining on this board, as unbelievable as that sounds.

>>7033616
Maybe not as much. And are you seriously saying history would be the same had he not founded three empires and 20 cities named after him?

I think Great man history is over-rated, but there were some great men who were in the right place at the right time to change history. And these men should be recognized. Anything else denies the facts.

>no great men alive today
dis nigga gon take us to mars

>>7033645
I swear to god this motherfucker is going to turn evil and go all Dr DOOM on our asses

>>7033645
there plenty of great men but with the rise of gnu/judaic resentment we are taught to hate rather than emulate the greats of our times

>>7033645
Literally who.

>>7033653
blah blah blah emulation is in our genes
I for one have only admiration for greater men

>>7033660
elon musk
he is very smart and very rich
he could be batman tbh

>>7033669
he's not that smart but he did get lucky when ebay bought paypal for way more than it was worth lol (he had already been kicked out of paypal by the other founders for being a retard by the time it was sold but they couldn't take his stock back) and now he does business were he can milk the tax payer (green credits for electic cars, government funded trips to the international space station etc.) i mean he's smarter than the average pleb on the street but watch his paranoid rant about AI and see that he clearly doesn't know dick about computer science

>>7033686
but anon i mean i don't believe in singularity either but he is a literal rocket scientist

he must be at least somewhat smart no
what do u think
also idk if you've worked a bit with turing-complete shit but it's scary to an extent

>>7033653
>implying admiration for "greatness" isn't still strong

It's still a great marketing scheme tbh. Do you remember what they said when Jobs died ? You'd have thought the guy was Buddha with dollars.

>>7030781
You're a celt fetishist go fuck yourself

>>7033645
being very smart and innovative is cool but I want someone to hero worship

>>7033691
of course he's smarter than the average pleb on the street, but by silicon valley standards he's nothing special

>>7033714
anon i think you may just want to belittle mr musk just because he is a smug cunt

>>7033633
He's a fact of history, but also overrated by the brutish types ITT. "Ohhhh, I wish he had led me into combat and my certain death" *moan whine*

[Alright captcha, I'll get a burrito]

>>7033739
i think he's a good business man, i own shares of tesla, but he got lucky with paypal.

>>7033745
I don't think you can over-rate three empires and 20 cities named after yourself. And better they praise him than a few others I can think of.

>>7033749
damn that's cool
I wish I did

>>7033759
Okay, yeah.

>>7030440
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LsrkWDCvxg

No... I... Fuck.... Fuck!

>triggered

>>7031208
>only if you want to do the whole 'hearts and minds' spiel

All this talk of conquerors and no one even mentions the greatest Khan to ever ride?
Alexander BTFO by sheer size of the conquered territory, the adminstatrion skills and military tactis.
An you know it /lit/.
You fucking know it.

>>7035303
>kill and rape as much as you can
>big ass statue

An inspiration to us all

>>7035303

Well that looks tacky and expensive. Isn't Mongolia a poor country?

>>7035303
What legacy did Genghis Khan leave, except for 60 million new graves?

This is the difference between Alexander and Genghis. Alexander was a scholar who transmitted hellenic civilization. Genghis was an illiterate nomad whose goal was to loot and rape as much as he could.

>>7035303
Yet the monument uses greek columns ;^)

>>7035312
You don't know a whole lot a bout Genghis do you?
>>7035314
Mongols be like : your palace may stand forever, but my yurt has fucking wheels.
I have to admit they were good at a lot of things but architecture was not one of them.

>>7035312
he was a ruthless conquerer to be sure , but he united a region that allowed cultural exchange from east to west for the first time since han china and rome. eventually trough that choinese inventonts made it to the west , and the story of eastern riches propelled the age of discovery and imperialismn.

also his sons founded the yuan dynasty in china , the ihl Khanate and the Golden horde in russia

>>7035324
>You don't know a whole lot a bout Genghis do you?
This is a typical answer of someone with nothing to say.

>Mongols be like : your palace may stand forever, but my yurt has fucking wheels.
You missed the point of the post. The point being the irony of claiming Genghis to be superior to Alexander by showing a sculpture of Genghis, when said culture incorporates Hellenic architectural elements, a legacy of Alexander.

>>7035345
>but he united a region that allowed cultural exchange from east to west for the first time since han china and rome
Purely accidental. He didn't do that on purpose, it just so happens that he raped and pillaged over a large area.

That's like saying that Adolf Hitler is responsible for men walking on the moon.

>also his sons founded the yuan dynasty in china , the ihl Khanate and the Golden horde in russia
The yuan dynasty was a catastrophe for China, setting it back centuries. The Ilkhanate oversaw the reduction of between 75% and 90% of the Persian population (turns out nomadic horse archers can't into agriculture). The Iranian plateau only recovered its pre-Genghis Khan population in the 20th century

The Golden Horde was a plague to Europe and significantly hampered the development of Eastern Europe.

The adulation of Genghis Khan is inexplicable to me. Are you some sort of John Green fan, since he seems to like "le mongols XD" too.

In any ways, your inability to correctly use punctuation is an indicator of your low intellectual capabilities, and you are comforting my opinion that people who adulate Genghis Khan tend to be not very intelligent.

>>7035362
well , adolf hitler was sort of responsible for men walking on the moon, ever heard of werner von braun?

>The yuan dynasty was a catastrophe for China, setting it back centuries.
not true , while the Yuan Dynasty did terminate the Song , the greatest dynasty in chinese history , it laid the foundation for the government model, the social order and military structure of the next foreign imposed dynasty (the Qing) which would under the Emperors kangxi yongzhen and Qianlong reach the apex of chinese power

>
The Golden Horde was a plague to Europe and significantly hampered the development of Eastern Europe.

not true , the golden horde gave massive leeway to local rulers as long as proper tribute was presented , that allowed the Archduchys of Novgorod and Moskau to turn into trade giants , creating the foundation for the Russian empire

>>7035376
>well , adolf hitler was sort of responsible for men walking on the moon, ever heard of werner von braun?
Sigh. Don't you realize the fault in your logic?

I guess Adolf Hitler's mom is responsible for men walking on the moon, because Adolf Hitler is responsible for men walking on the moon.

I guess Adolf Hitler's mom's mom is responsible for men walking on the moon, ....

>not true , while the Yuan Dynasty did terminate the Song , the greatest dynasty in chinese history , it laid the foundation for the government model, the social order and military structure of the next foreign imposed dynasty (the Qing) which would under the Emperors kangxi yongzhen and Qianlong reach the apex of chinese power
If by "apex of chinese power" you mean "rot away as a hermit empire".

Also the chinese population got reduced by half under mongol rule. HALF.

>not true , the golden horde gave massive leeway to local rulers as long as proper tribute was presented , that allowed the Archduchys of Novgorod and Moskau to turn into trade giants , creating the foundation for the Russian empire
Holy shit, what a revisionist way of looking at things.

The reason why Muscovy rose to prominence isn't because the enlightened mongol rule somehow allowed it to. It's because the ruthless mongols genocided all the competition and left a power vacuum. Same reason why Lithuania blobbed so much during the middle ages.

You're giving the mongols credit for things they didn't do. All the mongols did was rape, pillage and genocide. Whatever changes resulted from that is purely incidental.

>>7035385
by your reason nothing is responsible for anything ever , you completly deny cause in effect. while saying that Adolf Hitler was r4esponsible for the moon landing is a juxtaposition of course , Nazi Scientist werner von Braun was the chief designer for the Saturn 5.

>If by "apex of chinese power" you mean "rot away as a hermit empire".

that happend later at the End of Qianlongs Reign and under succsesive emperors. mid of 17th century chinese society was one of the most advanced in the world.

>You're giving the mongols credit for things they didn't do. All the mongols did was rape, pillage and genocide. Whatever changes resulted from that is purely incidental.

and you are denying them all credit , they united a region from korea to poland. connecting west and east like never before, the administration they left in place was mostly beneficial , for example , they dident care what religion or culture their subjects had , making the mongol empire pretty humanist. the process of conquering was bloody ,nobody denied that. and it was not their intention to usher in the age of exploration , but it still happened

>>7035407
>by your reason nothing is responsible for anything ever , you completly deny cause in effect.
On the contrary, you're the one trivializing cause and effect by ascribing effects to fantastical causes.

For example, is Adolf Hitler responsible for starting ww2? Yes. Is he responsible for men walking on the moon? NO!

Von Braun has NOTHING to do with Hitler. That's the point I've been trying to convey (which you apparently are too moronic to understand).

>that happend later at the End of Qianlongs Reign and under succsesive emperors. mid of 17th century chinese society was one of the most advanced in the world.
Goodness gracious could you make an effort with your typing? I've typed more coherent and better phrased texts when severely drunk.

>and you are denying them all credit , they united a region from korea to poland.
Once again, they didn't unite shit. They just accidently pillaged over a large area.

> connecting west and east like never before, the administration they left in place was mostly beneficial ,
What administration? They were a bunch of horse fucking savages. Their "administration" consisted of moving from area to area, exorting tribute from terrified peoples. They didn't build any administration whatsoever.

> they dident care what religion or culture their subjects had , making the mongol empire pretty humanist
Haha, this is my favorite argument from mongoltards. "B-but they weren't racist!".

Yes, they didn't care if you were christian, muslim or buddhist when they massacred your village, raped all the women and sold the children into slavery.

>humanist
The death toll of the mongol conquests, adjusted for modern day populations, would be the equivalent of 1 billion people being murdered. Such great humanism!

>the process of conquering was bloody ,nobody denied that. and it was not their intention to usher in the age of exploration , but it still happened
It happened yes, but there is NO WAY you can ascribe that to mongol rule. That is just meme revisionism.

>le mongols were so anti-racist bro! They created the modern world XDDDD

Kill yourself, for your opinions as well as for your inability to fucking capitalize the first word in your sentences, you stupid fuck.

>>7035422
ok , disqualify yourself with your ad hominiem and buzzwords, strong arguments bro. fine with me

>>7035426
not that guy but you are embarassing yourself

>>7035426
>ok , disqualify yourself
You're the one disqualifying yourself by the complete lack of effort you put into writing your posts.

English is not even my native language btw.

>>7035431
yeah , mine neither
>>7035429
nice strawman

>>7035433
>nice strawman
That's not what a strawman is, you fucking retard.

Holy shit kill yourself.

>>7035426
>>7035407
>>7035324

And to all the mongoloids trying to justify the Golden Horde:

They were the most brutal people on Earth. The only thing that they did as an external force was to pillage, rape and murder. Trying to justify that by side-effects of their actions is just like saying a nuclear bomb is a good thing for future forest growth in an area.

In contrast, I find mongolian culture as an interesting thing to study and understand. They are a people still very rooted in the an ancient relation to land and nature.

But saying that the actions of the hordes (which left Mongolia because of excessive population along with certain environmental/weather conditions over some decades) as anything more than barbaric is just lying to one's self.

Coincidentally, I just watched Mikhalkov's movie "Ugra" last night. I strongly recommend it to anyone vaguely interested in modern/soviet Mongolia versus the ancient roots and customs.

>>7035462
>(which left Mongolia because of excessive population along with certain environmental/weather conditions over some decades)
You have a source for this? From what I understand the population growth of nomadic peoples like them was limited because there was few ways for them to increase their food production capabilities unlike agricultural societies.

>>7035492
yes

http://time.com/18147/climate-change-genghis-khan-mongolia/

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140310-genghis-khan-mongols-mongolia-climate-change/

>>7033745

Man butterfly you've always been poorly-read and stupid in general but now I'm convinced you're not even trying to sound smart

>You will never give birth to western civilization by allowing Greek and Persian cultures to intermingle.

"No"

>>7030399
>While there he is said to have encountered a statue of Alexander the Great, and realized with dissatisfaction he was now at an age when Alexander had the world at his feet, while he had achieved comparatively little.

>>7035431
Man, you wrote "sigh".

>>7030399

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SRizeR4MmU

>>7033632
>Hence why I said 'known' world. The Greeks at that time didn't know of anything further east than persia.

See >>7031300

You have failed to comprehend what you yourself said. Lel.

>Aristotle will never hear post-rock
>Diogenes will never taste MD2020

who really wins?

>>7036484
Good taste in music genres anon

>>7031298

Wait, what?

I thought Hephaestion died from a fever?

>>7036484
>>7036490
plebs

>>7036574
>too many people know about something so I can't like it xD
uhuh

>>7032063

Most people who lambaste the crusades don't even know about the Seljuks or the Islamic invasions of the Christian Middle East and North African coast.

>>7036595
>ad homineming it up
ur a kewl guy

>>7031988
This idea of "all the men will be killed, all the women will be raped" in historical conquest is bullshit. No marauding band or army has ever achieved a 1-1 kill to rape ratio or anything near it.
Armed men are killed out of necessity; unarmed men are killed when they cannot be beaten down and chained. Women are unnecessary to rape and the rape of women has always been less significant in war than the death of men.

"But all the women will be raped!" is a modern day social justice boogeyman. What you really mean to say is, "But many of the attractive women who don't kill themself or successfully flee will be raped!". Then you may be right.

>>7035303
>horse not facing west
why?

Diogenes taught by living example. He tried to demonstrate that wisdom and happiness belong to the man who is independent of society and that civilization is regressive. He scorned not only family and political social organization, but also property rights and reputation. He even rejected normal ideas about human decency. Diogenes is said to have eaten in the marketplace, urinated on some people who insulted him, defecated in the theatre, and masturbated in public. When asked about his eating in public he said, "If taking breakfast is nothing out of place, then it is nothing out of place in the marketplace. But taking breakfast is nothing out of place, therefore it is nothing out of place to take breakfast in the marketplace." On the indecency of him masturbating in public he would say, "If only it were as easy to banish hunger by rubbing my belly."

From Life of Diogenes: "Someone took him [Diogenes] into a magnificent house and warned him not to spit, whereupon, having cleared his throat, he spat into the man's face, being unable, he said, to find a meaner receptacle."

Absolutely no fucks given.

>>7036627
What an edgy cunt

>>7036651

He was one of the first trolls.

When Plato gave Socrates's definition of man as "featherless bipeds" and was much praised for the definition, Diogenes plucked a chicken and brought it into Plato's Academy, saying, "Behold! I've brought you a man." After this incident, "with broad flat nails" was added to Plato's definition.

>>7030399
>you will never be history's greatest flash-in-the-pan

>>7036659
kekked hard

He gave no fucks even when he was dying either.

When asked how he wished to be buried, he left instructions to be thrown outside the city wall so wild animals could feast on his body. When asked if he minded this, he said, "Not at all, as long as you provide me with a stick to chase the creatures away!" When asked how he could use the stick since he would lack awareness, he replied "If I lack awareness, then why should I care what happens to me when I am dead?"

>>7036602
Excuse me.

The difference between Hitler and Alexander the Great or Ghengis Khan, is that if Hitler had never been born, some other angry German would have lead the Nazis to defeat in WWII. Nazi Germany, or something like it, was a consequence of the previous war.

Had Alexander not been born however, the Greeks would have never defeated the Persians; Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle would have languished in obscurity; and the roman empire would look a lot different. Western civilization as we know it would not exist, full stop.
I'm not sure how Genghis Khan not leading the Mongols would have changed history, but I'm sure it would have been big as well.

So called 'great man history' is false as a generalization, but in the specific instances where it is true, it cannot be over-stated.

>>7038102
that image is ridiculous

>>7038228
Sorry, it's 100% true.

>>7030399
I'd have put those shitskins into gas chambers tbh.

>>7038714
And that's why you aren't the great.
A true ubermensch race mixes.

>>7038753
I'm a fucking spic, if what the ubermensch wishes to accomplish by race mixing is to preserve the great genes for himself then they are definitely geniuses

>>7030399
the greatest

>>7038790
Alexander had his men marry Persian women, and was planning on relocating large amounts of Greeks and Persians to create a new culture for his unified empire.

Because he died we instead got three smaller empires, but his goal was to literally start breeding a new race of man. That's fucking Uber.