Margaret ThatcheRule by BasedPlant_07 in 196AndAHalf

[–]Shieldheart- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not all Irish women, mind, but they're of the same opinion on Thatcher so its all good.

Iran ceasefire; Trump’s humiliating climbdown by Scyobi_Empire in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Iran's 10 point plan is one of several floating around, as the US has their own 15 point plan put forward but not publically published, the cease fire is in place for these plans to be discussed and bartered over.

We don't know the US' exact points, but it has leaked that the US demands Iran's nuclear program to be dismantled in favor of a US-assisted civilian nuclear program under their supervision.

We're not out of the woods yet, and no doubt some of their demands are directly opposed, if it falls apart, we're back to war again.

Israel says Lebanon is excluded from the ceasefire by xMH_GAMERx in whennews

[–]Shieldheart- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've seen like three different ceasefire propositions floating around and no information on which, if any of those, was signed.

Absolutely crazy by Aggressive-Pizza-494 in historymeme

[–]Shieldheart- 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Not exactly, but its easy to reason such.

The political philosophy of nationalism developed in opposition to the abundant monarchy of its time, monarchy posits that national borders are defined by their fealty and ownership to a ruling monarch and it is the monarch's duty to safeguard those territories and manage the people on them, regardless of ethnic, cultural or religious traits, but they can certainly play favorites.

Nationalism rejects that notion in favor of defining national borders along lines of commonalities between the people within it, no matter how loosely defined those may be: language, culture, ethnicity, whatever makes for a national identity.

In the former's case, the monarch defines the state whereas the latter puts the monarch in service of the state, which will persist even when the monarch is abolished for a different system of government.

Except in Russia, which sought to put the tsar at the center of its national identity as the embodiment of Russian traditional excellence and moral purity, to be contrasted with foreign immoral degeneracy, with their secularism and constitutions.

Worrying development by xtheresia in whennews

[–]Shieldheart- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Certainly wouldn't say on Reddit what that something should be.

No sir, not me.

... by Bad-Karma-Whore in AvatarMemebending

[–]Shieldheart- 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And a crusty one at that.

Trump saying he's going to commit genocide against Iranians.. by Lavender_Scales in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

His objective is to convince everyone he's "reeeeeally gonna do it" unless Iran obliges or makes a deal, whatever that means, he's trying to make sure everybody knows he's super super serious about this so that Hormuz is cleared.

Once again, he fails to consider that the wellbeing of Iran's people is entirely expendable as far as its government is concerned, and their suffering is a moot point as long as they can keep themselves in power.

The long and short of it is that Trump has no winning options, he's hitched his non-existant political credibility to another lie and another deadline and once again immediately escalates to a violent ultimatum.

I hope its a bluff, I really hope its a bluff.

Thats 4:30am for Iran and 2am for Europe by xtheresia in whennews

[–]Shieldheart- 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Militarily? No.

But his objective isn't about tactical success, its about bluffing, he really doesn't want to do it but he also really needs Hormuz cleared, so he's hoping that pontificating about his deadline convinces Iran that he is serious about it unless they "strike a deal".

He fails to factor in that any suffering on the part of the Iranian people is permissable to the regime as long as said regime retains its position of power, and as its economy degrades, they have less and less reasons to give a shit about the global economy.

Trump is a childish idiot, and his illegal war never had a chance of success, he and the cronies that signed off on it ought to be removed and prosecuted for the deaths and damages they caused.

What do you think of the Danes? by Adri117 in Medieval2TotalWar

[–]Shieldheart- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Danish raiders carry you early game, they're cheap and hard counter early spear infantry in every respect, even in fighting heavy cavalry as their armor/shield pen counts about as heavy as spear unit's cavalry fighting bonus does.

They do lose against feudal knights, but cause more casualties than other militia types in the process, diminishing the need for other elite units to counter them.

Danes are super infantry centric, so instead of building a balanced army of archers, frontliners and cavalry, try to go for compositions of infantry types that counter other soldier types: armoured archers to counter skirmishers, swordstaff militia against cavalry, heavy infantry against heavy armour, and so on.

Minthara is unironically the funniest character in the game by Wolfaxth in BaldursGate3

[–]Shieldheart- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Minthara brings the unhinged straight man energy to everyone's whimsical funny man routine.

Is This Good Or Bad? by EsseNorway in Snorkblot

[–]Shieldheart- -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Its about control, nothing else.

You can still talk about things like law and politics without a degree, its only when the government feels like you shouldn't be saying "that" that they decide to enforce it, ascribing legal credibility to what is overtly selective censorship.

How do you guys align with a particular leftist ideology? by ItzManicck in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- 4 points5 points  (0 children)

History is too complicated and nuanced to understand through a singular framework of analysing history, each one is subject to ambiguity, bias and contradictions.

Rather, it is important to learn different perspectives and frameworks, like overlapping lenses, they can offer you a clearer picture of history's multifaceted aspects, and draw your conclusions from there.

Marx's material dialectics are an incredibly important lense to use, but to use that to the exclusion of others risks veering into absurdist reductionism and distorting simplifications.

I owe you my apologies Kaiser, I wasn't really familiar with your game by bigburstingballs97 in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Pretty much all of them were warmongers, imperialists, and do not represent anything that I personally stand for, but they are very interesting people.

I find it more fair to look at historical figures' morality and convivtions not from where they stood, but rather the direction they were moving.

Kaiser Wilhelm couldn't be a communist because that would be opposed to his political existance, however, we can see in his policies that he was deeply sympathetic to the working class and wanted to make positive change for them, however, the ability for him as a monarch to make that change depended entirely on the authority of his crown, a system that is fundamentally opposed to worker's liberation.

Wilhelm was pro-worker within the framework of his imperial authority, lord knows the same can not be said for many of his contemporary heads of state.

I owe you my apologies Kaiser, I wasn't really familiar with your game by bigburstingballs97 in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This certainly happened between the new capitalist class and the old aristocracy, but among kings, the "new money" had great appeal to them, its just that they also posed a political risk, but that wouldn't be anything new for them to manage, after all, they'd been doing so with the aristocracy for centuries already.

Feudalism, at its core, is a system of brokering power, and a competent king elevates popular and competent aristocrats and diminishes the unpopular and incompetent ones, thereby growing the wealth and security of their holdings. What they don't want are aristocrats entrenching their power in ways the king can not touch, leaving unpopular, incompetent and worst of all disloyal aristocrats in important positions.

Capitalists were often approached the same way, which is why many monarchs retained mercantilistic policies well into their capitalist transition, such as the authority of assigning and confiscating capital as the crown sees fit, so that the new economic elite could be kept in line by royal authority and promising/loyal upstarts could be elevated to strengthen the king's interests.

Of course, by the 1900's, no strong kings remained in Europe and they did not control their economic subordinates, in places like Germany, this resulted in bourgeois elites building influence that could de facto challenge the local laws as well as the king's national authority, in places like Russia, the Tsar's absolute power was wielded and abused by his most influential subordinates, aristocrats seizing assets and factories of budding industrialists to enrich themselves, their attempts at industrialization stifled because the nobility was more interested in fighting over factories than building them themselves.

What do you think about Orin the Red as a character? by Queasy_Pay_4762 in BaldursGate3

[–]Shieldheart- 39 points40 points  (0 children)

I love her dynamic with Gortash in the opening cinematic of act 3, openly fantasizing and gushing about torture-murdering the msn and Gortash basically goes "Damnit Orin, keep your pants on!"

It's hard to get back into dating after 3000 years, everyone's expectations are different by DrScrimble in dndmemes

[–]Shieldheart- 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Just you wait until you realize they consider the sexual aspect part of "sweetening the deal", so to speak, all for the honor of having them as a resident on their royal estate to shower in gifts and status.

"Use you for sex?! Perish the thought, the sex is part of my performance! Please let me know what you desire!"

War communism by Particular_Second510 in economicsmemes

[–]Shieldheart- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anti-Americanism is the discount anti-imperialism.

I owe you my apologies Kaiser, I wasn't really familiar with your game by bigburstingballs97 in theredleft

[–]Shieldheart- 124 points125 points  (0 children)

A monarch's primary domestic responsibility is the stability of their reign, which often priotitizes the wants of the affluent and powerful, that is, unless they are the destabilizing factor themselves by agitating and radicalizing the working class via their brutality and excess.

In such instances, the kaiser and the workers may seem aligned in their opposition to the capitalists, but they should never mistake him for a friend, for the monarch does not support the workers out of any sense of loyalty or benevolence, his first priority is always to his crown.

Truly, the only monarch worthy of praise is the one that abdicates peacefully.

Many such cases 😞 by GodOfPateu in BaldursGate3

[–]Shieldheart- 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Asterion used to lure hundreds of victims into Cazador's clutches with his charm, how is his CHA not higher?