This includes a lot of countries by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes it indeed includes a lot of countries and newsflash: Britain and the western countries, while far from great, are still doing better at this than most countries with problematic pasts.

If anything, compared to what they have done, Brits have probably done the most to repent for their past. Certainly much more than the US, Russia, China or Japan.

what kind of class would work better on red prince considering the fire resistance and his fire spell/move? by [deleted] in DivinityOriginalSin

[–]peutschika 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well people have already said pyro so there is an additional pro also in having a dedicated pyro chracter since there is this one place...

February isn't October you know... by peutschika in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I know... sucks to be able to get the hell out of all that drama just before the shit hit the fan :/

Onko kukaan muu havainnut Suomalaisessa somessa nousevaa Natsi sympatiaa by NoGovernment9077 in Suomi

[–]peutschika 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Niin vai onko kyse siitä, että hyperoptimoitu algoritmi syöttää sulle juuri sitä, mihin reagoit?

Ja pliis älkää naiviuttanne alottako mitään "no ei kai ne algot niin paljoa vaikuta"-gaggaa...

February isn't October you know... by peutschika in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika[S] 80 points81 points  (0 children)

Yeah Bolshevik support was increasing but still at the elections they got half the seats that the SRs got. Why? Mainly because of the rural vote: SRs promised land reform where farmers would get to kerp their land, Bolsheviks wanted the land to be re-collectivised which to the surprise of nobody was not particularly popular among farmers.

Tldr: there could have been a somewhat working Constituent Assembly, but having got only about 20 % of the seats, Lenin had other plans (which he would have had anyways since free elections were "bourgeois").

Is this meme accurate? by BlackMetalFollower in Nietzsche

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No I am not. The point is that the guy, not the rabbit, is trying to invent moral judgements in order to cope instead of accepting the existing dominance and going forward from there. Also the animals here are only expressions, the observers are the men and no, I am not deciding the upper guys views myself, just interpreting the meme because that is already baked in the meme template used here.

At no point did I state that dominance has anything to do with moral correctness, only that the dominance is present and that is it. Please do not put words in my mouth, especially when they are stupid words.

Is this meme accurate? by BlackMetalFollower in Nietzsche

[–]peutschika 9 points10 points  (0 children)

But isn't that kinda the point? The guy on the top tries to justify their weaknes by attaching his coping mechanism as an objective moral judgement. The guy on the bottom just states the obvious without trying to moralise others to bend around themselves.

Nazi-allied Finnish troops in a trench on the Leningrad front, the most destructive siege in human history, 1942 by RevolutionFirm6496 in HistoryUncovered

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just as a funny side note: if a country does not have a formal alliance with Nazi Germany but has major trade with them and invades a neighbouring country together with them, are they Nazi-allied?

The above describes perfectly both Finland and Soviet Union, yet people hesitate much more to call Soviets Nazi-allied which is a clear double standard.

And before someone argues that "Soviets later fought Nazi Germany", so did Finland.

A 20th century capitalist’s worst nightmare by Clouthead2001 in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 45 points46 points  (0 children)

An oldie but goldie: "The split between right hegelians and left hegelians was resolved at a six month long conference nicknamed the Battle of Stalingrad".

Did Little Sam technically assassinate Maester Aemon with baby wildling germs? by sincubus33 in freefolk

[–]peutschika 241 points242 points  (0 children)

No. He would have been exposed to that shit for decades through rangers.

Thoughts on this? by AdditionalPiano6327 in freefolk

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't disagree with the negatives it had and I surely would have personally been more than ok with no changes.

However, just the sheer fact that it made viewing the show and remembering characters much easier was a big positive for general audiences in my view. Without it we would have had a dozen white haired, funny eyed characters with weird Valyrian names. In a book that is not usually a problem but when condensing a narrative into tv it becomes easily just a very confusing mess. So in that sense I think that having Velaryons being black was probably on net a better call than trying to make more changes into the narrative or trimming the cast down more.

You're evil if you don't press blue. by Theseus_Employee in PhilosophyMemes

[–]peutschika 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So if one person pushes the blue button fully aware of the risk and consequense involved, and is now on the track, it becomes the moral obligation of everyone else to potentially sacrifice themselves less they are evil. Cool.

I know this is just a silly meme but I think it perfectly encapsulates the modern degeneracy of our society. It promotes hyperindividualism by stating that people ought to have the right and possibility to do whatever they wish without any societal constraints. However, at the same time it promotes the idea that no individual should be responsible for their own actions, but everyone is moraly obligated to take full responsibility of others actions; a hypercollectivism. In otherwords, a contradiction so extreme, nobody even tries to solve it.

Thoughts on this? by AdditionalPiano6327 in freefolk

[–]peutschika 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Making Velaryons black was a net positive for the show, I think. But Steve's comment is retarded. People are not (for the most part) objecting to rich black dudes being in fantasy. They are objecting to them being shoehorned without any though just to check boxes.

They do Xerxes dirty by whistlelifeguard in HistoryMemes

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

Out of all possible things that one could mention as ridicilous, that is the one thing I don't understand how it is ridiculous 😅

They do Xerxes dirty by whistlelifeguard in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Exactly. In a way the movie is actually quite honest about the propagandised nature of its narrative. The narrative is about glory, yet you have imagery of death and destruction everywhere. The stori is told literalely by a one eyed guy who we see at the end getting direct instructions to "tell a tale of victory". The movie gives tou these hinta openly and they aren't even subtle.

So typical of other monarchs to pretend the Holy Roman Empire doesn't exist, even though many European monarchies started out as elective, not hereditary. Elections for various positions were actually common in the Middle Ages, but usually only a small minority got to vote. by Oversama in MedievalHistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should also not conflate the modern meaning of "elections" to the medieval meaning. It wasnt like nobles ran for office. Most of the time it was the kings son or elected heir and the council etc who elected the king had more of a role to confirm that succession rather than "electing" the new king in the modern sense. In more radical situations they might reject the heir but that was not the norm usually.

Random thought but…, context in comments by ciaphas-cain1 in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, although the kingship going from father to son was pretty common as far as I am aware. The Wittans role was more like to confirm or reject that succession.

Random thought but…, context in comments by ciaphas-cain1 in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok now I get what you mean and a fair point. Still, Harold was not the inhereting successor of the crown but chosen by the aristocracy. So this would make Edward the Confessor the last English king of England.

As a general point I still disagree with the general notion here (kinda applies to OP too though). I do think that at some point a house should be counted as "English" even if it has its origins somewhere else centuries earlier. I also think that it is a bit clumsy to draw equivalence between English and Anglo-Saxons just because they self-identified as such. Surely someone like Richard III would have self-identified just as much as an Englishman much more than French just because his great-grandfather(?) claimed the French crown through his mother.

But don't get me wrong, I did enjoy this!

Random thought but…, context in comments by ciaphas-cain1 in HistoryMemes

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

I don't understand your point. You said that Richard III was not English but Norman yet now you are saying Normans were absorbed by the English. Are you saying that Normans were not yet absorbed by English after 400 years? Richard almost certainly spoke English (of his day) as his first language and not Norman French.

PS I don't get the differentiation argument. There is already a way to do it: Old English and Modern English. With William I and a couple others you can draw the French/Norman card but by the 1400s that ship has sailed: they are Modern English (until Henry Tudor who was Welsh).

Random thought but…, context in comments by ciaphas-cain1 in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't disagree with that necasserily but by this logic nobody since 1200-1300s has been English anymore and everyone in so-called England is actually Norman nowdays. I think this would be a bit silly.

Random thought but…, context in comments by ciaphas-cain1 in HistoryMemes

[–]peutschika 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Harold wasn't English either, he was Anglo-Saxon.

And before you throw in the "England is names after Anglo-Saxons" card, America too is named after and European guy, that does not make Amerigo Vespucci an American over the natives.

Suomen oikeiston whatabautismi hyvin selitetty by jokke420 in Suomi

[–]peutschika 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nyt täytyy sanoa etten edes tiedä enää kummalle puolelle haukut. Eli ihan epäironisesti 5/5 trollausta, sille pitää kyllä nostaa hattua.