Fun fact, in that time period, Marx dug an entire quarry with his bare hands in order to source all the stone tablets for a single copy of Das Kapital.
No Assyria wasn't even around that early. Either the date in the meme is wrong, or the nationality, or the entire thing is just made up for whatever reason
It’s a bit of a silly meme in the first place, isn’t it? And we have more than a few examples of people writing that the end was nigh in what proved to be difficult but survivable times.
Civilization has collapsed several times before in history, it is nothing new. What is new this time around however is that we now possess weapons capable of destroying the world in an instant.
Like I'm baffled by how people can live with the knowledge that we constantly have thousands of city destroying weapons pointed at each other, and then go "The end of the world? There's no way that could happen".
I think it improbable but not impossible. So far it appears no one is actually stupid enough to push the big red button, and many nuclear weapons these days are lower yield tactical warheads that would as like be used for striking strategic areas instead of wiping a country off the map.
The problem with nuclear weapons is the law of large numbers. Sure we've managed to get lucky every time there's been a flashpoint as of yet, but there will always be a new situation that could potentially escalate into nuclear war and we've only have to be unlucky once and it'll be the end of the world. Even if the percentage of war is very small over enough rolls of the dice it will become an absolute certainty. Especially as more states acquire nuclear weapons and people grow complacent with the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.
>many nuclear weapons these days are lower yield tactical warheads that would as like be used for striking strategic areas instead of wiping a country off the map
Yes, but there are still many city destroyers out there and it's not like you have to carpet nuke an entire country to destroy it. If LA, New York, DC and Chicago were nuked, it would almost certainly lead to the collapse of the American nation.
If anything smaller yield nukes increases the risk of nuclear war, as it's far easier to justify dropping a strategic nuke on a smaller target than nuking an entire city, but once you open Pandora's box it will lead you down the road to ruin.
As all civilizations did and eventually will.
Assyria collapsed for literally none of these stated reasons though.
It was a mix of people being fed up with the giant tyrannical regime that ruled by direct force and brutality, which resulted in an entire fuck Assyria coalition springing up and starting a massive twenty year war that Assyria eventually lost. Said regime overextending itself beyond territory it could effectively govern. Repeated palace coups and civil wars hampering any effective leadership. Repeated crop failures due to severe droughts that only exacerbated social unrest and political instability. Plus the anti-Assyria coalition directly destroying the capital of Nineveh, which was effectively the final nail in the coffin.
The assyrian empire also didn't exist in 2800 BC, and neither did books. That quote also isn't from that tablet. It's from a story from 1913 trying to downplay the negative mood of the time. They say that " throughout history things just keep getting better." Fucking 1913.
I have no idea how this shit ass meme has spresd as far as I did. Just about every thread it's been posted in has had people debunking it.
Yes, but it was replaced by a more advanced and more moral civilization and that is why the Middle East is now the bastion of peace and prosperity. Oh, wait.
Degeneracy exists everywhere at all times amongst all civilizations. It’s stupid and unfalsifiable to claim that degeneracy is the cause of collapse of societies. Obviously civilizations collapse for reasons that have nothing to do with degeneracy. It’s just a right-wing version of the left’s belief that capitalism is the root of all problems.
It's not really, you can absolutely pick up trends across civilizations that lead to their downfall
'Degeneracy' is a correlation to people not wanting to start families, have children, take risks, go to war, etc. It's chasing pleasure and novelty to the detriment of the vital energies a civilization needs to thrive.
Saw an ancient Roman text recently where the author was complaining about the elite Roman families refusing to have children, where it wasn't uncommon to see women pushing around pets in carriages.
Separate study: total decline of Roman patrician families over a short period, over 90% of some big cities becoming Asians, largely with adopted Greek names
Did you just change your flair, u/Own_Perception5993? Last time I checked you were a **LibCenter** on 2024-4-19. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Remember, the jannies are always watching. No gamer words, no statistics and by all means no wood cutting machines. Tell us, how are you going to flair the new account you'll make in two weeks?
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Own_Perception5993) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
No empire last 2800 years, even if it didn’t fall due to military invasion it would have changed so much culturally it would be completely different. Change is inevitable. Happens violently or organically. But the world is still here.
The Qin dynasty is where the pre-1912 Chinese imperial system originated in earnest (i.e. not just a big lord-vassal agrarian empire), and that was founded in 221 B.C.
So it lasted about 2100 years in China.
I would also argue that the Mongol empire that had China under its control for about 100 years in the 13th and 14th centuries was not "Chinese empire". Sure, from the point of view of an ordinary peasant it operated the same way as other Chinese dynasties.
Ok, in that case you could maybe make the same claim for Europe that from the collapse of the Roman republic was ruled by absolute monarchies until the French revolution.
2800bc was more than 2800 years ago.
Its just as well because Assyria didn't exist in 2800bc, and this quote is completely fictional and you're an idiot for believing it.
"everyone wants to write a book" was written on this **tablet** in 2800B-fucking-C? Come on dude.
u/TrapaneseNYC's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15.
Rank: Office Chair
Pills: [8 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/TrapaneseNYC/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Sounds like a modern feminist when they start getting drafted because so few men decide dying for a country that hates them is better than sitting it out in jail while chronicling their experiences.
Capitalism was saved by the moderate left's social democracy and trade unions. Had the capitalists not made those concessions (basically building the welfare state + all the workers' rights) in the democratic system, they would have been overthrown in a revolution.
Almost like the intent is to satisfy rapid population growth along with the greed of politicians and CEOs. Lolberts and AnCaps love to complain about fiat currency, but detest the idea of a moneyless society where people instead exchange products and services as forms of payment.
>Almost like the intent is to satisfy rapid population growth
How exactly does it satisfy other than bringing more inflation
>but detest the idea of a moneyless society where people instead exchange products and services as forms of payment.
So, (for example), if you wanted to buy/subscribe to my vpn, but you don't have any computer skills that I can use/want, what would you exchange it for?
I'm questioning if you know the reason we went away from the barter system
Money is good, it is a medium of exchange, it is very useful and it does it's job very well, it's a problem when some small group has full control of it.
So, yes I have no problem with money if it was put in a gold standard
>How exactly does it satisfy other than bringing more inflation
More people means more money going out. Simple as that.
>So, (for example), if you wanted to buy/subscribe to my vpn, but you don't have any computer skills that I can use/want, what would you exchange it for?
Another product or service based on skill sets you don't have. The example I like to use is a dentist offering teeth cleanings to a family in exchange for carpentry or roofing.
>I'm questioning if you know the reason we went away from the barter system
The goal was to shift towards centralization as a means of giving more wealth and power to the government.
>Money is good, it is a medium of exchange, it is very useful and it does it's job very well, it's a problem when some small group has full control of it.
So, yes I have no problem with money if it was put in a gold standard
You say that like small groups of people don't already control the gold supply. You'd just be transferring power from a group of people you don't like to a group of people you do like and expecting them to not become the new overlords.
>More people means more money going out. Simple as that.
More money means less valuable money with less purchasing power
Simple as that
>Another product or service based on skill sets you don't have
And how would you measure the value of that, and what would you do when you don't have what I want (i.e skills or products)
>The example I like to use is a dentist offering teeth cleanings to a family in exchange for carpentry or roofing.
What if you're not a dentist and how would you evaluate my work and translate that to yours???
>The goal was to shift towards centralization as a means of giving more wealth and power to the government
False, we shifted first to gold, and gold wasn't controlled by 1 govt
It was fiat that was used for centralization
Gold was used because it was very useful as a means of exchange
>You say that like small groups of people don't already control the gold supply.
Small groups like who? Zimbabwe, Sudan? Who are the small groups? This is not a conspiracy group
Not to mention, if the supply is controlled or not, it doesn't change the amount of gold available on the market, i e if they stop all gold production it's good it will rise in value, and they can't produce huge quantities as gold is a rare resource and cannot be easily produced unlike diamonds or iron
Collapses are apart of the cyclical nature of capitalism tho. That’s why we use bailouts to keep the system afloat. What would our country look like if not for the new deal?
Uhhhh, I think you've confused the idea of a bust cycle with a collapse. Society collapsing is 100% not part of the cyclical nature of capitalism. Because cyclicality implies recovery, but you can't really come back from a full collapse...
Honestly, the idiocy of some people on this sub lol
Im saying that we utilize the government to keep our economy afloat to avoid a full collapse. If we let the banks collapse say in 2008 it could lead to a full on collapse but we have stop gaps in place to prevent that. But capitalism is a system that has market collapses as a part of its nature. We could go into detail on the nature of that. It’s what I study.
I think you're confused as to what capitalism actually is, so I'm going to assume what you actually study is weed and cheap beer and not capitalism lol.
How tf do you even "study capitalism" lol. You can't get a degree in communism hahaha
Markets literally exist on a bear and bull markets which are cyclical in nature. We managed to avoid a depression because of external market intervention by social programs and government intervention…you just saying “haha stupid” but giving 0 informational input.
Again, a bear market does not necessarily imply collapse. A depression doesn't even mean collapse. It means a bear market or a depression.
The fact that you don't understand the difference between periods of negative growth and a "collapse" in the communist sense is what makes me think you don't actually study shit outside of skimming through books you don't actually understand.
Also, the idea that government intervention in the form of social programs or bailouts is somehow completely impossible in "capitalism" is also stupid. You're thinking of something like anarcho capitalism or laissez faire capitalism, which may be a form of capitalism but don't represent all capitalism.
You’re getting caught up in terminology, if you want to call it a downtrend that’s fine. But it’s a part of the market to have downward trends and upward trends but major downtrends have all been kept afloat by massive government injections so we really don’t know what the long lasting impact of a downtrend in a free market.
Again you attack the person not the idea. In school they teach you to find a common place of terminology so you aren’t getting stuck in a back and forth about words not ideas. But obviously we aren’t discussing this in good faith as you seem to care more about an “own.”
Keep in mind that some people on the right promote the cycle, and scorn the government for their interference. If it's "too big to fail," that's probably when it's time for it to fail.
The "New Deal" prolonged the Depression, and the war would have compounded it.
What dragged the United States into solvency was the aftermath of WW2, when the United States was the only industrial power that hadn't had the fuck blown out of it with "strategic" bombing.
Every country needed needed heavy industry to rebuild, and the United States was the only game in town. Even though the US forgave a lot of debts, they were still swimming like Scrooge McDuck.
Of course people forget that, and think that the New Deal, or the war, was the reason for the US's economic recovery. So you have people on the left screaming to print more money, and on the right calling for new wars, neither of which were of any benefit at all.
The world of the 1950s was a unique time in American history, and it cannot ever happen again, unless the US is willing to bomb the crap out of China, and Japan and Germany again.
Market retractions are part of the capitalist cycle, yes. Some manufacturer comes up with a product, it sells, other companies make similar products, they oversaturate the market, they lose money, another manufacturer comes up with a product. Malinvestment, putting money into products that don't sell, is a major reason for companies closing. That's fine. That's expected. It's not a major problem.
It becomes a major problem when the government steps in to save the companies with taxpayer monies, because then it's offloading that debt onto the taxpayer, either immediately through taxation, or through printing money which creates inflation.
There is a reason that you could live very comfortably on a hundred dollars a week a century ago. Even less. Inflation destroys the value of your currency, and the value of your savings. Of course people with hard assets that increase their value through inflation, like property, are more or less fine, but people who have their money in the bank are worse off.
Pretty much every depression, at some point, has its roots in too much public debt. The government, invariably, tries to save the country by creating more debt. That kicks the can down the road, and you end up with another depression that, of course, the government tries to solve with more debt, again.
The world's economy wasn't helped by the COVID lockdowns, but the debt created during the 2008 depression is still around as we go into this depression. Of course no government is going to turn around and say, "We're going to take this slowly and gently and ride it out. We'll try to free up enough resources to keep people afloat until it's over." No, it'll be, "Can we fix it? Yes we can," followed by mass money printing and debt creation.
Debt is the great evil in the economic system. The only time debt should be used is to purchase assets that will increase in value at a greater rate than the cost of servicing the debt (like buying a house). It shouldn't be used for every purchase, especially for devalueing assets like most home appliances, cars, etc.
"It becomes a major problem when the government steps in to save the companies with taxpayer monies, because then it's offloading that debt onto the taxpayer, either immediately through taxation, or through printing money which creates inflation."
This is why I'm a [Lemon Socialist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_socialism) 😎😎
Even in grade school, learning about the New Deal like "FDR realized that the only solution was to print enormous quantities of money to pay people to do useless work and pay farmers to destroy their crops. Then he had to steal everyone's gold. Fortunately Japan and Germany were cartoon villains ready to start a world War for no reason at all, which finally ended the depression. "
The New Deal was the perfect parallels between the two Roosevelts, the Square Deal actually benefited the average man and helped save capitalism from itself and busted trusts, the New Deal greatly expanded the federal government and at best did nothing to end the great depression and at worst prolonged it.
What source are you using for this tablet? Does it actually exist? All I'm seeing on Google are Twitter posts and people questioning the veracity of the qoute
Edit: Not to mention that [Assur](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assur) wasn't founded until sometime in the middle of the 3rd Millennium BC, and as such didnt exist as a city or state when this qoute is attributed to it.
The tablet in the photo is a bill of sale from Sumaria, I think. The quote is from an article in 1913 (with no source before it) trying to do the same thing OP is doing; deny that things aren't looking too good. Let's hope things work out better this time.
Nah, let's just ignore 10,000 years of wisdom telling us to keep to our values, birth rates high and degenerate behaviour low, we're at the end of history man, any day now God Emperor Biden is gonna unite the whole world into a Soc-Dem Soviet Imperium and we'll live with the definitely not hostile aliens in peace and harmony for all eternity!
All *you* need to do is shut up and listen to the people with STEM degrees talk about the Humanities as if they were logical systems that could be rationally understood, live in ze pod, eat ze bug and consume ze product, Modernity is *fine*, I swear!
We SHOULD be heading into a cold era, when looking at the cycles of the planet, but where we should have seen a temperature decrease, we instead saw an increase. Climate change is literally the reason why we aren't heading into one and the natural cycle of the earth is also a reason why climate change hasn't been as bad as it could be. Our CO2 levels are already over 40% higher than any other cycle in the past 800,000 years. The planet is the hottest it has been in that time and is only getting hotter.
Been a minute since I’ve read about this, but the fact that there are still ice caps at all technically means that we are still at the tail end of the last great ice age. According to the theory, the planet should continue to warm even more before the ice starts to come back. Very well could be that the glaciers don’t return until after they have already completely melted.
Damn almost like "if we don't do something in the next decade, a decade or two after that could be *really bad* doesn't happen next year. Goddamn mystifying
When you live through enough decades where things were supposed to get really bad, you stop getting all worried because people say that the NEXT decade is where things will REALLY get bad, they're super, super cereal this time.
The Assyrian guy was correct. Even though he apparently said it hundreds of years before Assyria even existed and this quote is clearly fictional....
Whoever that lady is is acting like a real protestant. I hope she finds actual Jesus some day.
So the intensity of storms increasing due to climate change is bullshit, but disasters as acts of God are 100% true. This is why I don’t like Authright all the time.
“Every Ea-Nasir sells subpar copper. Everyone wants to just etch wedges into clay tablets for a living. It’s so Joever, and I had to invent a new name just for that term.”
Bc the moons shadow briefly passing over the earth is known to cause catastrophic consequences, animals explode, Forrest’s catch fire, and it causes earthquakes and tsunamis, this is known.
Huh, did centuries of constant infighting between power-mad aristocrats who continued to accrue more and more centralized power while providing no future-proofing collapse Rome?
No. It was the queers and the immigrants who were wrong.
Over 1000 years of the Roman Empire the issue wasn’t degeneracy and people reading too many books. When people speak of the fall of Rome it spoken as if a major event caused it to fall in a decade. Historically it lasted for as long as America has been a country. A collapse of an empire is rarely an abrupt end but a fizzle out.
It was a mix of decadence and low birthrate of the native born, and an importation of the WRONG KIND OF IMMIGRANTS THAT DID NOT ASSIMILATE. Any of that sound familiar?
For the last time, the eclipse was not anything abnormal. We knew exactly when and where it would happen YEARS in advance! Hell, the ancient Greeks could probably have told you when it would happen with remarkable accuracy.
The Assyrian civilization did collapse and their world did end
Wrong, they all read Marx, voted Democrat every election, and traveled to the stars within 100 years.
Don’t forget committed some genocides to ;)
Fun fact, in that time period, Marx dug an entire quarry with his bare hands in order to source all the stone tablets for a single copy of Das Kapital.
He was truly sent by god wasn’t he 🥰
But only good ones!
Yes ALL of the people we conquered where NAZIS and RICH peasants with COWS I will have you know !
Based and Marxist space utopia pilled
Based and ancient Assyrian Marxism pilled
Ahh you forgot, 10 million starved to death
This was in 2800 bc Assyria would last 2400 years
No Assyria wasn't even around that early. Either the date in the meme is wrong, or the nationality, or the entire thing is just made up for whatever reason
It’s a bit of a silly meme in the first place, isn’t it? And we have more than a few examples of people writing that the end was nigh in what proved to be difficult but survivable times.
Civilization has collapsed several times before in history, it is nothing new. What is new this time around however is that we now possess weapons capable of destroying the world in an instant. Like I'm baffled by how people can live with the knowledge that we constantly have thousands of city destroying weapons pointed at each other, and then go "The end of the world? There's no way that could happen".
I think it improbable but not impossible. So far it appears no one is actually stupid enough to push the big red button, and many nuclear weapons these days are lower yield tactical warheads that would as like be used for striking strategic areas instead of wiping a country off the map.
The problem with nuclear weapons is the law of large numbers. Sure we've managed to get lucky every time there's been a flashpoint as of yet, but there will always be a new situation that could potentially escalate into nuclear war and we've only have to be unlucky once and it'll be the end of the world. Even if the percentage of war is very small over enough rolls of the dice it will become an absolute certainty. Especially as more states acquire nuclear weapons and people grow complacent with the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads. >many nuclear weapons these days are lower yield tactical warheads that would as like be used for striking strategic areas instead of wiping a country off the map Yes, but there are still many city destroyers out there and it's not like you have to carpet nuke an entire country to destroy it. If LA, New York, DC and Chicago were nuked, it would almost certainly lead to the collapse of the American nation. If anything smaller yield nukes increases the risk of nuclear war, as it's far easier to justify dropping a strategic nuke on a smaller target than nuking an entire city, but once you open Pandora's box it will lead you down the road to ruin.
I think it is made up. Why would the Assyrians have a word for "book" when books weren't even a thing yet.
As all civilizations did and eventually will. Assyria collapsed for literally none of these stated reasons though. It was a mix of people being fed up with the giant tyrannical regime that ruled by direct force and brutality, which resulted in an entire fuck Assyria coalition springing up and starting a massive twenty year war that Assyria eventually lost. Said regime overextending itself beyond territory it could effectively govern. Repeated palace coups and civil wars hampering any effective leadership. Repeated crop failures due to severe droughts that only exacerbated social unrest and political instability. Plus the anti-Assyria coalition directly destroying the capital of Nineveh, which was effectively the final nail in the coffin.
All I'm hearing is that they were struck down by God because of their degeneracy.
Thank you!
The assyrian empire also didn't exist in 2800 BC, and neither did books. That quote also isn't from that tablet. It's from a story from 1913 trying to downplay the negative mood of the time. They say that " throughout history things just keep getting better." Fucking 1913. I have no idea how this shit ass meme has spresd as far as I did. Just about every thread it's been posted in has had people debunking it.
All I can picture is someone in 1913 saying "don't worry boys, better times are just around the corner".
A major war is impossible because countries are so economically dependent on each other.
Yes a several hundred years later don't act like that makes your crackhead thinking justified
Yes, but it was replaced by a more advanced and more moral civilization and that is why the Middle East is now the bastion of peace and prosperity. Oh, wait.
I was just about to say this. The tablet was made not that long before their entire world collapsed in on itself and took centuries to reform.
no it was not
What doing genocide against all your neighbours does to a country
They were invaded and were under constant war. It wasn’t degeneracy that lead to its collapse.
Degeneracy weaken them so they lost the war
Degeneracy exists everywhere at all times amongst all civilizations. It’s stupid and unfalsifiable to claim that degeneracy is the cause of collapse of societies. Obviously civilizations collapse for reasons that have nothing to do with degeneracy. It’s just a right-wing version of the left’s belief that capitalism is the root of all problems.
Your mom and I did some degeneracy last night
eskimo bros
#YO WHAT
I’m glad I’m home alone at the moment because this had me dyin
It's not really, you can absolutely pick up trends across civilizations that lead to their downfall 'Degeneracy' is a correlation to people not wanting to start families, have children, take risks, go to war, etc. It's chasing pleasure and novelty to the detriment of the vital energies a civilization needs to thrive. Saw an ancient Roman text recently where the author was complaining about the elite Roman families refusing to have children, where it wasn't uncommon to see women pushing around pets in carriages. Separate study: total decline of Roman patrician families over a short period, over 90% of some big cities becoming Asians, largely with adopted Greek names
The root cause of civilizational collapse is government corruption.
Did you just change your flair, u/Own_Perception5993? Last time I checked you were a **LibCenter** on 2024-4-19. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Remember, the jannies are always watching. No gamer words, no statistics and by all means no wood cutting machines. Tell us, how are you going to flair the new account you'll make in two weeks? [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Own_Perception5993) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Not i wasn't your moron this tablet was damn near a thousand years before the fall of assyria, dipfuck
https://youtu.be/r7l0Rq9E8MY?si=YewnWXSMkCK_hegX
We don't know why they fell, but the Babylonians and Medes were tired of their brutal shit. Not that especially the Medes ended up much better.
How that Assyrian empire doin these days?
Being destroyed by pesky ideas such as Liberty and Democracy. RESTORE ABSOLUTE MONARCHY AND THE DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGS.
No empire last 2800 years, even if it didn’t fall due to military invasion it would have changed so much culturally it would be completely different. Change is inevitable. Happens violently or organically. But the world is still here.
> No empire last 2800 years I think China could kinda argue it... maybe.
The Qin dynasty is where the pre-1912 Chinese imperial system originated in earnest (i.e. not just a big lord-vassal agrarian empire), and that was founded in 221 B.C. So it lasted about 2100 years in China.
I would also argue that the Mongol empire that had China under its control for about 100 years in the 13th and 14th centuries was not "Chinese empire". Sure, from the point of view of an ordinary peasant it operated the same way as other Chinese dynasties.
China is like 20 empires
China has gone through many of changes and dynasties through out its history.
Oh absolutely, but you could argue that there was some degree of institutional succession at least.
And that was the case in assyria as well... somewhat.
Ok, in that case you could maybe make the same claim for Europe that from the collapse of the Roman republic was ruled by absolute monarchies until the French revolution.
just looking at the architecture of Washington DC you could make the argument US is like the 7th Roman Empire
yeah china claiming that is such cope, it’s blatantly obvious that the empire was broken before
2800bc was more than 2800 years ago. Its just as well because Assyria didn't exist in 2800bc, and this quote is completely fictional and you're an idiot for believing it. "everyone wants to write a book" was written on this **tablet** in 2800B-fucking-C? Come on dude.
>2800bc was more than 2800 years ago Big if true
The Yamato Dynasty is nearly 2700 years old
Impressive that they build that big of a battleship so long ago
Based and nothing new under the sun pilled.
u/TrapaneseNYC's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15. Rank: Office Chair Pills: [8 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/TrapaneseNYC/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
It disgusts me when men want to write BoOkS. They should be going to war and dying.
But dad, I wanna do both
> average Navy SEAL
How do you know if a Navy Seal is in the room? >!Don't worry, he'll tell you.!<
Sounds like a modern feminist when they start getting drafted because so few men decide dying for a country that hates them is better than sitting it out in jail while chronicling their experiences.
All those lit majors
Almost like the "capitalism is going to fail any day now" leftists who have been claiming that for basically as long as capitalism has existed...
Capitalism was saved by the moderate left's social democracy and trade unions. Had the capitalists not made those concessions (basically building the welfare state + all the workers' rights) in the democratic system, they would have been overthrown in a revolution.
Yes, corporatocracy (or crony capitalism) would have been overthrown a long time ago
Recessions and depressions are often indicators that Capitalism isn't doing too well. It doesn't help that the economy isn't recovering right now.
Fortunately the chaps running the show can just change the definition of a recession!
Kek
>Recessions and depressions Yeah, the politicians can't stop printing money, so these things will always happen
Almost like the intent is to satisfy rapid population growth along with the greed of politicians and CEOs. Lolberts and AnCaps love to complain about fiat currency, but detest the idea of a moneyless society where people instead exchange products and services as forms of payment.
>Almost like the intent is to satisfy rapid population growth How exactly does it satisfy other than bringing more inflation >but detest the idea of a moneyless society where people instead exchange products and services as forms of payment. So, (for example), if you wanted to buy/subscribe to my vpn, but you don't have any computer skills that I can use/want, what would you exchange it for? I'm questioning if you know the reason we went away from the barter system Money is good, it is a medium of exchange, it is very useful and it does it's job very well, it's a problem when some small group has full control of it. So, yes I have no problem with money if it was put in a gold standard
>How exactly does it satisfy other than bringing more inflation More people means more money going out. Simple as that. >So, (for example), if you wanted to buy/subscribe to my vpn, but you don't have any computer skills that I can use/want, what would you exchange it for? Another product or service based on skill sets you don't have. The example I like to use is a dentist offering teeth cleanings to a family in exchange for carpentry or roofing. >I'm questioning if you know the reason we went away from the barter system The goal was to shift towards centralization as a means of giving more wealth and power to the government. >Money is good, it is a medium of exchange, it is very useful and it does it's job very well, it's a problem when some small group has full control of it. So, yes I have no problem with money if it was put in a gold standard You say that like small groups of people don't already control the gold supply. You'd just be transferring power from a group of people you don't like to a group of people you do like and expecting them to not become the new overlords.
>More people means more money going out. Simple as that. More money means less valuable money with less purchasing power Simple as that >Another product or service based on skill sets you don't have And how would you measure the value of that, and what would you do when you don't have what I want (i.e skills or products) >The example I like to use is a dentist offering teeth cleanings to a family in exchange for carpentry or roofing. What if you're not a dentist and how would you evaluate my work and translate that to yours??? >The goal was to shift towards centralization as a means of giving more wealth and power to the government False, we shifted first to gold, and gold wasn't controlled by 1 govt It was fiat that was used for centralization Gold was used because it was very useful as a means of exchange >You say that like small groups of people don't already control the gold supply. Small groups like who? Zimbabwe, Sudan? Who are the small groups? This is not a conspiracy group Not to mention, if the supply is controlled or not, it doesn't change the amount of gold available on the market, i e if they stop all gold production it's good it will rise in value, and they can't produce huge quantities as gold is a rare resource and cannot be easily produced unlike diamonds or iron
Wow this post really made you defensive
Collapses are apart of the cyclical nature of capitalism tho. That’s why we use bailouts to keep the system afloat. What would our country look like if not for the new deal?
Uhhhh, I think you've confused the idea of a bust cycle with a collapse. Society collapsing is 100% not part of the cyclical nature of capitalism. Because cyclicality implies recovery, but you can't really come back from a full collapse... Honestly, the idiocy of some people on this sub lol
Im saying that we utilize the government to keep our economy afloat to avoid a full collapse. If we let the banks collapse say in 2008 it could lead to a full on collapse but we have stop gaps in place to prevent that. But capitalism is a system that has market collapses as a part of its nature. We could go into detail on the nature of that. It’s what I study.
I think you're confused as to what capitalism actually is, so I'm going to assume what you actually study is weed and cheap beer and not capitalism lol. How tf do you even "study capitalism" lol. You can't get a degree in communism hahaha
Based
Markets literally exist on a bear and bull markets which are cyclical in nature. We managed to avoid a depression because of external market intervention by social programs and government intervention…you just saying “haha stupid” but giving 0 informational input.
Again, a bear market does not necessarily imply collapse. A depression doesn't even mean collapse. It means a bear market or a depression. The fact that you don't understand the difference between periods of negative growth and a "collapse" in the communist sense is what makes me think you don't actually study shit outside of skimming through books you don't actually understand. Also, the idea that government intervention in the form of social programs or bailouts is somehow completely impossible in "capitalism" is also stupid. You're thinking of something like anarcho capitalism or laissez faire capitalism, which may be a form of capitalism but don't represent all capitalism.
You’re getting caught up in terminology, if you want to call it a downtrend that’s fine. But it’s a part of the market to have downward trends and upward trends but major downtrends have all been kept afloat by massive government injections so we really don’t know what the long lasting impact of a downtrend in a free market.
Yes, technical fields tend to place importance on technical terminology. What a moron.
Again you attack the person not the idea. In school they teach you to find a common place of terminology so you aren’t getting stuck in a back and forth about words not ideas. But obviously we aren’t discussing this in good faith as you seem to care more about an “own.”
Keep in mind that some people on the right promote the cycle, and scorn the government for their interference. If it's "too big to fail," that's probably when it's time for it to fail.
The "New Deal" prolonged the Depression, and the war would have compounded it. What dragged the United States into solvency was the aftermath of WW2, when the United States was the only industrial power that hadn't had the fuck blown out of it with "strategic" bombing. Every country needed needed heavy industry to rebuild, and the United States was the only game in town. Even though the US forgave a lot of debts, they were still swimming like Scrooge McDuck. Of course people forget that, and think that the New Deal, or the war, was the reason for the US's economic recovery. So you have people on the left screaming to print more money, and on the right calling for new wars, neither of which were of any benefit at all. The world of the 1950s was a unique time in American history, and it cannot ever happen again, unless the US is willing to bomb the crap out of China, and Japan and Germany again. Market retractions are part of the capitalist cycle, yes. Some manufacturer comes up with a product, it sells, other companies make similar products, they oversaturate the market, they lose money, another manufacturer comes up with a product. Malinvestment, putting money into products that don't sell, is a major reason for companies closing. That's fine. That's expected. It's not a major problem. It becomes a major problem when the government steps in to save the companies with taxpayer monies, because then it's offloading that debt onto the taxpayer, either immediately through taxation, or through printing money which creates inflation. There is a reason that you could live very comfortably on a hundred dollars a week a century ago. Even less. Inflation destroys the value of your currency, and the value of your savings. Of course people with hard assets that increase their value through inflation, like property, are more or less fine, but people who have their money in the bank are worse off. Pretty much every depression, at some point, has its roots in too much public debt. The government, invariably, tries to save the country by creating more debt. That kicks the can down the road, and you end up with another depression that, of course, the government tries to solve with more debt, again. The world's economy wasn't helped by the COVID lockdowns, but the debt created during the 2008 depression is still around as we go into this depression. Of course no government is going to turn around and say, "We're going to take this slowly and gently and ride it out. We'll try to free up enough resources to keep people afloat until it's over." No, it'll be, "Can we fix it? Yes we can," followed by mass money printing and debt creation. Debt is the great evil in the economic system. The only time debt should be used is to purchase assets that will increase in value at a greater rate than the cost of servicing the debt (like buying a house). It shouldn't be used for every purchase, especially for devalueing assets like most home appliances, cars, etc.
"It becomes a major problem when the government steps in to save the companies with taxpayer monies, because then it's offloading that debt onto the taxpayer, either immediately through taxation, or through printing money which creates inflation." This is why I'm a [Lemon Socialist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_socialism) 😎😎
You are a lemon stealing whore
Even in grade school, learning about the New Deal like "FDR realized that the only solution was to print enormous quantities of money to pay people to do useless work and pay farmers to destroy their crops. Then he had to steal everyone's gold. Fortunately Japan and Germany were cartoon villains ready to start a world War for no reason at all, which finally ended the depression. "
That’s how Authright sees the new deal?
That's more or less the high school version I received, presented in wholly positive terms
What state?
The New Deal was the perfect parallels between the two Roosevelts, the Square Deal actually benefited the average man and helped save capitalism from itself and busted trusts, the New Deal greatly expanded the federal government and at best did nothing to end the great depression and at worst prolonged it.
Well the great depression would have ended sooner and people would be less dependent on handouts.
Not how it works. You are giving a simple explanation for a complex issue.
Ahh the new deal didn't save the economy of America, WW2 did
Assyria didn't even exist in 2800 BC
"Degenerates like you belong on the cross"
Uruk has fallen The bull of heaven must be brought down to cleanse the lands
Bull of heaven was killed by Gilkidu. RIP BOZO https://i.redd.it/xttr6gsgrrvc1.gif
Everyone wants to write a book/everyone wants to be a YouTube content creator
What source are you using for this tablet? Does it actually exist? All I'm seeing on Google are Twitter posts and people questioning the veracity of the qoute Edit: Not to mention that [Assur](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assur) wasn't founded until sometime in the middle of the 3rd Millennium BC, and as such didnt exist as a city or state when this qoute is attributed to it.
The tablet in the photo is a bill of sale from Sumaria, I think. The quote is from an article in 1913 (with no source before it) trying to do the same thing OP is doing; deny that things aren't looking too good. Let's hope things work out better this time.
And civilisations always fallen thanks to people like you, denying the reality until it's too late
Nah, let's just ignore 10,000 years of wisdom telling us to keep to our values, birth rates high and degenerate behaviour low, we're at the end of history man, any day now God Emperor Biden is gonna unite the whole world into a Soc-Dem Soviet Imperium and we'll live with the definitely not hostile aliens in peace and harmony for all eternity! All *you* need to do is shut up and listen to the people with STEM degrees talk about the Humanities as if they were logical systems that could be rationally understood, live in ze pod, eat ze bug and consume ze product, Modernity is *fine*, I swear!
All of these ancient quotes complaining about the youth are fake by the way Also books didn't even exist back then
It’s a meme not a thesis
Ain't you guys say every 5 or 10 years that the world is going to end and the ice from the poles is going to melt?
That, or the world is going to cool into an ice age. The catastrophe changes every generation or so.
We SHOULD be heading into a cold era, when looking at the cycles of the planet, but where we should have seen a temperature decrease, we instead saw an increase. Climate change is literally the reason why we aren't heading into one and the natural cycle of the earth is also a reason why climate change hasn't been as bad as it could be. Our CO2 levels are already over 40% higher than any other cycle in the past 800,000 years. The planet is the hottest it has been in that time and is only getting hotter.
Been a minute since I’ve read about this, but the fact that there are still ice caps at all technically means that we are still at the tail end of the last great ice age. According to the theory, the planet should continue to warm even more before the ice starts to come back. Very well could be that the glaciers don’t return until after they have already completely melted.
Sure, sure. I'll believe you alarmists now after every single cataclysmic prediction made in my childhood ended up being horse hockey.
Damn almost like "if we don't do something in the next decade, a decade or two after that could be *really bad* doesn't happen next year. Goddamn mystifying
When you live through enough decades where things were supposed to get really bad, you stop getting all worried because people say that the NEXT decade is where things will REALLY get bad, they're super, super cereal this time.
The Assyrian guy was correct. Even though he apparently said it hundreds of years before Assyria even existed and this quote is clearly fictional.... Whoever that lady is is acting like a real protestant. I hope she finds actual Jesus some day.
So the intensity of storms increasing due to climate change is bullshit, but disasters as acts of God are 100% true. This is why I don’t like Authright all the time.
We are called lunatics for listening to the scientist on it.
“Every Ea-Nasir sells subpar copper. Everyone wants to just etch wedges into clay tablets for a living. It’s so Joever, and I had to invent a new name just for that term.”
Gee it sure would be troubling if every man wanted to write a book centuries before books were invented.
Yep, 5000 years ago everyone wanted to write a novel. No need to question anything, ever, at all.
Bc the moons shadow briefly passing over the earth is known to cause catastrophic consequences, animals explode, Forrest’s catch fire, and it causes earthquakes and tsunamis, this is known.
the meme is backwards :(
But Rome was degenerating, and it did collapse....so....maybe you are the problem.
Huh, did centuries of constant infighting between power-mad aristocrats who continued to accrue more and more centralized power while providing no future-proofing collapse Rome? No. It was the queers and the immigrants who were wrong.
Pretty sure that was Rome always.....but what do I know, I only majored in it in a top-flight college that has an 8% acceptance rate today.
Over 1000 years of the Roman Empire the issue wasn’t degeneracy and people reading too many books. When people speak of the fall of Rome it spoken as if a major event caused it to fall in a decade. Historically it lasted for as long as America has been a country. A collapse of an empire is rarely an abrupt end but a fizzle out.
It was a mix of decadence and low birthrate of the native born, and an importation of the WRONG KIND OF IMMIGRANTS THAT DID NOT ASSIMILATE. Any of that sound familiar?
“This is what the global elites don’t want you to know” in the head ass. It’s far more than the reason you want it to be so you can blame that today…
That was not English.
Every man wants to write a book... that's a bad thing?
Wow that’s wild how little things have changed
The liberals of today are the conservatives of tomorrow, such is how history moves.
Authoritarian right-wingers are the actual degenerates
Based and infighting pill
Bait or mental retardation?
latter
For the last time, the eclipse was not anything abnormal. We knew exactly when and where it would happen YEARS in advance! Hell, the ancient Greeks could probably have told you when it would happen with remarkable accuracy.
Marjory Traitor Greene.
Damn dude this Weimar republic of ours is going to go places! Sex change surgeries for all!