[ b / int / meta ] [ fefe ] [ test ] [ FAQ / Rules / HowTo / Stats ] [ Radio / BNR ]

/int/ - certified time wasters

Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

 No.17093 [Last 50 Posts]

royal-academy-arts.png (828.23 KB, 930x450)

d7zt20nmusn81.jpg (154.36 KB, 1024x838)

or on the historical character of the english bourgeoisie

 No.17096

You are only allowed to post if you can list three classics of historiography

 No.17100 KONTRA

>>17094
You dog, really.
>we never learned about easy access to coal and iron as the defining factor for industrializing production
Here, in service of a system you do not fully understand, you - as a marxist, justify the denial of a proposal of objective material differences (access to fundamentals - coal and iron) in a system. It's a denial of it not being considered among possible valid factors to reference when asked "why did Britain industrialize first?" within this system I am examined under.
>Denying it as a factor is what's retarded
I've tried to clarify this, but you remain aggressive because of I mock my country's academia. -An actual example of genuine in-class solidarity and an example of a great deal of class consciousness. You insist that you're a proletarian, but it's pointless for us to bicker over this, because we simply subscribe to different schools of thought. me, the real one true sociological scientist! that carries holy marxist tradition! - you, a reformist of reformists and very characteristic of your own fetid class!

>the question of industrialization is a bourgeois question to distract from questioning capitalism, though. And that fox Portugal did not see through that ruse, I'm dissapointed tbh.

Here's the thing - there's a lot of variation of narratives that the national curriculum tells itself. And it varies in a very non-material sense from time and place.

Now:
I will write about what are correct opinions, as a means of memorizing them and using my EC addiction to reread them.

 No.17102

>>17100
>the denial of a proposal of objective material differences

I never denied it being a factor. Just like you I think it is factor one will need to consider and check. I checked it by asking you about other territories that have similar settis. You answered. I will agree there is more to industrialization than natural ressources at hand. I don't know the historiographic debates about the "great divergence" but I know that arguments exist that it could have been somebody else than England and I guess these arguments don't boil down to access to resources since in that regard there probably were other territories that had similar settis.

>You insist that you're a proletarian


lol

I'm a wage worker yes I have a job now like most people and I went through a university education which the majority does not afaik.

If I insist on anything it is being a Marxist because I think Marx did some valuable analysis and that this way mode of οἰκονομία is shit and we can have better and rational. Proles != Marxists.
Producing things for their use value and not to accumulate abstract wealth is what I think should be established. That is why I call myself a Marxist and certainly not a prole like you do. Some kind of late stage Maoism hiding behind remarks that put any bourgeois academic to shame.

You mock your academia and yet you want to engage with it. And that's how you are already inside. Let's see what is on the other side for you once you go through it and gain the class experience I went through. As you can see I have opinions on the evergreen of factors in historiography, agency and Marx and Marxists because I went through an academic education. And you are wrong if you understood all of these as favorable "academic class" solidary opinions. The joke about the question of industrialization has some truth to it and that's where you can pick up a threat that leads to more unfavorable opinions. I don't know you much you dig methodological and theoretical questions but even if you are not conscious of these yet you nonetheless engage with them as can be seen by your posts. The irony is that these are the most academic questions there are and you are on the way to the center.

>Here's the thing - there's a lot of variation of narratives that the national curriculum tells itself. And it varies in a very non-material sense from time and place


History 101 - Contemporary Historiography. Not just in the national curriculum but in academic historiography as well you will find these things. The worst is when you have to deal with people who have a faint idea of past events and at best lump together the national curriculum with hearsay and myths.

The problem with history is simply that there many factors you can consider and many things can weight into a turnout. Material factors, political and social factors (including law, violence, and so on), symbolic factors, psychological/mental/affective factors. I probably forgot something. And that's why many books on the same event can and have been written.

 No.17107 KONTRA

> Why exactly are the Anglo-Saxons causing a nightmare for the entire planet?
https://www.business-gazeta.ru/article/552538
> Business coach and blogger Ruslan Bakh explains the success of the Anglo-Saxons by rejecting the law of karma
> Anglo-Saxons in the strict sense of the word are not people at all, says Ruslan Bakh. This is the only nation in the world that has fundamentally refused to fulfill the law of karma and is not afraid of the consequences. And they are inevitable: winning due to meanness and deceit that is unacceptable for other peoples, they pay for it with “sexual deviations, BDSM, pedophilia, the need to kill, sadism, ruthlessness, and the most terrible cruelty.” Only Russia, since it has behind it the Stalinist period of the USSR with “positive selection of the entire people, an intensive economic and political system,” is capable of defeating the Anglo-Saxons “on all fronts.” And the Chinese, Indians and everyone else are doomed in confrontation with the Anglo-Saxons.

 No.17108 KONTRA

>>17102
> I'm a wage worker
What a fortunate circumstance, now you can pretend that your personal and economical circumstances of living on around 50k-80k a year in Germany are in the same category as those of sweat-shop-workers in Cambodia, and you can act as a bona-fide Marxist agitator. May the marxist revolution come and sent you where marxist revolutions historically did sent academics and idiotic idealists.

Mit sozialistischem Gruße!

 No.17109

>>17108
>50k-80k

Good joke.

I don't see how my high wage compared to some sweatshop kid determines what I have to think about the way it all works, including that the sweatshop kid has to work and works for practically nothing. Care to explain?

 No.17110 KONTRA

>>17100
Underdeveloped text, I didn't work it enough before posting. Deleted some parts and didn't replace them.
>Here's the thing -
I should be executed.

 No.17112 KONTRA

>>17109
>I'll just act stupid and ask "care to explain" that will show him

 No.17113

>>17112
That's not what he did

 No.17114 KONTRA

Since we are here playing dumb, I will ridicule myself by spelling out the obvious:
Marxism holds that what ultimeately differentiates people is "class", where "class" depends on whether someone's source of income is rents or wages.
That puts Marxist German-Ball in the same category as workers in sweat shops.

I can only roll my eyes. Holiday in Cambodia keeps playing in the background.

 No.17115 KONTRA

>>17112
What a weird way to say "I can't explain my bullshit". You look like a massive fool now that you can't explain your extremely stupid take. Try logic instead of sentiment next time.

 No.17116 KONTRA

>>17114
Like many people in the West, I'm a small-time capitalist. I have some money parked that 'magically' produces a surplus via interest rates of my bank. Why? Because I need money to have access to certain things I deem useful. That is why I go to work and the sweatshop worker does the same.
Working for money, converting savings into capital for others. All these things don't make me a Cmobdian sweatshop worker. But that is also not what Marxism is about which one could know if you choose to use a second brain cell. Marxism is a critique of a certain political economy. You don't have to be the most damaged human in this political economy to critique it.

 No.17117

>>17116
Do you live off interest rates on your savings? How rich are these academia fat cats anyway?

 No.17118 KONTRA

>>17117
>Do you live off interest rates on your savings?

It's an instant access savings account with a negligible amount. It doesn't even pay for groceries every month.

 No.17119

>>17118
Not a small time capitalist, at all!
In an unrelated note, someone that is settled in a first world bureaucratic state organization and owes their comfort to the continued existence and upholding of the status quo is deluding himself if he wants to insist he has class commonalities with an industrial worker that must sell his labor to survive. Any class analysis that wants to lump both together because they're both paid wages is goofy. Me? I'm actually a proletarian, as a commissar for Art Production in the Taijik Socialist Republic. You see, I get paid a wage.

 No.17122 KONTRA

>>17119
>Not a small time capitalist, at all!

It's about doing G-G'. It's small-time capitalist activity for sure.


>settled in a first world bureaucratic state organization


I was not. I say was because I got laid off today :DDDD big fat conglomerate the business was servicing went bankrupt and now they need to save costs and of course, my contract's trial period is still on So bye-bye it is. Certainly, not the fastest beginning to end in the wage world but quite quick.

Having experienced the shattering destiny of becoming jobless again before it really started I'm even more convinced this is shit.

And I don't know about the Portuguese government but the state is a normal contractor and employee and has to be treated as such sure the "revenue" is taxes. People who think the state does not use economics knowledge to save costs where it can is delusional. All government jobs I applied for are not civil servant jobs, albeit they were open to people who have the status of a civil servant.

 No.17123 KONTRA

>>17122
>the state is a normal contractor and employee and has to be treated as such
Nod rly XDDDDDD

 No.17125 KONTRA

>>17123
Why not?

If I sell my labor power to the state it is because the state needs that labor for its "business". The only difference between the industrial worker and me is in the quality of labor we are selling. We both need money to survive.
Or do you also want to schizo about the wage because the state pays so generously while the industry does not which is not true really and that is your Moral Marxism™ based on prole romanticization? The wisdom, destiny and pride over any analysis of political economy.

 No.17126 KONTRA

>>17125
The state isn't a for-profit enterprise, not subject to the same laws as a company. Someone in a warlord's retinue isn't a proletarian.

 No.17128

o-r.webp (122.55 KB, 450x634)

>>17096
> three classics of historiography
1) Primary Chronicle, by Nestor the Hagiographer
Allegedly written in 12-th century by monk from Kiev monastery. Has unique importance because there are few literally sources from that time in slavlands.

2) History of the Russian State, by Nikolay Karamzin
Written in early 18-th century, this work defined national historical narrative in Russian Empire. Author was not only historian, but also a talented writer, so his books were found interesting and became popular.

3) Russian history, by Mikhail Pokrovksy
First Soviet history textbook, describes events from Marxists point of view. It was extremely anti-patriotic, for example it claimed that Russia was the only culprit of the WW1.

 No.17129 KONTRA

>>17126
>The state isn't a for-profit enterprise, not subject to the same laws as a company

The state has to care for economic growth to increase tax revenue. It's quite similar. And even if the state has not the exact same status legally and in political power and potential of force like a company it is still true that it buys labor power from its citizens just like a business does in most cases.

>Someone in a warlord's retinue isn't a proletarian


Because they don't have a contract with the war lord or because the war lord does not own a legally sound business?

I already said I care about the setup that people sell their labor to survive. Don't care if that is proletarian or not. The fact that people sell their labor to survive is the important thing.

 No.17130 KONTRA

>>17096
Records of the Grand Historian
Book of the Former Han
Book of the Later Han

 No.17131

>>17129
>The state has to care for economic growth to increase tax revenue. It's quite similar.
Fascinating reach.

>Why isn't a member of warlord's retinue a proletarian?

The possibilities of differentiation you give are a real testament to how truly German you are. No, it's not for lack of a formal contract or a verified business address, you square minded Hun. A member of a warlord's retinue is not a cog in a for-profit machine, having his surplus labor extracted in an economical unit that requires profitability and specifically profitability from the bandit under the warlord's command. It's nonsensical to try to pretend this bandit is of the same social class as, let's say, the agricultural salaried laborer that works for the landowner under the warlord's protection. Do you think working for someone on a regular payment basis for services rendered is what defines proletarization? Were couriers and jesters of a 11th century court proletarians? How far back into time can we push these pseudoscientific concepts?

 No.17132

>>17129
Marxists🤝Libertarians: economic reductionism
State doesn't exist to maximize profits. Big busyness doesn't exist to maximize profits. Big part of small busyness doesn't exist to maximize profits.

BTW, rent/wage classification is absurd. Apple's top manager with 7-digit salary or Latin-American dictator with his palace are modest proletarians. Meanwhile, Vietnamese grandma who lends room in her hut is bourgeoisie and belongs to Gulag.

 No.17133 KONTRA

>>17131
>Fascinating reach.

But not wrong, apparently.

>>17131
Ok, you are right.

What was important to me is that if you work for the state or some private business, you sell your labor power, and you don't own any means of production and the results of that production. You can only buy these once you have received your salary. The state does not produce a product like a car, semiconductors or milk for profit, it does not produce anything you can buy in a market economy. Does not change the fact that it makes use of citizens like the businesses in the state's economy. It reproduces/maintains itself without producing products but the state's reproduction is dependent on successful economic activity. People are dependent on a wage to live and survive, be it either business or state and it is one attribute of capitalism: a more or less universal dependence on wage work/money to survive in this economy. If you work for a business or the state in either case you are dependent on them and their payment to survive and reproduce.

 No.17134 KONTRA

>>17133
>But not wrong
A state doesn't require profitability to continue existing. I can even think of states and leaders who have done nothing but cause economic retraction and lessened tax incomes without compromising the continuation of the state.

 No.17135 KONTRA

>>17134
>without compromising the continuation of the state.

Yeah, it still has the monopoly on violence card for example. Not that this is always working, though. As long as some revenue is made and you can pay for what is needed for at least rudimentary maintenance the state can exist unlike a company which will run out of credit at some point and can't use violence to maintain itself.

 No.17141 KONTRA

>>17135
>As long as some revenue is made and you can pay for what is needed for at least rudimentary maintenance
I'd go further say that under certain economies, the primary source of income for the 'state' (- read:power) is just maintaining ownership. And if arrow goes down due to mismanagement, it doesn't fundamentally threaten regime change if this economic downturn to beneficial to the warlord class. Warlord class is a not as rich term cacique (or kasike). There is a fundamental issue at hand that prevents this kind of examination by the rest of society, - by the 80% of the masses that would profit from a real scientific examination of this problem that allows man to condemn another man's lungs to fill themselves with fluids from endless shifts in a lithium mine, all while telling them they are willful participants in a win or lose game of seeing their lives and the futures of their children condemned to the same sort of economic servitude they were victims to their whole lives, as were their fathers before them.

This fundamental issue at hand prevents class consciousness by the majority of our world is the hijacking of the truth by retinues of the überwarlord once again, i must employ terms easily accessible to Germans. These particular retinues and material forces that prevent real and honest sociological analysis are yet to be named in my studies. I am still far from publishing the masterpiece comprehensive treaty on class that Der Zeitgeist und das Handy will become and I am slowed down by having to spend time formatting my mind to correctly identify the two largest contributors to the rise of international terrorism in the post 1991 context of supranational crisis within a hegemonic world.

 No.17144 KONTRA

>>17141
Have you been very angry about the 'always have been'?
The human cog in the human conveyor belt in a Madagascan sapphire mine that as a whole costs just $100 a day might think differently than Ernst in his home office with another smart device in the post box or the tradesman with 5 workers in the best of all systems. I vote right wing or left wing in the west, the human conveyor belt stays. And if the coal miner in Australia votes right wing and for another round of exploitation you should not critique him (not even some of his positions) because his lungs are dirty from the work he does. The damage (sacrifice) is an excuse for every opinion and thought. The victims of this world have the wisdom to change it, just let them cook vote and everything will be different.

One day there will be moralinsaurer capitalism and we will all be happy, sounds good, right?

 No.17145 KONTRA

>>17144
>Have you been very angry about the 'always have been'?
Not really, it's a thought line I stole from conspiracy theorists. It's a sly way to imply there has been no class mobility in recent history.

 No.17146

>>17145
Explain pls.

 No.17183 KONTRA

>>17146
>Explain pls
Just applying tricks into making my speech into one that will incite revolutionary thought and action.

>>17144
>And if the coal miner in Australia votes right wing and for another round of exploitation you should not critique him
No idea what you mean, I was thinking of Chile as I don't care for Australians. "this problem that allows man to condemn another man[...]" is to be understood as the problem of capitalism.
>I vote right wing or left wing in the west, the human conveyor belt stays
As a member of academia, you have a special duty to fight capitalism by enlightening the masses. By continuing to study and preach your pseudoscientific Marxism, you have failed them.

 No.17261 KONTRA

>>17183
>Just applying tricks

And one day the spontaneity of the masses will do its magic. Europe is healing already.

 No.17292

Day 1/10.
Soviet expansionism during the interwar years isn't a valid factor in the contribution to the rise of fascism and other right wing authoritarian regimes. If one must reference the spectre of gommunism, one must do so from the perspective of the European bourgeoisie fearing social unrest and revolution. The treaty of Versailles and imposition of terms on defeated nations is valid. One must reference the ascendancy of the United States and Europe's reliance on the American economy, that exacerbated social crisis resultant from the great depression. Increased support for Marxist-Leninism from the Soviet Union's immunity to the Great Depression is not a valid reason for increased left-wing social unrest, one must reference it only in a vacuum of poverty and worsened living standards. The recourse to political violence is something that only occured at the hands of fascist paramilitaries - left-wing agitation was limited to strikes and lock-outs. One can link the rise of fascism to the ineffectiveness of the Society of Nations, that was weakened by the disrespect of it's norms by said fascist regimes.
I am being healed of anti-soviet bias, but being indoctrinated with Nazi adjacent revisionism on the scale, scope and importance of the humiliating Versailles Treaty. Healing is a process and I must continue through it in order to become a real and honest academic.

 No.17296

>>17292
Are you preparing for some kind of standardized government test? If no, they could rate not "correctness" of your views, but your quality of your argumentation. If yes, they could only have factual questions.
This way it's just a test on following party's line, not on knowing and understanding history.

You made me want to try a high-school graduation history test. I've never interacted with it, since I was preparing for application to STEM higher education which doesn't require history exam, but I liked history lessons. Let's see how much I'll score.

 No.17297 KONTRA

By the end of high school I could write basically 100% historical essays for the exams. They told me they read like as if I were copying the textbook.
Generally speaking, you really didn’t need to provide proper historical analysis. You need to establish an acceptable, centrist chain of events and that’s it.
Of course one time I cheekily said that “Socialism was elevated to a scientific level by Marx and Engels.” in one essay and I felt really edgy.

 No.17298 KONTRA

>>17296
>Are you preparing for some kind of standardized government test?
Yes.
>If yes, they could only have factual questions.
They have various questions that are more open ended. Usually it'll involve identifying factors for historical processes and drawing a connection between them. There is an accepted list of factors, with discretion for the examiner to consider your answers corrects if they aren't on the list (and they personally agree with you), there isn't much to be said about argumentation, it's a game of memorizing terminology and approved explanations.

>>17297
I must create a tulpa of a center-left examiner in my mind's eye and then ask him for approved explanations when the day comes.

 No.17299

>>17298
Yes, that's how it here with essays in Russian language exam (which is mandatory for tech bros as well). Usually they list 3-4 most reasonable interpretations and the rest is on the mercy of examiner. I think, most examiners accept everything as long as it sounds any meaningful and not edgy. Probably same with history.

 No.17300

>>17299
>most examiners accept everything as long as it sounds any meaningful and not edgy
This is probably the case for any event further back than the 20th century. Given the textbook maintains the Soviet Union was a democratic state until (1928/1936/1945, depending on which chapter you take), I'm not so cocky about going off-script.

 No.17301


 No.17302 KONTRA

>>17299
>I think, most examiners accept everything as long as it sounds any meaningful and not edgy.

In Germany, it during my time in high school it usually as long as your argument is sound you will earn some points for it.

 No.17303

>>17301
17/17
16/16
36/60

 No.17304

1.png (72.34 KB, 1515x561)

2.png (87.16 KB, 1521x616)


 No.17305

Cold War.jpg (23.33 KB, 343x454)

Oh la la.jpg (26.29 KB, 347x423)

La Baguette.jpg (37.75 KB, 408x612)

>>17302
Je m'appelle Ernst, oui monsieur, le vin et bien. Merde!

No way I'm answering 60 questions with only 10 seconds to even read everything., so no result on the 3rd one.

 No.17306

>>17301
>https://www.britannica.com/quiz/facts-you-should-know-the-cold-war-quiz - 15/17

17/17 - some were guesses, though. What Gary Powers is famous for. I had the U2 planes I read about in John DeLillo's "7 Seconds" novel in my mind and just went with aerial

>https://www.britannica.com/quiz/france-a-history-quiz - 14/16


12/16

>https://www.britannica.com/quiz/european-history - don't know shit, answer randomly, then ragequit


36/60

 No.17308

>>17304
22/23, didn't know about Japanese helium balloons.
9/10, failed the Orwell question.
America - failed the first 5 questions and quit

 No.17314

End of day 1. I now close my eyes and instead of imagining historical forces, events and personalities - I see approved historiographical terms.

 No.17342

images (1).jpeg (5.41 KB, 207x244)

Name three supranational issues of the late 90s and early 00s that put into question the validity of the nation state as a geopolitical unit.

 No.17343

>>17342
global warming, free trade, internet

 No.17344

>>17343
1/3 - failed.

 No.17345

>>17344
mass migration, nuclear weapons, large hadron collider

 No.17346

>>17345
1/3, again.

 No.17347

Untitled.jpeg (91.43 KB, 923x1280)

>>17346
Damn globalists!

 No.17348

>>17342
terrorism? The introduction of the Euro? However all of this did not question the validity of nation states.

I'm curious about the conclusion. In high school we only ever talked about supranationality in reference to the EU.

 No.17349

>>17348
Terrorism is a valid factor. Nonstate actors and so on.
>However all of this did not question the validity of nation states
It did, nation states are ill-equipped to deal with these issues and it causes the concept of the nation state to be placed under scrutiny.
Possible factors:
Pandemics (AIDS)
Environmental issues
Terrorism and separatism
Mass migrations

You don't really need to try to link them and actually justify how they case a discrediting of nation states, merely provide a historical context.

 No.17350 KONTRA

>>17349
>and it causes the concept of the nation state to be placed under scrutiny.

Reading this I already hear an MG toned voice in my head that mocks by emphasizing s c r u t i n y bourgeois (academic) catchphrase which means nothing happened but people questioned something in texts

 No.17351

>>17349
>justify how they case a discrediting of nation states

Global warming does not know borders!

Is there a part where you have to write a text an argue? If so the solution of a red world revolution will give bonus points.

 No.17353

education-check2.jpg (24.27 KB, 600x602)

&&The New Economic Order of the 20th Century&&

Look at the funny German cartoon from 1926. Translation: "FAKE MONEY", "INFLATION", "UNEMPLOYMENT", "DEVALUED CURRENCY", "ECONOMIC COLLAPSE".

Now - list two of the motives, that according to document 1, explain the attraction* that the US exerted over Europe in the years after the world war.

There are 5 possible reasons. I managed to see four of them. But I think that requires a specific understanding of what you're supposed to induce from your analysis.

*it's an odd word usage in Portuguese too

 No.17354

Bonus question.
"A strong, centralized and directed power annulled all local and regional particularities."
Is this a definition of:
A) Nationalism
B) Authoritarianism

 No.17355 KONTRA

>>17354
Doesn't sound like a definition but a description of a process.

It could either describe an authoritarian (undemocratic) regime or the irony of the consequences of a nationalist ideology.

 No.17356

>>17355
I mistakenly selected Nationalism, as it felt like something that could be applied to the centralizing ideas of the French Revolution. Now I know better

>Is there a part where you have to write a text an argue?

Not argue. You might be able to take some sort of liberties in the larger essay in how you approach subjects, but there's no arguing to be had - this is a scientific endeavor.

 No.17358

>>17356
AI:


The sentence "A strong, centralized and directed power annulled all local and regional particularities" more accurately defines authoritarianism.

Here’s why:

Authoritarianism involves a concentration of power in a single authority or a central government, which often suppresses local autonomy and individual freedoms. The phrase "a strong, centralized and directed power" suggests a form of governance where control is highly concentrated, which is characteristic of authoritarian regimes.
The annulment of "all local and regional particularities" further indicates the suppression of local identities and autonomy, which is a common feature of authoritarian rule, aiming to enforce uniformity and control across the entire nation.
Nationalism, on the other hand, emphasizes the unity and identity of a nation based on shared culture, language, and history. While nationalism can sometimes lead to centralization, it does not inherently require the suppression of local particularities; rather, it often seeks to unify them into a broader national identity.

Therefore, the described scenario aligns more closely with authoritarianism.

 No.17359

>>17358
> AI
Great idea.

RE: picrel
2/3, isn't it?

 No.17360

>>17359
3/3, nailed it, perfect answer.

 No.17382 KONTRA

real.jpg (260.92 KB, 971x1280)

Day 3 - Last day that I must still go through work. Full dedication ahead.

 No.17393 KONTRA

Only really got up at noon.
Day 4 begins.

 No.17398 KONTRA

>>17393
I don't think I'm gonna make it. I feel like all my answers will only be tangentially related to what I'm supposed to answer.

 No.17431

>>17398
Think of all the girls in university, craving for an older man. And don't give up.

 No.17433

>>17398
I don't know what kind of stupid test you have to do but you are more than cut out to study a humanities degree or do university-level history.

 No.17439 KONTRA

Joejones.jpg (259.64 KB, 837x1280)

>>17431
Don't want them, partially doing this for a woman older than myself.

>>17433
Or so I would tell myself.

 No.17440 KONTRA

>>17439
Also, day 5.

 No.17446 KONTRA

I struggle with memorizing which international organizations are writing with their English acronyms and which I'm supposed to write in Portuguese. Generally, post-70s, they're all in English.

 No.17447

>>17446
Are you actually obliged to know this or do you think you have to know this?

 No.17448 KONTRA

>>17447
I may have to know this, it's important to know the name of various international organizations and pacts if I'm asked to write about them. I think it's safe to write them all in English, but better safe than sorry.

 No.17449

>>17448
The good thing is that once you are in uni doing history you can simply look these up. If you dig down into a topic you will know them by heart anyway quick enough, no need to memorize them like vocabulary. Also, any sane high school like test will ask you to write about the most important organization, not some fringe bureau that got its own book with a history of that office somewhere on the library shelf.

>Digging into the history of this office and its predecessors, we found ourselves on a track that ran parallel to the story of civil defense (see figure 0.1). It led us to the National Security Resources Board and the Office of Defense Mobilization, which were established not to carry out the now-familiar functions of emergency management but to prepare for military-industrial mobilization. In contrast to the well-studied history of civil defense, the activities of these organizations have been largely neglected in the scholarship on the history of emergency management and, indeed, in the broader scholarship on American political development in the middle of the twentieth century. And yet, from 1947 (when the National Security Resources Board was created by the National Security Act) to 1958 (when the Office of Defense Mobilization was combined with the Federal Civil Defense Administration), these were the organizations working on the central problem of emergency government: preparedness for a nuclear attack on the United States. As we show in the chapters that follow, experts and officials working in these now obscure offices shaped current understandings and practices related to the vulnerability of vital systems, preparedness for future catastrophes, and the organization of emergency government.

 No.17450 KONTRA

18738376_wUTz8.jpeg (82.66 KB, 250x350)

>>17447
Also heavy anxiety, due to requiring a very high grade (85%+) and the worry that a sum of minor mistakes will compromise that. I also haven't taken any kind of humanities related test in over a decade, and when I did - I'd score poorly!
I struggle with getting an accurate rating of what I write due to going about this solo. The criteria is more lenient than I expect, it allows to receive a 100% score on some sections even with a mistake. I struggle with conforming to guidelines on terminology, or identifying elements they want me to elaborate on - and not ramble about something that isn't even in the approved answers list.
I need to carry a little more bravado in answering, they are okay with a great deal of vagueness about any specific event. I'm afraid to write to paper the specifics of the Norton de Matos candidacy (especially with not being to look up the exam dates!) in questions where the answer could be "the opposition worked through presidential candidacies that suffered intense repressions from PIDE."
I don't know, it will either be a very high grade or the narcissistic injury of the century.

 No.17451 KONTRA

>>17450
>exam dates
exact dates
The fifth day takes its toll on my psyche.

 No.17452

>>17450
There are prominent events with prominent answers. If this is really like a high school sorta test nobody expects you to be a historian. Why do you have to do this stupid test anyway? You have been a student before, why can't you just get into a history major or whatever you are planing to do? Why is the Portuguese education system so different from the mighty German one where you can just enroll if you have the school certificate inb4 NC, neither STEM nor history have an NC in most cases

 No.17453 KONTRA

>>17452
>You have been a student before, why can't you just get into a history major or whatever you are planing to do?
I was a STEM student before.

 No.17454

>>17453
And this test is mandatory if you want to be a humanities/history student?

 No.17455 KONTRA

>>17454
Depending on the course, you'll need one or another exam. Generally, humanities is Portuguese and/or History.

 No.17456

>>17455
I think that is idiotic but maybe that is due to the small country size and a selective necessity. However, it is just national history with a bit of European history mixed into it?

 No.17460 KONTRA

17456
First, It touches on "the mediterranean roots of western civilization" - basic greek and roman stuff - 10th grade level.

After this more serious 11th grade selection of early parlamentarism, colonialism XVII and XVII century. Liberalism and the French Revolution.
Then it jumps to three more in-depth modules starting in 1918 and ending sometime in ~2012.
The first of these modules is Interwar Europe, ideological shifts, the Russian Revolution. The first Portuguese Republic and Estado Novo, fascisms and Hitlerisms.
The next module is entirely about Portugal from 1945 to 1976. postww2 political shift, colonial war. failed reformism of Caetano, the revolution, the post revolutionary period and finally democratic Portugal.
The third is the most esoteric one about modern society and "Portugal in a new international framing". Hopefully the essay won't be about this one, but if it is I will close my eyes and summon the system studies German in my mind and manifest something about technologies and postmodernity.

 No.17463

>>17460
I was told that "Western civilization" is an Anglo-Saxon term, and continentals say "European civilization". Was I lied to? Or is Portugal an exception because it's... western?

 No.17464

>>17460
Interestingly history at university had an obligatory module about ancient Greece and Romans. And an obligatory module about new modern period and modernity. After that, all modules have seminars you can freely chose the period/topic from. Only at the end you were obliged to again chose a module that deals with ancient greece/romans and new modern period and one that deals with modernity.

So if you subtract the ancient stuff you have the same topics I had in my advanced course in history during the high school graduation phase. Only that it was not Portugal but Germany that was focused on in these periods. The last phase up until 2012 sounds shit. German high school history education in the advanced courses stopped after 1993 in my case and that is not even mandatory curriculum I think, not sure, and that was in the early 2010s.

You might derive what will be tested when you know what periods and topics have been tested in the past and what current events might touch on events in the past.

>about modern society and "Portugal in a new international framing".


Is this about the EU or 'globalization'? Sounds more like political science or social science education in school than history.

>system studies German in my mind and manifest something about technologies and postmodernity.


That won't help you in this case if my guess above is right.

t. that German

---

I mean it sounds like a curriculum that has some predefined answers/arguments that need to be taught to high school students to give an overview of the typical history taught in schools - a heavy focus on political events the history of our democratic nation/Europe that is tied to economic developments and has some social history and even cultural history elements as well. It's a "big history" book that you have to learn in essence.

Just know these arguments taught, usually the criteria are simple:
>student names causes C1, C2 and C3 for event E
>student explains how X causes Y

something along these lines. How did Hitler get into power? There are certain answers you learned in a class room plena or in the books that are simply asked for. In that case it will be something about the economic situation, last cabinets of the Weimar Republic and their thinking/tactics - the political rule set/constitution that allowed all this to happen and of course the Gleichschaltung process / events that happened right after Hitler was made Chancellor, like getting at unions and so on.
Since I have a bad memory I cannot even remember all the things. You are probably better at this than me, I think you read some proper books on sovite communism and you read a lot of "big history" books, something I hardly did. I'm a very specialized academic that generally knows about historiography as a craft with certain methods. I don't memorized big history books or anything that I did during my history BA I have (faint) memories of what I did in papers or read in articles of course

I'm pretty sure you will able to pull this test since you understand how this curriculum works and you have enough knowledge and skills to give the answers that are expected.
Mind you, history in university often is about thinking about "factors" which means you will inevitably leave things out that others have already argued for. So you will have books that argue for something has happened because of X and Y that is not mentioned or barely mentioned in big history books as an important factor. And neither is wrong, its a question of focus which is inevitable in history since there is no super synthesis of all historical works on a topic possible. It's simply too long.

 No.17465 KONTRA

>>17464
I looked up big history and apparently, it is used for something else. I forgot the term I learned in uni that labels these books that are basically broad overviews on certain topics. I meant something along the lines of the "History of Germany" for example that usually has a mix of political history, social and economic history and makes rather broad brushes.

 No.17466

>>17460
>Portugal in a new international framing
I assume that's just Portugal's membership in the NATO, EU and the Common Market where people, services, goods and capital flows freely. (The Four Freedoms of the European Union!)
Plus its postcolonial relationships in the 21st century with Brazil and the like.

The thing you have to remember about essay on this level is that they don't want research or something like that, they want you to be a good boy who can just re-build the textbook on his own. (Someone who is in possession of the baseline of knowledge from which he will be able to differentiate in the future.)

 No.17479

1592903246595_aa.png (631.04 KB, 950x646)

41242803.jpg (359.73 KB, 2000x1124)

>>17466
>assume that's just Portugal's membership in the NATO, EU and the Common Market where people, services, goods and capital flows freely.
It's a little more than just that.
>they want you to be a good boy who can just re-build the textbook on his own
Awful, just awful. Anyways here's my rebuilt textbook on.
There are two geopolitical options that must be studied for Portugal - Portugal in NATO is studied more in-depth in the framework of a cold war NATO founding member, before the political isolation caused due to the colonial war, it's more of a footnote in modern international settis.
The European Union has its own little section, of which I mostly need to know the following:
The Consolidation of pluralistic democracy in the framework of an unified Europe. Joining the European Union in '86 as it undergoes the process of "creating and consolidating institutions that will shape the European Union". Schengen accords, Single European Act. Generally understanding a timeline of events.
Post WW2, Marshall Plan -> Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). Organização Europeia de Cooperação Económica (OECE).
1952 - European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). Comunidade Europeia do Carvão e do Aço (CECA).
1957 - Treaties of Rome.
1985 - Schengen, Single European Act
1993 - Maastritch Treaty
2003 - Nice Treaty (Eastern Expansion and its consequences - to be understood in the context of a predatory neoliberalism colonizing eastern europe)
2007 - Lisbon Treaty
And then a whole section that is indeed just The Four Freedoms of the European Union and assorted stuff.

Portugal in the present international context features a little more, joining the EU as a method of consolidating democracy. It's important to go over this.

The perfect textbook essay on "Portugal - A new international framework" is:

On a political level, the full integration into a democratic Europe facilitated the consolidation of democratic institutions in Portugal. It put to an end to revolutionary turmoil and with an absolute majority by PSD under Cavaco Silva, Portugal was irreversibly on the path towards a western, pluralistic, modern democracy. Portugal stopped being the Salazar's nation of "Proud Solitude" and began to proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with the most solid and powerful European democracies. Portuguese diplomacy began to occupy a place of prestige in the international sphere, with its highest achievements marked by the Presidency of the UN General Council, in the person of Freitas do Amaral; in the international support achieved by the Portuguese government in the complex process of Timor Leste's independence; in the invite to the then Prime Minister Durão Barroso for the Presidency of the European Commission, seat that he held from the 29th of November 2005 to 2014; in the exercise of the role of high commissioner for the UN on the question of refugees, seat held by former prime-minister António Guterres, who in 2017 took the role of General Secretary of the UN.

 No.17480

>>17479
On an economic level, the solidifying of a Single Market for 1993, imposed the modernization of the economies of member states. Given Portugal's economy showed weak signs of development, the European Community transferred to Portugal large sums of financial aid and technical support, according to multiple programs of economic and financial relief, in order to lessen the economic gap between Portugal and other member states.
- PEDAP - Programa Específico do Desenvolvimento da Agricultura Portuguesa - financed the substitution of an archaic farming sector by a modern more efficient system.
- PEDIP - Programa Estratégico de Dinamização e Modernização da Indústria Portuguesa - the program behind the publication of a new legislative framework on measures to reduce and eliminte polution sources, associated to an inevitable program of economic incentives.
- PODAEEF - Programa de Desenvolvimento e Apoio a Estruturas de Emprego e Formação - For professional and technical school.
- PRODEP - Programa de Desenvolvimento Educativo para Portugal - For the modernization of the education system
These programs, alongside the devualuing of the dollar and oil prices, made it so that the Portuguese economy would grow at higher rates than the European average. It's effects were economic prosperity - increased foreign investment, lowered inflation, an increase in exports and a reduction in sovereign debt.

Socially, the diminished importance of the agricultural sector in exchanged for a fortified service sector is intensified. There is an increase in small and medium enterprises for services, notably telecommunications, informática e grandes superfícies comerciais. (tech and malls). Create new job alternatives with good wages, while the governments positive economic status allows it to build on social aid networks and increase available jobs in the public sector.

Downsides
- Struggling in a highly competitive market of extreme competitions (tried to translate it as best I could, it's straight up what they wrote)
- The freedom and sovereignty of the national government in budget questions is conditioned by the political options of the European Union
- Opening of borders facilitated the moving of business and investment to more competitive markets
- Accentuated regional differences
- It became harder to monitor for illegal immigration and new challenges arouse in fighting in organized crime
- The connection of the national economy to global markets augmented the negative effects of the international financial condition in the entry to the third millennium

In pursuing the European option, there remained a strong ideological current in Portugal, which for historical reasons, defended the privileged relationship with the Atlantic, a term that would include lusophone countries. After all, the Atlantic vector was a permanent mark of the national characteristics of foreign relations. Hence why, despite adopting a European vision, the historical Atlantic view was not lost in foreign affairs matters. The initial years after the declarations of independence (of Portuguese Africa) did not facilitate the establishment of of open and honest relationships with the former colonies. The ideological alignment of these states with the socialist bloc and the political instability that characterized the first years of independence, allowed some to believe that the historical relationships with African communities was over.
However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war and its repercussions in the political evolution of Austral Africa precipitated an important inversion of political paths by the Portuguese former colonies: violent civil wars ended and the regimes adopted western type democracies lol. As such, the conditions required for Portugal to reinforce its relations with the new African lusophone states were gathered - in a manner that did not compromise the European option.

 No.17481

>>17480
Relations with PALOP (Países Africanos de Língua Oficial Portuguesa) privileged the economic aspect, which was desired by African states who lacked foreign investment that were considered necessary for their development on all levels and desired by Portugal where the newly found prosperity of these nations could be used to internationalize its economy and mediate relationships between the EU and lusophone nations.
It's in this framework that Portuguese companies turn to African markets, through signing economic and financial cooperation protocols with new comercial partners in tourism, construction, telecoms, cement, power, banking and the development of infrastructure.
Alongside economic cooperation, Portugal gives important support in regards to education, culture, science, fighting poverty and health - in order to consolidate the lusophone cultural identity of these nations.

Relations with CPLP have been centered around the reinforcement of internal cohesion, by cooperation on an economical, linguistic, political and diplomatic level in order to harness the strategy potential of the lusophone community in international relations.
Relations with Brazil, one of the largest economies in the world, have been intensified since the 90s, at a time when the Portuguese business sector began to take advantage of opportunities given by an immense consumer market. Particularly, tourism, telecoms, cement, power and the metalomechanic industry have received a great boon from their investments in the largest country of Latin America.
The relation with Brazil, has given a strong interchange in regards to migration flows and cultural bonds, which contribute for further cohesion in these two sister communities.
Relations with Timor-Leste, after the complex diplomatic proccess that led to the independence of this nation, have been anchored in the defense and promotion of Portuguese cultural values, where language, cooperation on education and help in consolidating political structures.

The Atlantic option of Portuguese foreign policy also includes the relationship with the United States and Latin America.
In conformity with its bilateral plan, Portugal confirms and strenghtens its relationship with the United States of America, with purpose of renewal of the Lajes Accords of 1979 and 1983, and in a multilateral plan, reinforces its presence in NATO and renews its commitments to the policies that were abandoned with the outbreak of the colonial war.
The relationship with Latin America also earned a privileged attention in the goal of reinforcing historic relations with Spain. In this regards, Portugal fully integrates the Organização dos Estado Ibero-Americanos and actively participates in their summits, with the purpose of reinforcing the internationalization of the Portuguese economy to new emerging markets and to benefit from the established cultural exchanges, of education and technical-scientific development.

//

It's hard to write this all with a straight face.

 No.17487 KONTRA

german-unification.jpg (117.09 KB, 733x745)

Gonna translate and write down more textbook chapters as things progress. Still got a couple of days to fuck around with. A daytime shift for general exercises and completing exams and a nighttime translation for EC.

 No.17488

gsp_ddr1_titel_1000.png (145.88 KB, 661x1000)

gsp_ddr2_titel_1000.png (59.65 KB, 643x1000)

>>17487
Glück auf, Genosse!

 No.17512 KONTRA

The attempt to make the history exam have a more objective grading, by upholding textual and documental analysis as the main method of questioning is a tricky one. One must never answer the questions as they are posed in a literal sense, but look for the meta questions behind them. Contrary to what is stated, they don't want you to actually find evidence of the mobilization of artistic resources by 20th century authoritarian movements in a given excerpt in a text, they want an essay on how these movements used art that uses quotations of the given text in a tangential manner. Meta analysis.

 No.17515 KONTRA

Maybe there is still time to tattoo the entirety of the European Constitution on my forearm so I can use it as a memory aid.

 No.17516 KONTRA

I'm quite sure I'm going to fail this. I don't know, I'm better equipped at writing about things I didn't know about, as I think I would have come short of grading requirements for an examination of the soviet collapse. Maybe, the reviewer would accept all my various points and award me the perfect grade. Maybe he would consider my detailed text with references to the 1991 failed coup, name dropping opposition figures from within the central committee and tying the rise of Yeltsin's liberal gang with a reformist center sieged by hardliner forces that couldn't hold its own. In some things I'm not explicit enough. Seeing a graph of industrial production comparing the USSR and the USA, and using it to highlight the soviet agricultural crisis but missing the [verified] interpretation - Soviet production was lesser than American production. In things I was more ignorant of, I have fairly standard and correct answers, even if they suffer from the effects of my functional illiteracy in writing.

Anyway, here's the section on a unipolar world:

 No.17517 KONTRA

gorb.jpg (13.77 KB, 240x279)

Correct interpretation of the crisis of the Soviet model - on the sections I got wrong, in half translated Portuglish:

By the end of 1982, when Brezhnev died, and despite of the profound changes that has marked the international setting, Marxism Leninism as interpreted by Stalin in the 20s was unchanged in its principles and policies. Faithful to the principles of democratic centralism, the Communist Party continued to be confused with the state and its highest rulers - the nomenklatura - continued to use power to perpetuate their privileges.
However, the winds of change where strong.
If, in Western Europe, the old socialist and communist parties began to undergo profound renovations marked by the abandonment of its Marxist thesis and by undertaking the democratic-reformist route, so too the USSR revealed evident the signs of the crisis of the Soviet model.

Deeply accentuating the internal distortions of soviet society, by the end of the 1970s, externally, the regime faced increasing difficulties in maintaining its domain in eastern europe, it was retreating in Asia, Africa and Latin America and it floundered in Afghanistan, in the consequence of a disastrous military intervention.
It's in this context, that in 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev is elected general secretary of the CPSU. The new ruler was aware of the difficulties that the economy was going through and felt that the socialist system, despite not being worthy of replacing, required a reform. In the same manner, he understood that the desire for freedom manifested by the soviet people.
These were the positions that Gorbachev proposed to the 27th Congress of the CPSU, in 1986, and that he decidedly adopted, by undergoing a process of economic restructuring, perestroika and by implementing a policy of transparency, glastnost.
Perestroika was an ambitious process of adapting the planned economy to the mechanisms of a market economy. Big state monopolies would be broken, free competition between companies would be established, open to national and foreign investment.
Glasnost sought the more active participation of citizens in the political process. It was an end to the persecution of political dissidents and it carried the launching of anti-corruption campaigns. It further protected free speech, of which resulted the publication of forbidden works and the reappearing of a free press.

 No.17518 KONTRA

Anxiety intensifies.

 No.17523

>>17517
> its highest rulers - the nomenklatura - continued to use power to perpetuate their privileges
Bruh, in which country highest rulers don't have privileges? Soviet elites lived very modestly compared to Western elites and moreover post-Soviet elites. This is a non-issue and it's mentioned because it was weaponized by Yeltsin's demagoguery during his struggle against Gorbachev: "How dare ministers have their own drivers?"
However, this type of rhetoric was effective because:
1. Elites lived modestly, but common people lived abysmally. Difference 200$ wage and 400$ wage is bigger than between 1000$ wage and 10.000$ wage, even though numbers say the opposite.
2. This quality of life was man-made and it was created by elites. "Party decided that you don't need washing machine and dental anesthesia" (while having it themselves ofc).
3. According to soviet mindset, it was controversial to demand to live good, as it qualified you as greedy materialist who thinks too high of himself. However, asking "why don't they live as bad as us?" was absolutely ethical.

 No.17528 KONTRA

>>17517
> privileges of the nomenklatura
Is this really listed as a cause of the Soviet collapse?
Lol. As if those communist vermin had ruined the national economy by allotting to themselves cheapened down russified copies of a 1960s fiat. While the country was pathetic, it was not that pathetic.

SU was done in when the machinery extracted from Germany as reparations started to age, while they failed to make their agriculture sufficiently productive and had to import grain, while oil-prices were down, while Reagan arms-raced them to death, while they were hit by an earth quake in Armenia and a Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine.

Of course, we could have had this sooner, had the traitor Frahms not started to buy gas from them, instead of building a fuckton of NPPs like decent countries. (Cue France.)

 No.17543 KONTRA

>>17523
>However, asking "why don't they live as bad as us?" was absolutely ethical.
Lol. Our expression for that is "Dögöljön meg a szomszéd tehene is!" [The neighbor's cow should die too!]

 No.17544 KONTRA

quiet-german.jpg (79.43 KB, 722x1000)

I'm not gonna make it.

 No.17549 KONTRA

How am I supposed to see a "a growing desire for freedom on behalf of the populations of Warsaw Pact nations" as a real reason for the iron curtain to fall? Or "an intensification in the struggle against Soviet rule"? Insanity. In my view, the only valid reason is Gorby's actions in defanging the Warsaw Pact. Unless we are to think that the various nationalities of the east awoke one day when the winds of change crept at their door and suddenly felt the desire for sovereignty. Maybe previous attempts are breaking free of Soviet domination failed because the local populations simply didn't will freedom into existing hard enough. I'd still pass this question because the answer sheet breaks down "Gorbachev's policy" and the Sinatra doctrine into two separate reasons, for some reason.

 No.17550 KONTRA

>>17549
>for some reason
I suppose the first is the push for elections in the warsaw pact in an attempt to affirm reformist communism. They simply do not elaborate, on what specifically beyond "Gorbachev's policies".

 No.17560 KONTRA

>>17549
>the winds of change crept at their door and suddenly felt the desire for sovereignty.

It was always there. Everybody wants to be a free person. It was just that the sovereignty of an unjust state stifled any attempts to let that desire roam freely and sublimate into ordered /law) competition.

 No.18353

IMG_7962.jpeg (80.33 KB, 400x599)

A book about the Swiss student societies and their role and position in modern swiss history.

The book is unequal in its chapter’s qualities, the origin and evolution of the Germanic student societies is really well explained. From a cooperative of “guilds” of students, grouped by place of origin and managing the universities through those, the groups were then discharged from academic administration, thus becoming “private” (Landsmannschaft), and by that private for. The selection of new members sometimes went from place of birth to other type of selection and discrimination, which saw the rise of student orders with free-mason adjacent political ideals in the 18th century or Kränzchen, their ideologically neutral equivalent. In the late 18th, early 19th, those societies tried to fuse into a nationalist Burschenschaft, united, German nationalist student societies. It got abolished by the authorities in Germany, but not Switzerland, were those societies became Swiss nationalist. First actual student societies were born in the early 19th century in Switzerland, mostly inspired by the German structure but with a Swiss nationalist touch instead of a German one. The three great Swiss student societies were Zofingen (liberal), Helvetia (radical) and the Schweizerischer Studentenverein (catholic conservative). All of those permitted to create a national elite shared between the Romands and Germans with a relatively shared political goal of Swiss unity thorough modernity and patriotism. Carl Jung was for example a member of Zofingen or the Swiss general during ww2, Henry Guisan (and a lot of others I was surprised to see here but you wouldn’t know about).

After the general strike of 1918, those societies became for the most part a beacon of anticommunist ideology. The Schweizerischer Studentenverein even supported the 1934 initiative to make Switzerland fascist: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fronteninitiative

The last fourth of the book about the later 20th century doesn’t have a lot to say and looses itself into a strangely Houellebecq adjacent rhetoric about « new left » international emancipation in academia and don’t talk a lot about the student societies. Not a lot to say besides the slow decline in members and debates over woman membership.

 No.18355 KONTRA

>>18353
>The last fourth of the book about the later 20th century doesn’t have a lot to say and looses itself into a strangely Houellebecq adjacent rhetoric about « new left » international emancipation in academia and don’t talk a lot about the student societies. Not a lot to say besides the slow decline in members and debates over woman membership

Sounds like the author is sad about what happened. Sounds like the author might have a bias if using that kinda rhetoric.

 No.18379 KONTRA

>>18355
There’s quite a few authors, that’s the weird part. They may all be nostalgic. And they seemed sufficiently neutral in their appreciation of 19th century academic history of Switzerland.

 No.18390

>>18379
>neutral in their appreciation

Not sure if appreciation is neutral. Do you mean they seem very interested, engaged and nerdy about it or is the tone really more appreciating of the time itself?
There is a difference between being interested in nazi Germany as a historian and writing well on it because you are deep in it or if you appreciate nazi Germany. It's the typical hyperpole but gives you an idea of what I mean exactly. At least I hope so.

 No.18391

>>18390
By appreciation I meant judgment, understanding of the situation, not enjoyment. If think the word can be used as such.

 No.18392

>>18391
I would distinguish between interest, understanding and appreciation. The later to me connotes it also seems to denotes as understanding according to an online dictionary a positive judgement toward an object. Well, maybe I could say I appreciate postwar Germany. But that is not really true, I'm very fascinated by the history of it, though. I appreciate reading about postwar Germany or even doing my own work with sources, then.

 No.18399

>>18391
I agree with you.

 No.18400

>>17549
Reading close to ahistorical.

When Gorbachev took power in 1985, the shortcomings of the deficit-economies had long become blatantly obvious to their inmates. Polish martial law had come and gone, it had ended with concessions, not with a Warsaw pact invasion. As we have known since 2009, Jaruzelski had practically begged Kulikov. But Brezhnev-doctrine was over.

 No.18404

>>18400
That was just the goofy national curriculum. Now that I've achieved the necessary grade, I can freely shit on it.
None of the silly Soviet curriculum even came up. Quite sad.

 No.18565 KONTRA

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist…The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocation, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded"
We are remembered that one Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke about the perils of unchecked military-industrial expansionism, but the keepers of the historical record tend to omit the warning about scholar's being coopted by the warlord faction.



[Return][Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ b / int / meta ] [ fefe ] [ test ] [ FAQ / Rules / HowTo / Stats ] [ Radio / BNR ]