The Chud Vision of Roman History
acoup.blog
The Chud Vision of Roman History
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#2[deleted]
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#3[flagged]
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#4[dead]
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#5"[T]he oddity I pointed out in that piece that the chuds are both really attached to classical antiquity and also don’t know very much about it."
As a history nerd in the Bay Area tech scene, it always amazes me how so many of the e/acc, NRx, and "The West" people fit the quote above.
I think this is why Curtis Yarvin has been successful, as he states bad history with confidence to people who either don't know the difference, or have a direct interest in promoting his "The rich should rule us, actually" ideology.
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#6Bret previously on "statue pfps" https://www.thebulwark.com/p/why-stone-faced-fascists-keep-g...
and chatting with one directly https://xcancel.com/BretDevereaux/status/1742957031353466903
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#7[flagged]
You should work on the ability to distinguish respect from charitability.
One can be charitable to views that one does not respect. And if one ends up being disrespectful it does not mean that they were insufficiently charitable.
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#8"[T]he oddity I pointed out in that piece that the chuds are both really attached to classical antiquity and also don’t know very much about it." As a history nerd in the Bay Area tech scene, it always amazes me how so many of the e/acc, NRx, and "The West" people fit the quote above. I think this is why Curtis Yarvin has been successful, as he states bad history with confidence to people who either don't know the di…
all history from 2000+ years ago is bad history. neither the chud nor the cuck vision of classical antiquity is anywhere near accurate. entire decades get extrapolated from a few surviving bits written a century after the events. every sentence in every history book about that era implicitly comes with "We assume that..."
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#9[dead]
Re: The Chud Vision of Roman History
#10"[T]he oddity I pointed out in that piece that the chuds are both really attached to classical antiquity and also don’t know very much about it." As a history nerd in the Bay Area tech scene, it always amazes me how so many of the e/acc, NRx, and "The West" people fit the quote above. I think this is why Curtis Yarvin has been successful, as he states bad history with confidence to people who either don't know the di…
all history from 2000+ years ago is bad history. neither the chud nor the cuck vision of classical antiquity is anywhere near accurate. entire decades get extrapolated from a few surviving bits written a century after the events. every sentence in every history book about that era implicitly comes with "We assume that..."
Well at least we can filter out the Jeffrey of Monmouth's though.