Controversial his opinions?

>germany saved Europe in ww2
>Byzantium got what they deserved during the 4th crusade
>Nubian kings were black and admirable
>muslims have the right to have a modern day caliphate

Calling them controversial implies that there's enough evidence for them to create a controversy.

>Europe would've been better if they all became communist

>>germany saved Europe in ww2

Explain this one? Looking past "Hitler did nothing wrong" stuff, WW2 didn't really end well for anyone, if you don't include the obligatory technological advances from war.

completely shattered the soviet soldiers will to fight in a western European invasion.

>Nubian kings were black and admirable

That's a fact though

apart from the admirable part tho*

>completely shattered the soviet soldiers will to fight in a western European invasion.
Stalin was afraid of an invasion from Western Europe, which was why a series of buffer states was continually being made in Eastern Europe, even today.

If anything, WW2 destroyed European hold on the world, forcing early decolonization which completely fucked up the Middle East and Africa.

>>muslims have the right to have a modern day caliphate

I couldn't agree more...


...under one condition that is, extremist abdul and moderate muhammad are confined to having their caliphate in their own shitty sandbox.

>microhistories at small scale and computational modeling at large scale are the future of history

With hot opinions like that I can see you're slated for a chair at a right wing liberal arts college.

Given the general quality of troops in pre-war Soviet Union, that doesn't say much.

The South had every right to secede and starting a war over it was downright senseless.

They were Black Africans, yes.

Does anyone deny that?

I mean, they weren't the ancestors of the Black Americans, but they had black skin.

Black? Yes. Admirable? Depends.

I don't believe in the preservation or sanctity of culture outside of the context of scientific/historical study. People should be free to mix and match however they want without other people's retarded gatekeeping and misplaced feelings of pride getting in the way.
>muh heritage
>muh nation
>muh cultural appropriation
Or generally
>muh sacred identity

I believe people should mix and match without discarding their cultures.

There's no reason you can't commingle and preserve your heritage.

What a fucking boring world it'd be if everything just kind of mixed together.

I don't like the idea of "their" culture. I feel like people should be part of whatever culture they want. I agree with your last point, but that's never going to happen; the world will keep generating new cultures into the foreseeable future.

This is a board for history and the humanities, where scholarly discourses exist. We don't care about what you believe or disbelieve. Fuck off to where they care what you care about.

And I don't care if you do, but this is an opinion thread and culture falls under the humanities, nerd.

>People should be free to mix and match however they want

Okay, but people should also be free to segregate themselves from others. Reminder that no Western nation was asked by their politicians if they're okay with the whole immigration stuff.

Oh, absolutely. There's nothing sacred about the blending of cultures, either.

>culture falls under the humanities
High quality discourse is expected here. Not juvenile opinions with no connection to cultural or critical studies. Maybe you missed first year: NOBODY CARES WHAT YOUR OPINION IS.

Except no.

Here we see a classic example of user using his classical letters to demonstrate just how much he does not care.

>juvenile opinions with no connection to cultural or critical studies
Oh yes. We all know these are nowhere to be seen on Veeky Forums, that wonderland of academic fulfillment and genuine discussion.

>other shit exists
Great argument.

>England should have made peace with germany after they invaded France

This is motherfucking Veeky Forums. No one should care what ANY user thinks. Just because it's a history board doesn't mean you don't have uninformed opinions from posters. Why else would we have holocaust denial and sub saharan African civilisation thread every day?
Just chill man.

I'm not arguing with you, buckaroo. I just don't know what about my post specifically deserved your wise and even-handed consideration moreso than the rest of this board, o magnanimous sultan of academia.

>Why else would we have holocaust denial and sub saharan African civilisation thread every day?
Because you don't report off topic posts.

Please continue to rephrase "other shit exists."

As this anonymous has done.

right to secede? maybe
war being senseless? nah

We should completely eliminate the idea of nations like Italy, France, Germany. They are arbitrary groups of people who maybe have blood and culture in common, some don't even have a common religion.
What we should have is a united europe with some sort of macro regions.

I'll take right to self determination for 500

Even the scummiest empire is justified in fighting a rebellion

Yeah, that's working great

itereting justifying imperialism is another good controversial opinion

I think Islam should be regressed back to Arabia and allow the pre-islamic people to convert back to their native religion.

We want your shit.

And such is war.

>muslims have the right to have a modern day caliphate
There are muslim women in Afghanistan that will vouch for idea that their daughters should never learn to read.
It's possible to choose incorrectly, even when one has a right to a choice.
People that are not educated and haven't developed the intellectual skillset or are the product of brainwashing or simply lack relevant experiences should have their right to choose correspondingly matter less.
I know that's a slippery slope, it's hard to say who should be in charge of drawing that line. But it can't be either extreme. We can't have one person deciding for everyone. At the same time, we can't have one out of every six humans choosing to live under Sharia because they simply don't have the capacity to appreciate the alternatives.
Humanity just can't tolerate allowing such an extreme manifestation of its retrograde tendencies to be allowed that much military and economic influence.
I have nothing against muslims, but the rest of us just can't wait around and watch while a global caliphate happens, because we don't know who will be in the seat of power, and chances there's a significant chance that mission control is going to be left largely in the hands of ancient texts alone.
The World needs for muslims to "take one for the team", as marginalized as they may feel, and make a clean break from the religion of their parents, one way or another. On an individual level that will seem like a thankless task for them but it will be a large step toward ensuring human prosperity indefinately.

>Classical Rome was far greater than contemporary China, India, or Persia
>Byzantium was Rome
>Western Europe was already a greater civilization than anywhere in Asia by the mid-13th century
>Western civilization begins with the Franks, not the Greeks
>The Dark Ages were real
>Crusades were not defensive wars
>Most of Africa's backwardness can be explained by geography, just like Siberia or Australia

>I have nothing against muslims

The rest of your post reads like you think they're absolute idiots that deserve to have their culture wiped out.

There was a black Egyptian Pharoah.

He was also a big fan of ancient Egyptian religion and culture.

Piye's story is fucking amazing. But he was one of a kind.

>we wuz pharoahs and shit

>>Byzantium was Rome
Nobody denies this except memesters on Veeky Forums

>Byzantium existed
I think you mean Rome.

>an entire world of pain and suffering would have been avoided had Austria-Hungary been maintained as a state after World War I
>the right to secession in the US was something the founders intended the states to have as a tool against the federal government, regardless of the shitflinging any mention of the CSA induces
>Constitutional Monarchy is by far the best form of government, and it is the height of stupidity that so many European countries willingly lose out on the traditional, symbolic, and economic value of a monarch and instead have castrated "President" roles that serve the exact same powerless figurehead purpose but with nobody giving a shit

>Crusades were not defensive wars

I'm worried that people think that a controversial opinion