Is there any historical evidence about how a sudden displacement of refugees may have caused the recipient...

>How would you learn from it, if you don't understand it?
Learning from the past would imply understanding it.

Why are you assuming that I wouldn't understand it?

And they were expelled from Balticum. For some reason. So i guess they were refugees.

>Nobody said anything about being triggered
Your post was one gigantic whinefest.

> but the minute you see the words: nigger, kike, cuck, red pill etc. you can rest assured the poster is a moron.
We all have our trigger words I guess. Whenever I see someone saying anything in favor of marxism I automatically assume they have below average intelligence.

>The best way to adapt would probably be to leave the basement.
The funny thing is that I'm actually pretty important in real life.

>Utilizing historical narratives to fit modern political opinions.

>Are you for real? That is literally the goal of historical study.

>Why are you assuming that I wouldn't understand it?

Your greentext doesn't help me understand your position.

Since I claimed one can learn from history, this must mean that I'm an ignoramus who doesn't understand real history? I'm trying to understand what you're trying to say (so that I might learn from it and assess whether you are an utter time-wasting moron)

You seemed to imply that the potential practical applications of learning about history were the goal rather than simply understanding history.

I should've been more careful. "One of the goals" would've been more appropriate.

Doesn't change the fact that the user I reacted to thinks that learning from history is "pure cancer", which is a lot more cancerous that whatever I have said in this thread.

Stop your autistic battle please. Discuss my example instead you cunts:

> The funny thing is that I'm actually pretty important in real life.

Wow. With posts like these you'd be hard pressed to find someone with lower intelligence than yours.

Also, pic related.

>I'm actually pretty important in real life

Did your mother tell you that last time she bought you some anime figurines?

>I'm actually pretty important IRL.
laughingwhores.jpg

Hah, yeah that was super funny you guys, can we discuss the Vandals now please.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals#In_Gaul

What about them? The Heatherite contention that they were 'refugees' spurred to move into the bounds of the western Roman empire by Hunnic incursion is a very long way from being proven. It is a very convincing model, but when you actually bother to check what evidence we have for a movement on sufficient enough a scale by the Huns in the first decade of the 5th century to have caused 406, you'll find there is very little there.

So, they may well not even fit the bill? Moreover, does the modern word 'refugee' work at all? The Vandals entered Gaul under arms. We wouldn't use the word at all today, so why use it anachronistically, applied to an extremely ill fitting situation?

>That is literally the goal of historical study. To learn from the past.
Comparing historical refugee flows to modern day ones like the refugee crisis in Europe now is dumb because the characteristics of modern western society is more different than it's ever been before. It's like comparing vegetables with meat. There's no way you're gonna be able to predict the outcome of the refugee crisis today but studying any other refugee crisises in the past.

Also Fuck off back to your containment board.

what the fuck is wrong with doing that and drawing parallels?

>my word is gospel and only i dictate what the goal of historical study is

fuck off

...

You triggered as

>Wow. With posts like these you'd be hard pressed to find someone with lower intelligence than yours.
I don't understand how you inferred that from my post, but whatever helps you sleep at night.

>he doesn't suscribe to my marxist fantasies, so that means he's a neckbeard virgin hahaha
Your stupidity is really showing. Is that the best argument you can muster?

>Comparing historical refugee flows to modern day ones like the refugee crisis in Europe now is dumb because the characteristics of modern western society is more different than it's ever been before.
Well then since society is always evolving I guess ANY comparison with the past is dumb, right? Heck, with that logic even comparison with 5 minutes ago is forbidden.

Could you not envision making a comparison with historical precedents WHILE taking into account the differences between today and the past? You know, exercising this little thing called "intelligence".

Have you tried /pol/? They don't use big words, logical arguments or the fruits of a college education there. They'll accept you as you are.

I think the worst thing about you redditors is your smugness.

I'd take a nigger over a smug redditor any day of the week.

Where in God's name did you find 'Marxist fantasies' in anything anybody above has written? Jesus buddy, maybe give the tinfoil hat a rest.

As for the problem of 'comparing' past and present, the idea that you can do so mutatis mutandis is deeply flawed. If you exercised your own intelligence, I'm sure you'd be able to see that.

Those tears.

>mfw

>Where in God's name did you find 'Marxist fantasies' in anything anybody above has written?
One of the things marxists tend to do is repudiate non-marxist historiography.

>As for the problem of 'comparing' past and present, the idea that you can do so mutatis mutandis is deeply flawed. If you exercised your own intelligence, I'm sure you'd be able to see that.
Is your pathetically ineffectual brain confounded any time it has to compare two things which are not identical in all aspects?

>One of the things marxists tend to do is repudiate non-marxist historiography.

Again, you'll have to make plain where any non-Marxist historiography was repudiated above?

>Is your pathetically ineffectual brain confounded any time it has to compare two things which are not identical in all aspects?

If you're a fan of rigorous historical enquiry, you'll see the need to consider the methodological flaws in any such comparison, and will see that the flaws very often make any such comparison so utterly meaningless that taking the time to draw it in the first place is wasted.

But your vocabulary, sentence formation and wild assumption making suggests that you prefer 'history' as constructed by amateur fumbling.

Look at you trying to use big words to seem smart. You're the kind of pseudo-intellectual idiot that embodies most of what's wrong with the world today.

>you'll see the need to consider the methodological flaws in any such comparison, and will see that the flaws very often make any such comparison so utterly meaningless that taking the time to draw it in the first place is wasted.
I don't see this as obvious at all. Could you explain why?

As opposed to you, paragon of intelligence, whose sole contribution so far has been posting memes and insulting me?

If you're confused by the words you're honestly stupid.

>Well then since society is always evolving I guess ANY comparison with the past is dumb, right? Heck, with that logic even comparison with 5 minutes ago is forbidden.
Genius analogy there friend, but no I didn't even imply that. Like I said it's like comparing vegetables with meat, the only major refugee crises that brought down the fall of civilizations were the Germanic migrations before the end of the Roman empire.
>Could you not envision making a comparison with historical precedents WHILE taking into account the differences between today and the past? You know, exercising this little thing called "intelligence".
Holy shit it's like arguing with a 12 year old Redditor. You seriously believe you can take into account enough of the differences between today and pre dark age Rome accurately enough to make any kind of reliable prediction?

Take the 'migrant/refugee crisis' in Europe at present. Take the 'obvious' historical comparison, the one that the OP seems to want to lead us to - the situation in the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century.

As made clear by a poster above, the problems begin at the word 'refugee'. What sort of modern 'baggage' does this word bring with it, what connotations, what does it make us think of?

If we use it to describe the Vandals/Sueves/Alans or Goths (or any of the other peoples) that made incursions into the western empire in large numbers in the first decade of the 5th century, then what does that immediately do to the way we think of these peoples? To spell out the obvious, it puts us in mind of people fleeing their homes to escape political/social/economic/environmental upheaval of one kind or another. That instantly colours our perception of their motives, demographics and the way they were received by, in this case, the western Roman state - all without any basis in the primary source material.

If so large a problem is presented even by the vocabulary we might otherwise unthinkingly use, you can quickly see that our understanding of the situation - both modern and historic - is likely to be badly undermined by un uncritical comparison.

By the time you have teased out the major problems with such a comparison, you will find that any comparison you do make will have to be so heavily qualified, that it is hardly worth making.

Seeing the modern refugee crisis and turning to 5th century Rome for a comparison is the stuff of tabloid journalism. Historical comparison of this kind is usually only valuable when comparing situations that are either more or less contemporaneous or societally analogous.

Nations and empires take damage from shit like public health crises like the plague, economic crises like state bankrupcy or private sector capital flight, and civil unrest that follows the deterioration of social conditions (like dropping living standards or an oppressive political environment). And sometimes you just get invaded and everyone gets killed.

"Comparing historical refugee flows to modern day ones like the refugee crisis in Europe now is dumb because the characteristics of modern western society is more different than it's ever been before. It's like comparing vegetables with meat. There's no way you're gonna be able to predict the outcome of the refugee crisis today but studying any other refugee crisises in the past"

Yes the society from the past it's radically different of society today ,... but..., that doesn't say anything about what are factors that influence the social proces behind the fall of an empire/nation. What are tose factors ? ,well then, we must answer that question first before simply say " it can't happen because the society has change" .

>To learn from the past.

To learn of the past.

That assumes that there are a common set of factors, and that those common factors remain the same beneath the surface.

We will never have a unified theory explaining the way empires rise and fall. We will never have the data and in any case, the data we do have is so wildly divergent (or can be interpreted as so - for instance, the same data set has allowed historians to post more than 200 'causes' for the fall of Rome, from led poisoning to effeminacy) that it can never be corralled into a set of 'factors that influence the social processes behind the fall of an empire/nation'.

only examples I can think of involve the Roman Empire

Cimbri & Teuton migration involved millions of people fleeing the Jutland peninsula due to a flood or some shit
various other germanic migrations due to pressures from the steppe

I suppose you could easily draw the similarities between the two but the modern 'refugee' crisis is far more insidious I think, the ones that effected the Roman Empire were quite obviously invasions

You've been doing a great job of insulting yourself in your posts. I just gave you a little help. And what would your contributions to the discussion be? Calling everyone who disagrees with you marxists?

lmfao off yourself my man, cringing @ your posts right now. time to put the thesaurus down

I think he probably has. He hasn't deigned to grace any more 'Marxists' in here with his stunning displays of erudition.

I'm not ... but you are really making yourself sound like an asshole. Sophomore in college? Trying out your new-fangled vocabulary?

Yes, them words is kinda big-like and ain't what they talk back on the farm, but 'round these parts you're probably impressing (much less confusing) very few.

Or, to approach your talky-talky: although your lexis of choice is perhaps not entirely pedestrian, it is very much academia-standard... and a significant percentage of those who frequent these environs have gone/are going to university.

One thing I realized, after I started to write like you, is that it's more important to express yourself clearly than to try to impress your professors, much less strangers on the intrynet. And if you're bright enough, you can do it without sounding like a douchebag.

Best of luck, frrrrriend!

I would recommend you a book on theory of history. E..H. Carrs What Is History? is a classic and a good start. History is most certainly not something that should justify your own personal beliefs, political, religious or otherwise.

But user, Carr liked the USSR, our enlightened friend couldn't possibly lower himself in that way?!

I guess you overlooked/forgot/decided to ignore this:

>Veeky Forums is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected.

>calling someone a like means he's from /pol/
top kek

Wasn't the mass westward migration of the Turks triggered by Mongol invasion? That didn't turn out so good for Byzantium, now, did it?

Do I need to parse this for you? Second sentence:

>Global Rule #3 is in effect.

And for good measure, because you seem to be shitposting:

>... trolling will not be tolerated

You can refer to the basic rules of this board if you need the horse's mouth.

You do not seem to understand the point I'm making.
>calling someone a slur means they're from /pol/
3/4 of this site is racist you absolute mong.
But nobody gives a shit, so your whining has zilch effect

>Wasn't the mass westward migration of the Turks triggered by Mongol invasion?
More of an invasion than a migration thbf.

Also the Mongol conquests and resulting rejuvenation of world trade ultimately lead to the European Renaissance, in a way it was a necessary step in smashing the feudal system.

I'm not the guy who referred to anyone being from /pol/

Anyway, you're missing the fundamental point. The point being:

>Veeky Forums is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated

No need to interpret this as: "if you post on /pol/ you are not allowed to post on /hum/"

Also, your defense of breaking the rules doesn't make for a good argument.

Fuck it, this conversation is getting repetitive. If you don't get it, you don't get it.

Well then I don't know why you're getting involved in the argument.

And it seems to me that you're the one not getting it.

Just because he said kike doesn't mean he's from /pol/, since most of the site uses words like that, either ironically or unironically.

By that logic I can't call you a fag either

>3/4 of this site is racist you absolute mong.

You really shouldn't be proud of the fact that you're 16 and frustrated.

There is absolutely nothing good about racism, I'm just saying that this site is filled with racists, which is objectively correct

Saying nigger is not trolling, you stupid faggot.

Yup happened on the reg in Central Asia. Until the Russians and Chinese closed the steppes and modern centralized armies made hordes obsolete. Obviously there are the Germanic migrations and Rome as has been pointed out.

>There is absolutely nothing good about racism
In that case I apologize. Mea Culpa.

No prob dude

Depends. There's two ways to go about it.

Unbiased learning from the past from similar events to see how today might turn out, accepting whatever you find.

Or

Taking events from the past and fitting them no matter how true or not into a modern day situation to prove an argument that you believe, regardless of whether that's actually how it went down or not

>Kike
Great way to out yourself as the latter

>this planet is filled with racists
99% of people harbour some sort of prejudice and xenophobia. Get used to it.