What historical misconceptions drive you mad?

What historical misconceptions drive you mad?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=xOjPECybOYY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Egyptians were white

Jesus existed

Fascism doesn't work.

Nazis were bad guys.

That the allies fought against racism in world war 2 and that the communists were among the first to fight against the Nazi invaders.

Nazis were good guys.

>the middles ages was dirty
>Napoleon was the bad guy
>religion was anti-learning
>knights could barely move in plate
>Arabs invented medicine
>the renaissance was peaceful
>Che was liberal

>Le "bad guys won"

this senpai

Stalin was a bad guy

>Victors write the history

OP, we've exhausted these kind of threads in the early days of Veeky Forums.

Now, after much shitposting, invasions from /pol/ and /leftypol/, you will find no standard of discussion. Only shitposting, b8 and ideological edgelords.

>White people is and has always been better than other races

"white" is a social construct. This is evident in the fact that eqyptians would officially be considered white on the US census.

>the Versailles treaty was unfair

You dont need that chin strap when you go to war.

>The Prince was written as satire.

Capitalism works

Says the user who uses the ultimate cap tech

It's pretty lazy and disingenuous to say that computers or the internet are particularly capitalistic inventions, or to state that the usage of them invalidates the criticism of the system that they supposedly, but not really, were made within.

ARPANET was built by the American military and its technology was expanded by American universities

Columbus discovered that the world was round.

How are they not capitalist mil/uni?

>State and public non profit institutions
>Capitalist
Lel

Capitalism isn't really a requirement for a military or universities, and both existed before it. Thus it is a bit weird to say that things developed by them are the "ultimate cap tech".

Have you not seen the ads?

Are good discussions still possible on Veeky Forums?

That modern Persians share little to no genetic or cultural link with Ancient Persians.

I also get annoyed when I see Greeks get trolled by others about this too. Modern Greeks do share strong genetic and culture link with their Ancient past, same as Persians.

>Capitalism isn't really a requirement for a military or universities
Agreed. But the ones you mentioned most definately are capitalist

Yes I have. I don't really think the ads are the most desirable or necessary part of the world wide web, or what it was developed for in the statist corporatist world that spawned it.

>muh arpa muh military
This is a shitty argument and here's why: first of all the connection between the ARPAnet and the internet as we know it is tenuous at best, a pop-science level of understanding. Second, even if the internet had been developed by the DIA in order to co-ordinate nuclear weapons systems (which is not really true anyway), that doesn't mean that the popular internet that gets marketed to people with home computers somehow ISN'T related to capitalism. The internet as we know it today only exists because of personal computers.

>Galileo was burned at the stake by the Inquisition because he said the world is round

>Napoleon was a manlet

>The Soviets liberated Eastern Europe

Non-profit does not negate the capitalist nature of the organizations or the society they are in.

Nazi state is a good proof for me.

>le everyone drank beer 24/7

Guess what?

People boiled their water back then too

They didn't know how or why it worked, but it did

The Mongols believed they were appeasing evil water spirits by boiling it

The thing is that pro (free-market) capitalists often like to criticize the state involvement in the economic life, and call such involvement "corporatist" instead of capitalist. Most of the better things made in the capitalist societies of the 20th century have been due to heavy government and (military industrial) involvement - something that 'libertarians' supposedly oppose. The fact is that R&D is expensive and risky, which is why private corporations do not engage in it on a large scale. The risks are thus socialized while the profits are largely privatized.

>something something i dont have an argument

Scotland is celtic

The whole "water was too dirty to drink" thing always miffs me.

Alright I'll bite, what are the Scottish user?

>any European "discovered" the Americas

To use this as an example

>history has "good guys" and "bad guys"

Literally this

>self-irony: the post

Catholics burned witches, medieval catholics especially

Burgundy was more than a bunch of rascal fucks.

Ze Germans were THIS close to completing a nuclear device

religious peoples interpretations of the bible, or any religious text whatsoever

>"The middle east has been constantly at war for thousands of years"
>"Jihad means blowing yourself up"
>"Shia and Sunni hate each other"
>"Western intervention in the Middle East is a good thing"

Pretty much everything Westerners believe about the Middle East

Kinda related: Germany would have won the war if Hitler only listened to his generals

>>"Shia and Sunni hate each other"

Do they not? I mean, they have a long conflict of bloody conflict, right?

sup Iranian guy

Corporatism has elements of capitalism within, AnCaps admit this. AnCaps, however, believe that corporatism is holding back what could be a much more positive and productive version of capitalism.

The commie LARPer posting "#resistcapitalism" on Instagram with his/her Iphone is using a product of capitalism within corporatism. Imagine what kind of device he/she could post foolish tweets with if capitalism wasn't plagued by corporatism? This is what AnCaps believe.

>conflict of bloody conflict

Wew. History of bloody conflict, obviously.

Corporatism is the inevitable result of Capitalism

Winning? No. But I think they would have lasted longer and performed better strategically. Specially on the eastern front.

that's what i was trying to put in words, thanks user

Yeah and I'm pretty sure that commies believe that ancaps could post their shitty anarachyball memes on better devices if communism. Which is sort of the point, something being made and used within a system is a shit argument in favor of a system.

Most of the weird stories you can read about Roman emperors are false. In many cases they were made up by political rivals to give a bad reputation of them.

>Romans vomited during feasts to keep eating
>The Library of Alexandria was destroyed by muslims (no record of this until hundreds of years later)
>Everyone lived to 30 and just dropped dead from existing
>Elaborate medieval torture devices
>Chastity belts were a thing
>Pilgrims wore all black and buckles
>Accused Salem witches were burned to death
>George Washington had wooden teeth
>Benjamin Franklin proposed the turkey to be the national bird
>Napoleon was short
>Santa Claus's modern image was invented by Coca Cola
>Mussolini made the trains run on time
>There was a panic over the War of the Worlds broadcast
>Poles charged german tanks on horseback
>Albert Einstein had poor grades
>Kitty Genovese was completely ignored during her violent, public murder because of the "bystander effect"
>Ben Franklin invented daylight savings time

>women have contributed little to society because they were oppressed

In reality its because women are generally content to be a part of the group instead of fighting for a leaders role

>Thinking there would be no progress on consumer goods under capitalism

Do you think the overpaid executives and stockholders at apple are the ones in the R&D Department? Are they on the assembly line? Do the guys in the R&D department even fathom becoming millionaires by collectively designing a phone

Spoiler: Tim Cook just gives speeches and pushes money around. And any idea he has come up with has probably been laughed at by the people actually developing the projects

But how are you supposed to fight for a leaders role if you're not even educated properly.

How do you explain the rise in woman leaders coinciding with the rise in women being educated?

I dont know user, Seneca himself states the practice of vomiting to eat more, even tho that was probably only confined to the high aristocracy who could afford a laviish living.

That the mongols left Hungary because Ögedei died. This is probably the biggest misconception that I even see academics perpetrate

Why DID they leave then? The only reason I've seen told is that they do it because muh vote conference.

>Romans vomited during feasts to keep eating
my latin teacher told me this
was annoying desu

They found out that Hungarians were their long lost mongol brothers.

There is only one primary source that states (the chronicle of Giovanni da Pian del Carpine) that the mongols left because the Khan died. The same chronicle also claims that the Khan had been killed by God to save Europe. Actual Mongol records disagree with this: a high minister and historian of the Mongol Ilkhanate, Rashid Al-Din claims that the Mongols started leaving Europe before they knew of Ögedei's death.

The more reasonable explanation for the Mongol withdrawal is that they became bogged down in expensive sieges, they had lost a lot of men, their European line was spreading thin and the Cumans were rebelling couple all this with the fact that the plunder from Europe wasn't all that satisfying or plentiful why wouldn't they leave?

People also need to remember that while yes, Mohi was a terrible defeat for the Hungarians it wasn't a cakewalk for the mongolians either.

Seems plausible to me, thanks for the explanation user.

Soldiers aren't evil. They are just doing their job and protecting their country.

The SS on the other hand...

>muh clean wehrmacht

Oh and I forgot that: For Carpinis account to be correct, the Mongol messenger(s) would have had to reach Europe in 3 months in winter from Mongolia

this is a pretty good list

I know no one on Veeky Forums thinks the crusades were unjustified because of the dues vult meme, but normies are still quick to point out that the crusades were totally unwarranted and that the Muslims literally did nothing wrong.

This always bugged me too. I mean, the Crusades weren't really that different from any other wars fought in the period. It was a bloody period with a lot of wars and fighting, why focus on the Crusades so much?

>Napoleon was the bad guy

Depends on perspective really. The French might look up to him now but the Brits would revile him. Picking 'good' and bad' guys in history is stupid anyway.

>Arabs invented medicine

Never have I heard this. However they certainly contributed to various areas of medicine such as optics and developed crude chemical formulations and medicines which were useful though.

>the renaissance was peaceful

I've never heard this from anyone either.

I'm ignorant on the subject. I just kinda assumed they were some mix of people since they are usually bronze looking.

I don't know what to believe on Egyptians
youtube.com/watch?v=xOjPECybOYY

I have to justify muh jihad somehow.

Yes thinking history in terms of good and bad is retarded, and yet it is what people do everyday. Expecially with napoleon, after his death english press wouldnt stop influencing the public opinion about how a scrouge for europe he had been, to the point that he was the "literally hitler" before hitler came around.
So it's not a misconception, more like the intended product of a political agenda pursued trough press.

>middles ages was dirty
What are aquaducts and sewers?

Things the ancient Romans built and the medieval europeans didnt

All u need is sauna

Normie understandings of Shakespeare.

>"omg Romeo and Juliet is so romantic

Which is why capitalism should be a temporary, transitional system rather than a permanent one.

Shit's kind of getting past its use-by date right now.

nah, beer consumption was high, especially in cities. beer also had some nutrition/calories so it was also drunken for that reason

>brits' whole "we stood alone against the Nazis" thing

p.s. I'm brit, before I get any nationalist chimp fellow countrymen calling me a frog or whatever.

p.p.s. I generally like the uk, but there's a hell of a lot of historical revisionism in our school system.

not him but an amalgam of celts (picts and later irish settlers), norse and angles in the lowlands (in addition to substantial african colonisation as shown by extensive archaological evidence) much like england. maybe more celtic and a bit of norse in the highlands

Also
>brits' whole "our king got deposed and subsequently some random dutch stadtholder invaded and became king of the uk which is pretty fucking embarrassing but we'll still call it the Glorious Revolution" thing
>brits' whole "the language of the english courts and aristocracy for over 400 years wasn't french, it was '''''anglo-norman''''' " thing

>every American Indian civilization was really just white people, asian people, aliens, Atlantians, or all of the above
>Solutrean """threory"""
>immigration and multiculturalism destroyed Rome

>>immigration and multiculturalism destroyed Rome
>the event that killed WRE is literally called the Migration Period

fuck you :)

Yeah the centuries of civil unrest, wars, coups, corruption, hyper-inflation, weakening army and over-reliance on mercenaries, and over-extension had nothing to do with it.

Plus the Goths and other tribes marching their armies over the borders and declaring new kingdoms is exactly the same as modern immigration.

when people believe causes to be effects and effects to be causes

>massive Teutonic army attacks Rome in the 1st century BC
>Roman legions break them and send them running home with their tails between their legs
>bunch of refugees show up in the 5th century running away from the Huns
>Rome is totally unable to push them back

Immigration and multiculturalism were symptoms, not causes.

That every conquest meant all women were systematically raped and they all gave birth and the gene pool was thus forever tainted by the conquerors.

It's not rocket science man, one needs but to look at a map, and remember the fact that the Nile flows from the South to the North.

Thanks for clarification, I knew about the Norse but can I get a source on the Africans, all google gives me is European Colonization of Africa and WE WUZ.

Wasn't there also massive crop failure, famine, and disease outbreaks as well?

The supposed 30,000 dissappeared in Argentina.

>