The bubonic plague was beneficial for the economy in the middle ages and started the Renaissance...

The bubonic plague was beneficial for the economy in the middle ages and started the Renaissance. Would something similar happen today if a virus killed 60% of the world population?

Other urls found in this thread:

nwf.org/Wildlife/Wildlife-Conservation/Biodiversity.aspx
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The service economy would fail and we'd move back to an industrial economy, the middleclass would actually shrink which would help biodiversity be maintained. It would certainly change the benefits system, which would most likely mean more government funding to the natural philosophies rather than to Ahmed and his 10 kids who all have diabetes from staying inside for too long

Probably

Overpopulation makes everything more difficult

> biodiversity
> when 60% of the world population died

>disease started a cultural movement
This board is something else

nwf.org/Wildlife/Wildlife-Conservation/Biodiversity.aspx

I'll give you a quick rundown:
>people realize the church can't protect them god's wrath
>people lose faith
>people inherit more because half their family dies
>more money, less faith= frivolous spending in art=renaissance

>less faith
>what is protestant movement

We are on the cusp of mass automation and guess what 99% of humanity will be culled as the elites of the world are becoming ecologically minded. They will inherit a fully automated green friendly utopia. They will probably all be jews too (just saying)

Protestantism is atheism 0.5

You realize that Renaissance affected like 5% of population at best? Commoners didn't give a shit about it, they kept doing what they already did for centuries.
>less faith
Are you saying Renaissance was also anti-religious movement? Because that's also wrong

Crappest, most tenuous reasoning ever.

But it isn't?
The Protestants believed in God more than plenty of popes. Why else would they risk their lives to practice?

It was as anti-religious as it could have been taking into account the historical context. Painting pagan gods and naked people was pretty controversial and groundbreaking.

>You realize that Renaissance affected like 5% of population at best?

Ah yes, the meme that the Renaissance is a meme. John Green is a retard who keeps conflating the artistic movement and humanist philosophy that started in 1400 with the real Renaissance that started after the fall of Byzantium which most scholars agree it's what makes us jump to the early modern period.

It was a meme. The science progress that was happening in the middle ages halted for the sake of hedonistic romanticism that did shit for the common man.

There are way more important scientists from the Renaissance than there is for the entire Middle Ages. When you take into consideration that medieval Europe had double the size of the population it becomes specially baffling. No scientific progress was halted at all. Some of it was just lost because of the turmoil caused by Black plague.

The real Renaissance started in the 12th century.

it doesn't explains why communist countries were shit despite millions dying

Capitalism is the whole point of this theory. It can't be applied to communist shitholes
also
>communism
>flourishing of culture
pic one

We can see that protestant countries nowadays are more atheist than catholic ones.

200 years after the great plague what's your point?

>he thinks biodiversity is humans rather than innocent elephants seen once or twice in America
Dude it's hammered in in my biology lectures how important ecology is
>the elites
Good thing I'm in 10% needed to code the new AI

It happened during the renaissance.

They had a religion but was it Christian
But the church agreed life should be celebrated
The early modern period begins either when you have a proper English identity, or the invitation of William of orange
This is the early modern period

>what is making everything into cubes

The Renaissance didn't start until almost 200 years after the plague