Study history

>Study history
>Suddenly start getting really ambitious in my actual, real life
>Get depressed because I realize it is too late to have come to this point

>Study history
>Become depressed due to how fucked up our timeline is

>study history
>become nationalist and socialist
>mfw Hitler already trademarked the term

Most people in the real world become socialist upon studying history, you know.

>Study prehistory
>Become an anprim

>study history
>study philosophy
>study arts
>remain open to opinions throughout, dont become a volatile memelord faggot

Mfw ended up a communist and have no shame

>Studying history
Do you mean being taught a biased version of history by a liberal professor with a liberal approved syllabus in a liberal school?

>we will never live in the "Aurelian doesn't get assassinated" timeline
>we will never live in the "Joan of Arc lives" timeline
>we will never live in the "October Revolution fails" timeline
>we will never live in the "Hitler invades Austria in 1934 and gets btfo" timeline
what's the point of getting out of bed lads

>Hitler invades Austria in 1934 and gets btfo
By who? Why would Austria refuse? Who's going to protect Austria? Are Mussolini and Pilsudski going to team up and save the world?

This.

Also this.

I’m going to drop out, though. Studying History was a mistake.

this but unironically

No, colleges are overwhelmingly neoliberal institutions, and a lot of them let kids play activist and yell about privilege in sanitized classrooms while theyre there.

It is admittedly confusing now because plenty of liberals call themselves socialists or even communists but if someone is a haughty dismissive asshole throwing around shame like its currency theyre probably a liberal no matter what they call themself

Yes, you historical illiterate

>By who?
Italy mainly, with France and Poland joining in when they realize it's an easy way to depose Hitler without seeming like warmongers
>Why would Austria refuse?
because the potential invasion was precipitated by German-backed terrorists murdering their president and trying to seize control of the government

>Study history
>Become a Roman restorationist

Also this.

>throwing around shame like its currency
That's socialism alright.

Literal we wuzzer, I bet you call Byzantium the ERE.

I consider the empire to have entered a prolonged interregnum in 363.
I do not consider any state (Greek, German, Slav or otherwise), to have any claim to the empire.
Even just in spirit.

Good.

But the Latin Empire was the true successor of Rome.

A lot of socialists might be obnoxious idiots but realistically most people are obnoxious idiots. The trick is to make it work in such a way that individual opportunism and failures of character and ability dont fuck it up for everybody which admittedly socialism does not have a good record of, but neither did capitalist parliamentarism in the early 19th century, and it still ended up being a major improvement over royalism and the ancien regime.

>make it work in such a way that individual opportunism and failures of character and ability dont fuck it up
So it's impossible.

>decentralized socialist

>uneasy
Well not really

Well, by "dont fuck it up" I dont mean create a perfect world or anything near it, just a system in which democracy has been effectively extended to the economy and accumulation of capital and maximization of profit doesnt determine the limits of human flourishing.

>Extending democracy to the economy
Yes, that's impossible to make work, there's a reason pure democracy is never used.

I dont know what "pure democracy" is but I dont think it's what I'm advocating, which is ownership and management of resources and production based on the free association of unions whose power is checked by a decentralized government of regional citizens congresses, all of which is overseen by a limited federal government that could play an administrative role but be subject to the demands and desires of both unions and regional congresses because their power comes from their access to any resources and infrastructure, both of which are controlled by the shared power of unions and regional congresses.

Totally hypothetical and idealistic scenario of course, but just an example of how a socialist government might work without being Stalinism or doomed anarchism.

>Listen to podcasts
>Feel superior over high schoolers

It's doomed to Stalinism or Chavezism or something like that in the end if that's how your country works.

[citation needed]

Bernie Sanders had the most support of any candidate in the history of forever! Everyone in Europe and Australia and the good parts of Asia like China and North Korea wanted him to be President!

Same. Fuck the French.

>capitalist parliamentarism in the early 19th century, and it still ended up being a major improvement over royalism and the ancien regime.
Only in how it could make its people happy with more taxes and less rights, under the guise of nationalism.
When people think their money is going to their own people, and their rights are being curbed for the good of their people, and that the leaders who did this were "their" leaders(Since they voted for them), they're much more willing to endure a government that is objectively worse for the people than if that government doesn't have the standing to create that good propaganda.
Nearly all improvements in the lives of the people in the past few hundred years have been due to technology.

>play paradox games on adderall binges
>tell the history board of my favorite Nepalese kukri smithing forum that I'm studying history

>study history
>leave Islam instantly
>become more interested in pre-islamic ME
>stoicism
>romanboo

My "conservatism" didn't change though.

THIS