Worst "people" to discuss history with

>Try and discuss anything history related with a Brit
>The Crown dindu nuffin! We wuz bloody Empraz an shoite!
I have yet to meet a Brit who wasn't fucking delusional

Attached: 1513270448356.jpg (239x326, 16K)

nazis

Yeah Nazis are about as bad as Englishmen
>Hitler was just keeping the Jews in 5 star resorts with swimming pools and dental care all on the German tax payer dime!

>not naming communists
the reddit raids are getting annoying

Way to perpetuate the retardation.
This thread also has nothing to with either history or humanities, it just satiates your hatred for a particular country.

He mentioned nazis who are socialist/communist

Commies, Asians, and Jews. They all conveniently "forget" important details or outright deny proven factual history, constantly.

This entire shitty board. History is a fun and interesting subject but people here ruin it for me

I know this is bait, but fuck you

Even worse than that, grammar nazis who are also regular nazis.

Fucking insufferable.

hahaha baiting this badly

>tfw I can't generalize the thoughts of tens of millions of people under a single informal response
How do I achieve this level of narrow-mindedness?

>the crown

Amerimutt detected.

>The conspiracy theorist. That special person who is are both intensely credulous and skeptical at once. "I need 10 peer reviewed and expert authored sources to believe this one fact but will cite an anonymous article in some obscure newspaper/infographic as all the proof I need". 35% chance that jews or masons will be brought up.

>The "I only know about history in one specific area/methodology so Im going to either drag every discussion to that area" Mainly marxists or those with pretensions of being one with the occasional autist.

>The ideological idealist. A fan of mistaking their knowledge in an area related to history as history. "Well my religious/philosophical/political beliefs are X therefore Y happened"

>The highschool historian who thinks their A- forever exempted them from ever having to read another history book again.

>The puritan "History outside of X is just glorified journalism" or "Eastern history is the only history worth studying"

>The exacerbated crusader. Not necessarily a bad person but one who is so used to constantly having correct common misconceptions they are constantly on edge and have become infected with the trollish behavior they sought to stop. "No the Polish didnt charge tanks on horseback" "No the Inquisition didnt kill 6,000,000 free thinkers"

>The nationalist. The man whose emotional investment in a certain narrative has reached critical levels. The most likely of all groups to refer to countries in the collective "we" and talk as if they were living individuals.

>The WE WUZZER. Ready to make up for a lack of personal achievement by identifying with an existing or historical group. Will fight tooth and nail to tie every single positive achievement to this group and every negative one to another.

>The 56% percenter. Often part of the above two groups that person who things their ancestry somehow gives special knowledge and weight to their opinions.

Attached: bll_add49622_f184v_d1.png (553x387, 378K)

Well we did have an empire and brits rarely romanticise the crown on Veeky Forums
I assume you're either an assblasted amerimutt or a bottom bothered frog

Marxists

Honkie supremacists, No*dic supremacist, nazi, libercucks, lgbt.

>The glomper. That person who assumes that someone from a foreign country not only knows a lot about their countries history but wants to talk about it. Cant take the hint that Takashi the exchange student doesnt want to talk about the merits of Edo period or the Korekiyo government's economic policy.

>The aggoniser. Can talk about history in an engaging and lucid way but unfortunatly thinks a can of deoderant is a good as a shower and that their pubey redbrown beard will hide their bad breath.

>Mr hypothetical. Their maxim "yes but what if...."

>The paradox gamer. "Everything I know can be brought on a steamsale"."What do you mean the Byzantine Empire of 1444 couldnt reconquer Europe"

Attached: 1449363236420.jpg (587x561, 64K)

Socialists/leftists. Especially when they try to discuss economics.

Attached: marx-.jpg (583x488, 44K)

and commie, nihilistist, hedonist.

Libertarians because they insist rights exist.

>discussing with anyone that hasn't at leats finished one university and read over 20 history-related books
There's your first mistake.

My roommate.
>tries to talk about vikings
>tries to talk about the church
>tries to talk about other religions
>tries to talk about ancient Rome
>tries to talk about the middle ages
>tries to talk about the world wars

Attached: 1489643782904.png (424x470, 139K)

commies who apply their class struggle theory to all periods and places regardless of how different they are to today and nazi-types that see all history in terms of race

These

Stormfags and tankies

But there was class struggle in the Ancient world and pre capitalist society. Just because Ancient Helots didn't want to establish Communism dosn't mean class conflict didn't exist