2k17 /pol/

[Screemonster]

Bottom post of the previous page:

Problem is, screeching, stamping and demanding change NOW NOW NOW is basically the only way you're getting things changed any time remotely soon. A few people being gigantic babies and flaunting pollution because muh nostalgia is a small price to pay, and their children won't understand what all the fuss was ever about.

The problem with that is that when you demand change NOW NOW NOW you can stifle development in things that are genuinely better by plumping for whatever shitty marginal improvement comes first. In this case, it was ultimately unnecessary to "get things changed" because the change one step down the pipeline was far better than the thing that they were trying to ram down everyone's throats by force.
You'll notice that nobody's having to legislate to get people to switch from CFLs to LEDs.

The next big thing that's causing a fuss is electric cars and those are going to be an interesting shakeup. I'm not sure how many people realise just how much extra load they'll put on the electricity infrastructure if people were to start switching en-masse. (hint: lots. Even if they charge overnight.)

[XSI]

Electric cars won't even solve that much

The gas will go to a power plant instead of a car, and then everything is just as before
Electric vehicles is great and all, and a necessary step when we have the majority of our power supply renewable/clean/green/whatever. But right now, it doesn't actually do anything yet, it's just shifting the pollution from your personal vehicle to the power plant. Your pollution which isn't even that much compared to any industry or airlines/transport companies/shipping/even just offices.

Still, it's a thing that will happen eventually and a logical step when gas/oil gets phased out over time

[ShadowDimentio]

We need to push research into fusion energy. If that becomes viable suddenly all our energy needs vanish as we just fuse a common as fuck element from the ocean forever.

[Screemonster]

The main thing that electric cars will solve (or at least alleviate) is air pollution in cities, and that's about it. Not to downplay that 'cause that's certainly something worth solving, but they're not a magic bullet that'll stop all greenhouse gas emissions forever, 'cause like you said, all that'll happen (for now) is that those greenhouse gases will be produced elsewhere.
They also create the problem of disposing of the batteries, but that's not an atmospheric one at least.

[Grazyn]

Anarchy in the UK is an old chestnut anyway

[Incomptinence]

I'm still a bit fond of fluorescent light bulbs that whole less electricity used thing also saved money on electrical bills and the life expectancy of incandescent bulbs was always dogshit.
Also helped that next to no heat output made them easier to be around on a sweltering summer night.

with current technology, assuming we were to run on 100% renewables, storing excess power when we're producing more than we're using and then putting it back into the grid when there's a renewable shortfall, assuming renewable output continues to produce the same patterns of peaks and troughs on average as it did over the last five years, the power storage needed to cover periods of low supply would entail a hydro dam the size of the cairngorms.

Curious as to where you got that figure from I have heard of non battery physical methods of storing power but a cairngorms dam sounds a bit of a hyperbolic extension of that.

Oh, and the variable nature of renewable generation means your fossil plants can't just run at a constant rate, which has a similar impact on their efficiency as highway versus city miles in a car. (again, different types of generation have different tolerances for this sort of thing. Nukes, for instance, have a very long ramp time compared to, say, gas turbines)

As for the supply variation yeah businesses are looking to start up gas plants and not planing to set up new coal plants at least in Australia for that very reason.
Might be different in US with trump slobbering all over the mining industry's cock.

I mean there have been enormous tax incentives for fossil fuel extraction in the US while in Australia 60% of royalty revenue from miners including coal is estimated to be paid back to miners in subsidies, tax exemptions and infrastructure for their direct benefit.
Long and short the heart of the fossil fuel supply is a bunch of old parasites cosy with the government and it's not the economic one way it's played up to be.

On the renewable side though I have no idea why South Australia accepted that battery farm deal from tesla. Key fact about current batteries they shave off capacity as a percentage over time meaning their high energy density is mostly just good for saving space and mass where it matters like say on a moving vehicle, makes no fucking sense to have a big battery array sitting around wasting away.

[Grazyn]

It's still interesting to notice how whenever someone mentions anarchy in a positive way, the standard reaction is "Who let this lunatic out of the asylum?" But start talking about anarcho-capitalism, and suddenly everyone is at your feet praising your political genius.

[XSI]

Of course. If they don't, they've violated the NAP and you can fire your private McTowMissile at them

[Professor Hangar]

I'm still a bit fond of fluorescent light bulbs that whole less electricity used thing also saved money on electrical bills and the life expectancy of incandescent bulbs was always dogshit.
Also helped that next to no heat output made them easier to be around on a sweltering summer night.

with current technology, assuming we were to run on 100% renewables, storing excess power when we're producing more than we're using and then putting it back into the grid when there's a renewable shortfall, assuming renewable output continues to produce the same patterns of peaks and troughs on average as it did over the last five years, the power storage needed to cover periods of low supply would entail a hydro dam the size of the cairngorms.

Curious as to where you got that figure from I have heard of non battery physical methods of storing power but a cairngorms dam sounds a bit of a hyperbolic extension of that.

Oh, and the variable nature of renewable generation means your fossil plants can't just run at a constant rate, which has a similar impact on their efficiency as highway versus city miles in a car. (again, different types of generation have different tolerances for this sort of thing. Nukes, for instance, have a very long ramp time compared to, say, gas turbines)

As for the supply variation yeah businesses are looking to start up gas plants and not planing to set up new coal plants at least in Australia for that very reason.
Might be different in US with trump slobbering all over the mining industry's cock.

I mean there have been enormous tax incentives for fossil fuel extraction in the US while in Australia 60% of royalty revenue from miners including coal is estimated to be paid back to miners in subsidies, tax exemptions and infrastructure for their direct benefit.
Long and short the heart of the fossil fuel supply is a bunch of old parasites cosy with the government and it's not the economic one way it's played up to be.

On the renewable side though I have no idea why South Australia accepted that battery farm deal from tesla. Key fact about current batteries they shave off capacity as a percentage over time meaning their high energy density is mostly just good for saving space and mass where it matters like say on a moving vehicle, makes no fucking sense to have a big battery array sitting around wasting away.

As a South Australian; because fancy shiny new Tesla toy, probably.

We did have most of the state suffer a gigantic blackout a couple of months ago from a storm, too, so there's a reason to want to beef up the infrastructure by any means necessary, especially when we've shut down the in-state power plant. (Last I checked)

[starmute]

Maybe you could pretend you're playing CK2 and consider the world doesn't end when you end. Maybe it would be nice if your family or others are affected by a good legacy or investment you create. Of course don't if you have other things you want to do but hey, maybe you'll feel all warm and fuzzy inside or if not you can just hoard money. Metal circles of bartering do make amusing clinking noises and have some of the prettiest depictions on them. I'm actually a little sad to see some of my older pounds go even if the new one has a very nice display of the four plants of each nation over here.

I also seem to play and talk about paradox games far too much to feel as though my criticisms have real weight. I guess if you love it, you can point out everything wrong with it? Or do I want to justify the time spent?

Unless you pay off your mortgage which I assume you would have issues with after the 60,000 dollars unless you are rich. The probability that your home will stay in your family line is slim. Because who wants to live in grandpas house after he's dead forcing you to relocate, find a new job ect ect.

I guess it could be nice if you are buying a house and you have lots of money.

[XSI]

It used to be the family home, in a good location. Very wanted by all the children, and very comfortable. Before mortgages were a thing, a house would usually stay in the family for generations
After that, owning a family home in a great location became a prestige thing, but then enough people lost their generations-old houses that they stopped caring. It was normal not to have and barely anyone knew someone who still did

And today, it's just a house. Nobody really gives much of a shit unless it's in a really great location and worth a lot

[starmute]

It used to be the family home, in a good location. Very wanted by all the children, and very comfortable. Before mortgages were a thing, a house would usually stay in the family for generations
After that, owning a family home in a great location became a prestige thing, but then enough people lost their generations-old houses that they stopped caring. It was normal not to have and barely anyone knew someone who still did

And today, it's just a house. Nobody really gives much of a shit unless it's in a really great location and worth a lot

Mortgages have constantly been a thing. Anytime that a person lives outside their current means then they use a loan. From what I've read in history current mortgages have been around since at least 1765.... So I guess you've been around a bit XSI? (not trying to offend just a fun jab).

Kids used to live with their parents in the past way after they were 30. I can list off a million things that used to happen that weren't good or whatever but the past is the past and the present is the present. Needless to say not everyone lived in Dowton abby.

[XSI]

History books and varied history lessons/interests

But yeah, mortgages were because the majority of a country's wealth ended up in real estate I believe. And wealth that doesn't get used doesn't benefit the economy. That allowed people to mortgage their house and spend the money if they wanted, which gets the economy moving
Entire families used to live together too, uncles, aunts, grandparents, parents, and so on. At times even multiple families for the poorest. Now that is something not many people miss, certainly we've improved since then

Also of note, separate beds for married couples(Should they be wealthy enough to afford it)

[starmute]

History books and varied history lessons/interests

But yeah, mortgages were because the majority of a country's wealth ended up in real estate I believe. And wealth that doesn't get used doesn't benefit the economy. That allowed people to mortgage their house and spend the money if they wanted, which gets the economy moving
Entire families used to live together too, uncles, aunts, grandparents, parents, and so on. At times even multiple families for the poorest. Now that is something not many people miss, certainly we've improved since then

Also of note, separate beds for married couples(Should they be wealthy enough to afford it)

Its basic banking. Lenders would lend money against estates and well to do homes. However the majority of the non wealthy were so dirt poor that lenders ignored them. Everyone can "afford the dream" with a loan nowdays but it comes with costs. People want a nice car, a nice home and nice things and it takes loans to do it half the time. Not that its a good thing but I'm just keeping it real.

[Professor Hangar]

History books and varied history lessons/interests

But yeah, mortgages were because the majority of a country's wealth ended up in real estate I believe. And wealth that doesn't get used doesn't benefit the economy. That allowed people to mortgage their house and spend the money if they wanted, which gets the economy moving
Entire families used to live together too, uncles, aunts, grandparents, parents, and so on. At times even multiple families for the poorest. Now that is something not many people miss, certainly we've improved since then

Also of note, separate beds for married couples(Should they be wealthy enough to afford it)

Its basic banking. Lenders would lend money against estates and well to do homes. However the majority of the non wealthy were so dirt poor that lenders ignored them. Everyone can "afford the dream" with a loan nowdays but it comes with costs. People want a nice car, a nice home and nice things and it takes loans to do it half the time. Not that its a good thing but I'm just keeping it real.

And this is why the middle class is evaporating, and the remainders are drowning in debt. While the rich have never had more money and have no idea what to do with it, but they sure as hell don't want it taxed.

[starmute]

History books and varied history lessons/interests

But yeah, mortgages were because the majority of a country's wealth ended up in real estate I believe. And wealth that doesn't get used doesn't benefit the economy. That allowed people to mortgage their house and spend the money if they wanted, which gets the economy moving
Entire families used to live together too, uncles, aunts, grandparents, parents, and so on. At times even multiple families for the poorest. Now that is something not many people miss, certainly we've improved since then

Also of note, separate beds for married couples(Should they be wealthy enough to afford it)

Its basic banking. Lenders would lend money against estates and well to do homes. However the majority of the non wealthy were so dirt poor that lenders ignored them. Everyone can "afford the dream" with a loan nowdays but it comes with costs. People want a nice car, a nice home and nice things and it takes loans to do it half the time. Not that its a good thing but I'm just keeping it real.

And this is why the middle class is evaporating, and the remainders are drowning in debt. While the rich have never had more money and have no idea what to do with it, but they sure as hell don't want it taxed.

Thats why the middle class existed in the first place. I mean for hells sake I was talking about 1600-1700s. To elevate yourself you need to invest in yourself. Sometimes that's a dicey proposal. Student loans is a bank saying "Hey this will better your life and we will invest in you". If you default on those loans they lose money.

Social stratification comes from lots of sources but you have to realize that 21 percent of people worldwide, around 1.5 billion, live in extreme poverty, at or below $1.25 a day. (http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/isp/p ... y-in-focus, Olinto, Pedro & Jaime Saavedra (April 2012). "An Overview of Global Income Inequality Trends". Inequality in Focus.) Its not just caused by banking, its caused by LOTS of history, overpopulation, social systems that have been in place for decades and other stuff.

[Incomptinence]

My impression was the middle class only came into existence because the original nobility shitlords had zero idea of how to control anything other than pig ignorant illiterates and had no idea what their sources of actual power were due to holding power so long their ancestral power grabs faded from memory.

So they concluded they had magic noble blood and set about concentrating it to claim more titles and shit for their offspring making them dumber than they already were as inbreeding kicked in.

With the science of genetics and economic theory now thoroughly developed such a buffet will never open again to new money. The odd statistical freak emerges from the prole soup but they only allow that scant possibility so you think you can make just like they did and in the process shoot their hoards further into the stratosphere by enabling them.

I would even count millionaires as chumps under the current system.

[ShadowDimentio]

We need to push research into fusion energy. If that becomes viable suddenly all our energy needs vanish as we just fuse a common as fuck element from the ocean forever.

It's heavy water, not just any water. No I don't know if that matters on rarity. Yeah it'd be nice to have fusion power but I imagine it is going to come with a similar problem to fission: expense. Although I imagine the containment for the fusion power will be less hazardous to replace and perhaps with less regularity than a fission reactor.

To my knowledge fusion using that element from the ocean is supposed to produce something totally harmless like some hydrogen atom or something that can be dumped wherever.

[Incomptinence]

I'm not sure I buy the evil rich people are in a conspiracy, collectively or individually, to keep everyone down idea. I'm more into the idea that their hoarding of wealth has the effect of punching down, either as a means to the end of power/wealth or as a result. But I guess I find it hard to imagine people can enjoy being mean as a hobby or a job.

Oh no that's exactly what I mean they don't need to conspire.

The vilest of the affluent of the rich will simply rise to the top because loopholing laws, screwing with the comparatively poor and breaking regulations with negligible fines makes more money.
Any way we can make ourselves richer they can pounce on with paid expert advice, algorithms reading the stock market for them and much vaster volumes of cash.
This also means less mistakes and less percentage of wealth lost on mistakes.

It's more they are actively given incentive to screw you and you will almost never beat them at their own game.

[XSI]

Thats about right, they're not actively being evil, it's just that the system is set up so that they're going to fuck over the poor anyway just because if they don't, then they're going to lose their wealth share to the ones who do
Slowly though, not immediately losing it all

Many ways they fuck over the poor are also not immediately obvious in their effects

[starmute]

A

Is the film supposed to be about celebrating that stereotyped culture or is it more sinister...
The_Boss_Baby_poster.jpg

• "Born leader"
• Blond
• White

All they need now are blue iris contact lenses and they can finish what Trump started, Murica First.

I think its just supposed to be a silly movie for children. Kinda like edit* megamind

[Professor Hangar]

The middle class was also a result of a number of things; post-WW2 getting a shitload of people killed so remaining labour had leverage, said leverage also coming from industrial actions and unions forcing employers to pay workers living wages, and as a result them being able to buy nice things, and sell each other nice things.

Then wages stopped rising, unions started getting busted, and all of a sudden their kids can't find work and are getting blamed for it.

[Professor Hangar]

I'm not sure I buy the evil rich people are in a conspiracy, collectively or individually, to keep everyone down idea. I'm more into the idea that their hoarding of wealth has the effect of punching down, either as a means to the end of power/wealth or as a result. But I guess I find it hard to imagine people can enjoy being mean as a hobby or a job.

Oh no that's exactly what I mean they don't need to conspire.

The vilest of the affluent of the rich will simply rise to the top because loopholing laws, screwing with the comparatively poor and breaking regulations with negligible fines makes more money.
Any way we can make ourselves richer they can pounce on with paid expert advice, algorithms reading the stock market for them and much vaster volumes of cash.
This also means less mistakes and less percentage of wealth lost on mistakes.

It's more they are actively given incentive to screw you and you will almost never beat them at their own game.

They don't even have to organise when they can pay people to do it for them; they're called lobbyists, police and politicians.

[XSI]

Dont forget, politicians who do well at passing things that rich people love get employed as 'advisor' or similar

Quite literally "Do something good for us at the expense of everyone else and we'll reward you"

[Professor Hangar]

Or being paid tens of thousands of dollars for 'speaking engagements'.

[Grazyn]

Alright I don't usually see "evil sjws" everywhere but this... this is just wrong

https://medium.com/incerto/something-is ... fc9a1f154a

Get your shit together Britain

[XSI]

Literally history revision
That's essentially what people think of when they talk about evil SJWs. No morals, trying to bully people into agreeing with them(Going so far as to call his mother? Pathetic), and trying to push an agenda despite it being blatantly untrue
They need their academic credentials stripped, especially considering that the darkest people in the Roman Empire were some far-southern Egyptian nubians, and even then only a tiny minority. In that era, 'africans' were mostly pale-skinned carthagineans/phoenicians, berbers(Still pale skinned), or the slightly dark orange skinned Egyptians

What we know today as 'africans' are the sub-saharans who are brown or darker

[XSI]

That sounds about right

Also, those supermarkets advertise to the far-left who believe 'diversity' is the end goal of everything and the best thing ever
Even though it's horrible for everything involved and all governments except the brits already stated multiculturalism just does not work.

Of course, just because it doesn't work doesn't mean they're stopping either.

[Incomptinence]

Diversity is a waste of time.

If all races are "equal" then they are interchangeable.

Not to imply enormous neurological differences between but any research on links between IQ and genetics is basically on hold due to sjw hand wringing over being racist, ableist or whatever the shit.

This swings both ways and I'm not really concerned about migrants other than muslims who being an hard core believers* can spread faster through the population than the non threat that is race mixing.

*cuz death to apostates, why am I as a former Catholic expected to embrace a theocratic political system that ordains atheists receive the death penalty?

[XSI]

I somehow doubt the British government said multiculturalism doesn't work. I somehow doubt even the word culture is on their radar. I mean, Hull got the city of culture award.

That's what I said
Essentially all of Europe's governments except the British gov said it doesn't work at some point, yet the UK remains oblivious
Even Merkel said it

[Super Aggro Crag]

Fucking minorities

[Malkevin]

Woah woah woah, I'm sure a fine upstanding establishment like the BBC knows that many roman era graves have been exhumed and that we can tell the racial phenotype from the bone structure and therefore there must be large amount of empirical data that confirms that blacks were a large part of the roman legions living in Britain.

I'll just patiently wait for them to compile a list.

[XSI]

You know that's never going to happen

[ColonicAcid]

unrelated but espouting to people you are openly neoliberal is like saying i like having hard and long things shoved up and down my orifices


i mean if thats your fetish power to you but keep that shit strictly to the bedroom thanks

[FantasticFwoosh]

Woah woah woah, I'm sure a fine upstanding establishment like the BBC knows that many roman era graves have been exhumed and that we can tell the racial phenotype from the bone structure and therefore there must be large amount of empirical data that confirms that blacks were a large part of the roman legions living in Britain.

I'll just patiently wait for them to compile a list.

KANGZ

[oranges]

The romans definitely used people from their subsidiary kingdoms in their legions what's controversial about that?

[ColonicAcid]

the romans learnt the lesson that you dont garrison a province with its natives very quickly.


people seem to think that the roman army was 100% white with british accents but in reality that only occurred when they were a city state.

[XSI]

What even is new liberal? I forget. Bad people who like business with no regulations, right? Liberal capitalists?

Neo-liberal economic policy is a revival of the classical liberal economic ideas of the 1800s.
It basically means "Fuck all regulations, market should be free! Fuck all attempts to stop free people from doing things!" Which includes unions, minimum wage laws, borders to keep the third worlders who are willing to work for next to nothing out, and environmental regulations.
Different from the memeball ancaps in that they support government's regulating away the things that would threaten their free market ideal, such as unions, personal firearms(To keep those peasants in line) and environmental protestors. While also not being above the idea that they could use the military to expand their 'free market'

It's really just bringing back what everyone else hoped was an artifact of the past where children worked in sweatshops and toxic waste was just dumped in the closest river to be taken to the sea. All because of the idea that it brings greater economic prosperity.
And that's why nobody likes them except the economists who learned to think of the economy as a divine being that demands sacrifices for its blessing of prosperity, and people as labour-units to be discarded when they stop producing
Not to be confused with the American 'liberals' of the democratic party, who are more along the lines of (Sometimes extremist) social-progressives who are opposed to the free market ideal of the old style liberals

Fuck I hate politics, who do I keep paying attention to it again?

[XSI]

Nobody really knows what's going on 100%
The best we can do is try to figure out as much as we can and try our best

Which is often not good enough

[starmute]

Fuck I hate politics, why* do I keep paying attention to it again?

I think the only reason I pay attention is I get really, really bored. I probably should keep to myself but a forum full of people that I hardly know is probably one of the few places I feel comfortable talking about it and bouncing information off of people. It's nice to hear something that is more personal than watching the news because I feel like you have your own viewpoint and hearing you talk to each other helps me learn more about your viewpoint, their viewpoint and the arguments for and against something in general.

I think politics is a form of escapism I mean does this sound interesting:

Had Toast and pills for breakfast. Beat the Total War Campaign for the Elves again. No big surprises. Looking forward to total war 2 even though it is a money sink. Considering how I hear other people spend their money, I feel fine spending mine on expensive video games. The book section that I just went through and error checked was actually pretty clean for once, I triple checked for sure. Rephrased a couple of advertisements for a couple bucks (freelance). Checked my Roth 401k. Still sick: coughed a bunch. Ate at Wendy's one small hamburger and milk with friend. Oh and Rick and Morty is on at 1am. Hope I can make it.

Not interesting. Dull.

However debating over things stimulate your mind. As long as it doesn't devolve to us slinging shit at each-other then I'm happy to debate anything under the sun.

[XSI]

Out of that, I'm thinking people here will probably have opinions on the TW game(Empire remains the worst TW I played, but then I haven't played Rome 2) and probably the cartoons too

But you are right that people are always saying something interesting when it comes to politics

[XSI]

Since either Empire or Shogun 2, your army layout stopped mattering anyway
And from what I've seen of Total Warhammer, all you really need to do is throw in a blob of units to take hits for your big monster units and then throw in said monster units while casting whatever overpowered magic your leaders get

I've looked into that game a lot and I just can't justify spending any money on it when it seems they've not learned a thing from previous titles, and at the same time are maximizing the monetization

[starmute]

Since either Empire or Shogun 2, your army layout stopped mattering anyway
And from what I've seen of Total Warhammer, all you really need to do is throw in a blob of units to take hits for your big monster units and then throw in said monster units while casting whatever overpowered magic your leaders get

I've looked into that game a lot and I just can't justify spending any money on it when it seems they've not learned a thing from previous titles, and at the same time are maximizing the monetization

As far as total war warhammer goes: there's lots of lore involved. That's what I like about it. Every province has a purpose every faction plays differently. If you don't like the warhammer lore then you probably would not like the game. Also I don't care about money as much as the next gamer but it costs somewhere around $100+ with all the expansions. If you want I can go into more detail but regardless it feels much different than Rome or Shogun 2.

Edit: I do have loads of complaints about that game too. I tend to have thoughts about every game in comparison to my favorites of all time. When I look back I get disappointed the stuff that I thought was amazing was abandoned or never completed. Example : Final Liberation and Emperor of the Fading Suns. I often wonder why games that were made in the past were so good even when messed up and games now still have loads of work to do.

[XSI]

The Warhammer Lore is the one thing I do like about it, it's the other stuff that I don't like
I could probably write an essay on it if I cared enough, but I don't. And that's probably more telling than anything else since I've given up on the TW franchise to the point that I no longer have any strong feelings about it while it used to be my favourite game series and genre
Now it's just a cynical "Eh, not surprised that they fucked up a lot, what else is new?"

[starmute]

The Warhammer Lore is the one thing I do like about it, it's the other stuff that I don't like
I could probably write an essay on it if I cared enough, but I don't. And that's probably more telling than anything else since I've given up on the TW franchise to the point that I no longer have any strong feelings about it while it used to be my favourite game series and genre
Now it's just a cynical "Eh, not surprised that they fucked up a lot, what else is new?"

Same as far as the essay goes. But honestly after reading so many other people's essays and works, correcting the language and making sure they cite their damn sources correctly I feel cynical about my own work and...

Spoiler:

[Professor Hangar]

I pay attention to American politics basically as an ongoing black comedy.

[ColonicAcid]

Unfortunately for the people who went so rabid at that cartoon showing GASP BLACKIES IN MY ROME??? should be more angry at the obviously erroneous armour thats shown if they truly cared about authenticity.


let me make it perfectly clear, the idea that the roman army was 100% white and 100% roman is complete and utter bullshit. Go to any country in the Mediterranean and what you will see is that people are closer to north africans in appearance and stature than to northern europeans. if I were to live in portugal still I would be a very, very dark tan, not quite sub saharan black, but closer to a morrocan black.

needless to say as well that there is evidence of roman governors of britain coming from tunisian, and even emperor Septimius Severus came from Syria and ruled the empire from york for a time. Rome was absolutely the meaning of a multi-cultural empire. They didn't give a shit about your skin colour officially, you were either a roman citizen or you weren't and since you could literally gain roman citizenship by serving in the roman army as an auxiliary and rising the ranks later on the empire could have been achieved due to meritocracy you bet your goddamn dandy ass that there were a shit ton of blacks and whatever else you want all over the empire.


just to reiterate for the third time in nice and big bold letters:
the idea of a 100% white roman army or a 100% white roman state is entirely wrong, romans cared far more about bloodlines and family genes than about your skin colour.

since when did you all turn into such fucking experts on antiquity... go atleast listen to the history of rome podcast before you raise your sticks at "THE SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS!!!" you fucking social luddites.

[Super Aggro Crag]

So are you saying...that rome was actually a black culture?

WE
WUZ
CAESAR

[XSI]

The thing is

The romans were not sub-saharan black. They had somewhat dark skinned people in their empire, but the empire did not extend south of the sahara desert
Morrocans used to be quite a bit lighter skinned before the arab invasions, and today they still have population segments that remained lighter skinned because they avoided the arab rape train so your points about that are wrong too, considering that Portugal and south of Spain got fucked by the arabs too.
Same for the entire Mediterranean, and even the levantine regions. Prior to the arabs invading everything they weren't as dark skinned
Tunesia and Syria were Phoenician, which were semetic and not what we know today as african. They would probably be more tanned than native britons thanks to the sun down there, but they wouldn't be black

Showing romans as sub-saharan black is not historically accurate aside from a few fringe cases of nubians, and doing so anyway shows that they did it not for the sake of accuracy, but for the sake of diversity and showing off their SJW cred

Them getting the armour wrong is just ignorance on their part, and everyone makes mistakes sometimes. Them putting in diversity for the sake of it is not ignorance- It's historical revisionism and almost certainly done on purpose. One of the two is worth pointing out. The other is just a mistake that is unfortunate but doesn't push for any agenda

Maybe instead of listening to podcasts, you should look up actual historical records sometime

[ColonicAcid]

Ah yes, this whole meme of "there weren't actually any blacks in north africa xd".

You ever seen berbers in real life? They can range from a nice and creamy French Montana black to a 11:59 PM black. Unfortunately for your point as well, Morroco was hardly "raped" by the Arabs. Berbers have been a distinct culture and ethnicity than Arabs since fucking antiquity, calling a berber arab is like calling a Polish person a Russian. For fuck sakes they don't even speak Arabic. Are we considering Afghani and Farsi people Arabs now? Jesus christ.

What do you consider the numidians? You see the thing is, you seem to think that all of Africa has this homogeneous background. That everyone above the sahara is a brown and everyone below the sahara is a midnight black. That's very much not the case. Numidians have been shown to be ranging from the usual slight shade of brown to near sub-saharan levels because they quite literally lived in the fucking sahara desert.

To your other points about my own country's peoples being only tanned because we are a mix of moorish blood (which I don't entirely disagree, as I've said I have a lot of north african features in general even though when I'm not tanned I'm only slightly darker than a British person) is that if that were true sephardim jews should be the "actual" Iberian peninsula colour of EXTREMELY WHITE PEOPLE.

Which they're not. They range from the exact same colour range as normal Portuguese and Spanish people, you have your very light skinned ones and you have your very dark skinned ones. This is my own people I am speaking about here, I know about my history and I know for a fact that even up in the Galician mountains where there was ZERO muslim presence you still get very, very dark people.

Unfortunately genetics a bitch and when you live in a place that is as hot as most of North Africa you develop the same melanin levels as they do.

But yeah buddy, Romans were the white master race, keep telling yourself that. In reality what everyone assumes to be the average "roman" should probably be more likely to be a Germanic or Celtic people.

[ColonicAcid]

Also by the time that the Emirate of Cordoba broke off from the Umayyad caliphate the Emirs of Cordoba have been born in Spain for the last ~7 generations, intermingling with the local population, mostly Christian concubines. By the time it turned into the Caliphate of Cordoba the Calpih, Abd-ar-Rahman III was described as the following:

white skin, blue eyes and attractive face; good looking, although somewhat sturdy and stout

In fact, he was the nephew of the Queen of Navarre. The first Emir of Cordoba was also the son of a Berber concubine. Yeah, I get it "le arab rape train" but that is so far from the truth. There's a reason they're called moors and not arabs, by the time the reconquista came along you could hardly tell the difference between the Moorish lords and the Christian lords due to them basically having interbred for over 400 years.