Is it true that the present is superior to the past, and that things are more or less getting better with time?

I'm sad that you live in the US and are forced to roleplay in order to give some meaning to life in that wasteland

Pretty sure you have that backwards

>heading towards

True. I’m further right than most people who claim to be “far right” in that I recognize even those on the far right need to be euthanized themselves along with the degenerate, pedophilic and bourgeoise leftists. Claiming “technology has been a disaster for the human race” means you disown the past and must relinquish the future. Our ancestors don’t give a shit about your cry for “Tradition” and “muh identity”. Our ancestors are the same ones who were driven mad trying to achieve the comfort levels we sustain today. Behaviorally, the far right are a bunch of children who need to be spanked with a lack of civilization and a return to nature in the form of dropped in the Amazon jungle with nothing but a cloth to cover their pricks. Now, if I’ll have your attention, please....
>fuck the left
>fuck the right
>fuck capitalism
>fuck communism
>fuck democracy
>fuck the republic
>fuck niggers
>fuck gays
>fuck trannies
>fuck the anglos
>fuck the germanics
>fuck the arabs
>fuck the asians
>fuck the j*ws
and most importantly
>fuck the jannies
Goodnight.

Attached: ACA8A765-CD4A-44BB-95AA-3D63CB040C9E.png (1276x630, 467K)

What if the "strong" you consider is nothing but the elitists already in power?

It is if you’re an intelligent person who can think for themself and take care of themself, although it could be argued that life was better in some ways during the last century or so
But the (relative) lack of war and freedom of the world (at least in the west) since ww2 is undeniably a boon
Life for the average person has undeniably improved over time. Although in the last few decades there has been some decline much of the perceived negative change is psychologically caused by consumption of too much media.
I guess it could be argued that the decades between the end of ww2 and the rise of international terror were better than our current state of affairs though, but civilisation tends towards getting better despite some dips, it obviously isn’t going to be linear improvement
Anyone who thinks that life would be better as a medieval feudal peasant should be forced to live that way

past>present>future

>Is it true that the present is superior to the past
Depends on the scale and what constitutes as good in a relativistic sense; for if we are to compare ours to the time of dinosaurs, definitely decrease in quality has happened.
If we compare human life, then all the times humans had less addictive compulsions - were simply better.
Freedom, beauty, hope, justice, wisdom, understanding, knowledge, vision, aesthetics, music - these are important. I know people and nations with these have existed, and may still exist, but I don't know if they still do or will.

Attached: 1560162427486.webm (1920x796, 1.89M)

retard.

>plowing fields every day of your life
Meme. Peasants had more holidays than all modern workers.
>you die in your 40s because you get the common cold
meme.
>your daughter gets repeatedly raped by the local lord
Now you get to watch your daughter being plowed by chads and blacks. And you best be happy about it otherwise you are a sexist pig.
>you lost all your sons to plague, war and hard winters
Death is part of life but also, meme.

I should clarify that I don’t condone increase in recent degeneracy but I’m willing to put up with obese blobs, trannies, and cringy bugmen if it means living in a time when I can get almost anything I could ever want or need in terms of food, clothing, shelter, knowledge/information, and places too discuss things, happiness comes from within anyway so these things are really a nice bonus

Only because I’m alive

>lack of war
war is being waged upon you right now.
>freedom
just lmao if you actually think you're free.
>Anyone who thinks that life would be better as a medieval feudal peasant should be forced to live that way
no one is saying that life in the middle ages was perfect, but it was a lot better than the hell we're living in now.

>muh history was falsified by da ebil aristocrats!

LOL BUT THIS GUY IS FUCKING GAY

>2 of the bloodiest wars in the history occurred with in living memory
How peaceful!
Who wouldve thought that their might be a little swing back in the opposite direction. But who is he to say that that means we are now on the never ending path to peace and progress

It is if you're a successful member of the techno-capitalist elite.

Just lmao if you actually think you’re less free now than you would’ve been 500 years ago
>war is being waged upon you right now
I guess if we’re changing the definition of war that drastically we can say almost anything to be true
>modern life is hell
Stop being a pathetic faggot, modern life is only hell if you’re a total failure
If you’re going to be hypocrite enough to complain about how the Middle Ages were better on the internet at least try to use it to organise some kind of movement instead of whining

wow based holy helly based wow dude how does he do it. Based base based based base based based.

good thing im a med

People didn't die at 40, they either died at

i'm now certain that you don't even have a penis or testicles. pathetic.

Attached: 1531783908406.jpg (400x501, 18K)

war is being waged by such a minority of the U.S. population that most Americans probably don't even realize we're still fighting one

i'm not even talking about foreign war

>minority
a silent RETARD majority is not a minority

I have a fairly large uncut penis and moderately heavy testicles

i'm sure you have plenty of large penises at the ready to satisfy your every desire, you fucking braindead whore.

Why do have to pretend I’m a woman?
I’d agree that women’s suffrage has been on the whole negative in outcome but that would just mean a return to the 50s to fix things, not so drastic as all becoming illiterate serfs

Things are getting better, but we aren't perceiving them as better because we a majority of the improved things for granted.

so you're a midwit then?

name one thing thats gotten better in the last 5 years

Bugwit my dear Samsa.

Certainly not. I had a qt gf in high school and now I am single and miserable for almost a decade. Destruction of small social groups did it to me.

always the micropenises clinging onto race and getting mad at everything

I’m not a midwit because I prefer to have a warm comfortable house, a wide array of available information including philosophy and literature, food security, nice tasting food, and some decent personal rights over the way people lived in the Middle Ages, are you some kind of abo? Or one of those leftists who believes in the noble savage

I shit on the past, and will skullfuck the future. Entropy all the way

Attached: Breakfast grumpy.webm (854x480, 2.89M)

I like it.

dumb post before protestants peasants only worked 100 days a year

your soul is too small for me to even continue replying.

>muh soul
You can have community and closeness if you make the effort now, but given that you’re arguing for technological regression on Yea Forums you probably don’t possess great social skills.
Going to a close knit farming village community life wouldn’t magically make you well adjusted and your life happy, you’d probably still be a weirdo because the ability to make friends is not strongly dependent on societal situation

>Just lmao if you actually think you’re less free now than you would’ve been 500 years ago
Yes it is. Obviously. The humanist Sharia isn't exactly a good thing on our psyche or soul. The advent of psychology made modern life unbearable, as did the UN's ban of psychedelics ~50s.
>I guess if we’re changing the definition of war that drastically we can say almost anything to be true
Economic and spiritual warfare have always been things.
>Stop being a pathetic faggot, modern life is only hell if you’re a total failure
Said everybody at every age.

part of the complex of lousy sex, drugs, and lies to prevent people from chimping out or offing themselves en masse is "those terrible middle ages" myth

There weren't records 500 years ago. You could literally become a fucking pirate. Now your gay ass SS number follows you everywhere.

Yes but our minds aren't adapting quick enough to new freedoms and intricate self-governing. So, no- however, the past was never better, every point in time is as good as it gets, but the statistics vary greatly. Everything has its strengths and weaknesses, that's only practical.

Attached: 279304760963.jpg (320x421, 23K)

>the past was never better
Every day in the past when people didn't have to chemically alter themselves to get out of their beds was a better day than a day today.

midwit

It depends on what you mean by better.
Economically speaking, we are better than ever. Technologically and in terms of medicine, this is true as well. If that's all you care about, things are great.

But I would agree with >If we compare human life, then all the times humans had less addictive compulsions - were simply better.
Humanity's peak was probably the Roman Republic in early times or the Roman Empire during the 5 Good Emperors Era.

It probably peaked at the exact minute that dude walked away from his consulship and returned to his farm.

in what sense exactly? do you honestly people in greece were all pure, stoic, studious and philosophical kind you see represented by their bests?
i bet they are all sibling-fucking homosexuals as much as we are
and they probably committed more crime than we do.

>i bet they are all sibling-fucking homosexuals as much as we are
Uh...

There are degenerates and there are prudes in every society.
That said, at least the Greeks didn't consider unrestrained hedonism to be a virtue like people do nowadays.

Yes
We have access to more of the past to learn from and are bettering figuring out what works and what doesn’t in all areas.
>inb4 muh depression
>inb4 muh mental problems
>inb4 life is inherently a good
>inb4 politics

>Meme. Peasants had more holidays than all modern workers.
A. Proof
B. They had much harder work and more people needed to do the harder work as opposed to clerical jobs

>We have access to more of the past to learn from
But don't use their knowledge.

>and are bettering figuring out what works and what doesn’t in all areas.
We aren't. Otherwise people wouldn't be as unhappy as they are.

*not a good

again, we often see their bests
and we often see our worsts
the average joe walking down the street isn't thinking about how much pleasure he would have if he have a harem of 16 virgins or the pleasure of drugs
most of them are just getting by with their lives
we only see instances, mere moments of excitement from them and then attribute those weird behavior to them because thats the only time we pay attention
20 minutes from now, i will probably be the most boring person wasting his breath by the philosophical standard
but thats just what people are

>But don't use their knowledge.
Look at literally everything around you, including yourself. Look at the Neo-Aristoleans, if you want direct usage of older knowledge that wasn’t built upon for thousands of years
>We aren't. Otherwise people wouldn't be as unhappy as they are.
Name a single time in history where everyone was happier than now

>steven PINKER

Show me where are the modern day Platos, the modern day Aristotles, the modern day Epictetus.
2000 years ago, people were taught by Epictetus. His lesson was that people should try to emulate the divine.
Nowadays, people are taught by celebrities and magazine writers. Their lesson being that people should try to emulate bonobos.

>Look at literally everything around you, including yourself. Look at the Neo-Aristoleans, if you want direct usage of older knowledge that wasn’t built upon for thousands of years
There are very few Neo-Aristoleans. Most people don't even know what a Plotinus or what an Epictetus are.

>Name a single time in history where everyone was happier than now
Five Good Emperors Rome.

C. Hard work isn't a bad thing
I'll give you that it probably was a little too much and some were malnourished but still
>inb4 hurr durr you keyboard warrior
I've worked 18hr shifts before when I was younger and in some ways I never felt more alive working with my bros. There is no feeling like getting done with hard physical work. I've never felt that way about some office monkey stuff.

>plato
jordan peterson
>aristotle
stefan molynew
>epicetus
joe rogan
what are you like illiterate?

each sentence needs its own line
no periods

We're progressively getting technologically better but we have degenerated socially, culturally, virtuously. That is the problem of modernity, not the technology.
>J*ws
It's kikes, kike. You are not further right in the far right.

>Humanity's peak was probably the Roman Republic in early times or the Roman Empire during the 5 Good Emperors Era.
>t. Retarded Romaboo

If you lived in the Roman Empire you’d probably be bitching about all the same shit you do now. You only worship them because you’re so far removed from that part of history that you can only connect to it at a superficial level and view it through the lens of popular culture.

And know you have the option to do that instead of being a serf or being limited by slow forms of transports. If you want to do that, you can. If you want to be an office worker, you can.
So?

>say something bad about emperor
>stabbed

Seventy-two fucking posts in and nobody has brought up the fact that this retard is a pedo who hung out on epstein's island? This board is ASS.

First, they are historical figures who are likely imbued with features that are exaggerated.
Second, there are plenty of people nowadays who belong in the pantheon of the intellectuals
people like Jon Stuart Mill and Newton will shed their human features and become pure idols with time.
idk how much digital technology will change that tho
Third, you are talking about a millenia time scale
The modern time can only be attributed to 500 years at most

However, I agree that we will unlikely see another person that delves into the inner spiritual study like Buddha or Plato anymore because we are focused on material progress but that's not saying we neglect spirituality -- the fact that we are still intrigued by them shows this --- and times are changing.

No steven pinker is biased, and his argument is flawed

holy shit, could you be any more cucked?
>waaah i don' wanna be a fawmer, my hands wiw get diwty!!

>If you lived in the Roman Empire you’d probably be bitching about all the same shit you do now.
How do you know?

If you were a patrician you would still be a whiny depressed little shit. If you were the average pleb you’d be bitching about having to work hard all day, paying taxes, immigrants, the military industrial complex etc.

>First, they are historical figures who are likely imbued with features that are exaggerated.
>Second, there are plenty of people nowadays who belong in the pantheon of the intellectuals
>people like Jon Stuart Mill and Newton will shed their human features and become pure idols with time.
We have their books to judge them (or in the case of Epictetus, a set of lecture notes).
Newton is just a scientist, not a philosopher. Mill caused more harm than good.

>idk how much digital technology will change that tho
>Third, you are talking about a millenia time scale
>The modern time can only be attributed to 500 years at most
500 years where we have been declining in non-material ways.

>However, I agree that we will unlikely see another person that delves into the inner spiritual study like Buddha or Plato anymore because we are focused on material progress but that's not saying we neglect spirituality -- the fact that we are still intrigued by them shows this --- and times are changing.
We do neglect anything that is not money or pleasure.

I'm not depressed at all.
Why are you so defensive over the idea of a different era being better than ours?

>Why are you so defensive over the idea of a different era being better than ours?
I’m not. Your Rome worship is cringe and if you were actually Roman you’d probably think the time of the Trojan wars was the best and Rome sucks. Again you’re simply viewing a time you never experienced with rose tinted glasses.

Then be one and leave me to not be one, that’s my point

>I’m not.
Yes, you are.
Look at how you take someone saying that this era is worse than another one:
>Retarded Romaboo
>whiny depressed little shit.

he's saying this era is worse than the roman era you retarded cunt

no, your point is "i don't want to have to break a sweat, so we need a system that dehumanizes everyone into a simple cog in a massive machine so that i can be one of the cogs that doesn't have to do much."

>he's saying this era is worse than the roman era you retarded cunt
He is not.

Wrong

Not him. Hard work IS good for you. What do you think exercise is? The harder the work the more valuable it is; trust me: this is coming from a kid who was/is the weakest and least athletic of his family.

you are saying
>this era is worse than another one
this era is not worse than the roman era you autistic zoomer faggot cunt.
seriously once you leave the comfort of your mummies titties and you go out in the real world i hope you get your face pummeled in by someone like me.

You’re right that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying you probably wouldn’t worship Rome so much if you actually lived there.

So please tell me why you do think Rome was the high point of humanity and why you think you’d enjoy living there more.

I'm saying
"5 Good Emperors Rome > 21st century West"
Mr disagrees with me and seems to think the opposite.

yea you think the roman era is better than what is right now.
you are retarded i just wanna see your face.

Then one could exercise on their own, or get manual labor jobs.

>I’m saying you probably wouldn’t worship Rome so much if you actually lived there.
I probably would. Most Romans of the 5 Good Emperors Era did. It was a particularly happy era in Rome. Epictetus who was a very demanding guy considered that he was living in a comparatively good era.

>So please tell me why you do think Rome was the high point of humanity and why you think you’d enjoy living there more.
They had a better culture than ours, with better values. They also were ruled by an elite that was much better than ours.

So, why did you post >he's saying this era is worse than the roman era you retarded cunt

Using drugs will make unhappier in the long run, you know?

i was talking about you LMAO are you this stupid

You were writing about

i never said the roman era is better than this.
my entire point was that you have to be some autistic shut in t othink that the roman era is better than this.
pay attention cunt

no, not wrong. you can't even refute it. your entire existence is superfluous and you're just afraid that without the convolutions of capitalism, you will be made obsolete. if you're not even willing to do the basic human labor required for survival, you cannot even have a say in the matter without looking ridiculous. you're like a child making demands to your father, whom you completely depend on for survival. its fucking pathetic really.

>could
Thus you wouldn't. The point is: you're incontrovertibly wrong about hard work.

>I probably would.
Pure conjecture.
>Most Romans of the 5 Good Emperors Era did.
You literally cannot find any statistics or hard evidence to back up this claim.
>They had a better culture than ours, with better values. They also were ruled by an elite that was much better than ours.
They were a bunch of degenerate power hungry war mongers. Little different from the modern globohomo hegemony.

Looking at your posts, I wonder if I'm arguing with an IRL version of Beavis or Butthead.

you know my point and you divert its cool fuckface

>basic human labor required for survival
>what is work
I love your psychoanalysis in place of an argument
With or without capitalism, I would not be obsolete. There is no reason for this, you have provided none, and you will not as you do not know me and I do not know you.
Wrong in what sense? Choices are bad? The upkeep of a society that allows for more efficient and more productive hard work is bad?

>man cuts himself on scythe
>gets infected and dies
>man trips on rake
>breaks leg and can’t walk right ever again
>horse trips on rock
>man dies

>Pure conjecture.
And what is your post, exactly? You are saying I wouldn't like living in Rome. I'm saying I likely would. Why exactly your post is on firmer grounds?

>You literally cannot find any statistics or hard evidence to back up this claim.
I have historians on my side. You have "Uh, people didn't liked Rome in that era, because, uh, because people are always pessimistic or something".

>They were a bunch of degenerate power hungry war mongers. Little different from the modern globohomo hegemony.
They ruled Rome to its peak. Our modern elites are destroying what is left of Western civilization.

What would you like about Rome?

you want to have a choice between physically working to provide society with its basic necessities and working to provide society with useless luxuries. imagine 10 people get shipwrecked on a deserted island. 9 of the people start making shelter, gathering berries, making a fire, etc. then 1 guy goes off and sits on his ass polishing a coconut. you are that guy.

Wrong in the sense that you wish not to be as healthy you otherwise could be. Wrong that hard work is inherently bad. Labor: work that requires you to use your body and your muscles is necessary for mind and its faculties to be optimal.
>more productive hard work
>more productive
While there is importance to some sedentary work, people need labor and sunlight.

The culture and the values.

You know this isn't a counterargument at all.

So you’re a LARPer then
>hard work is inhibited by medical issues that are easily fixed nowadays and thus allow for harder work longer
Holy fucking brainlet. Get off this board.

Where in that post did I argue against modern medical practices, brainlet? Greentext it, nigger.

>Why exactly your post is on firmer grounds?
Unless you literally build a time machine and go back 2000 years you won’t KNOW if you’d actually like living in Rome and can only imagine an idealized image it.

>I have historians on my side
Such as? My point is it’s impossible to tell exactly how happy the average person was that long ago when we have no hard numbers or a limitless source of literature from the average pleb to judge it by.

>Our modern elites are destroying what is left of Western civilization.
And they destroyed Rome with their constant wars emptying the imperial treasury and depleting the empire of good soldiers.

>So you’re a LARPer then
No, just someone who thinks modern culture is completely shit and that Roman culture (at least in the era of the 5 Good Emperors) was better.
At least the Roman elite of that era didn't try to teach people that unrestrained hedonism is the way for a happy life or that living without promiscuity, alcohol and drugs would lead to a boring life that would give you regrets.

>food analogy
Define useless and define luxuries. They all have uses, a lot of them to facilitate hard work. Look at machinery, mass transport of crates and such, need for roofers, there are much more varied forms of hard work than “farming” and “smithing”. Do you not get this? I can choose to provide society with a service that allows for more and better hard work. Everyone needs houses, food, heat, and so on. Those jobs aren’t gone. My work may aid the people who perform those tasks, thus again allowing for more hard work. And again, I can exercise and receive the benefits of hard work on my own, with machines specifically designed to aid me and work me harder.

>the past was better but I want modern medical practices along with it
Not how this works.
Define elite

>Look at machinery, mass transport of crates and such,
stopped reading right there
>b-b-but we need to do more work so we can do more work!
retarded. its all just a run around so you can justify sitting on your ass all day.

>member of the techno-elite says everything is great

tedkaczynskiquote.png

>Unless you literally build a time machine and go back 2000 years you won’t KNOW if you’d actually like living in Rome and can only imagine an idealized image it.
You were the one arguing that I would hate living there. Isn't this a very selective demand for rigor? You claim I wouldn't like to live there without the need of explaining why.
But I would need some fucking time machine for my point to be accepted.

>Such as? My point is it’s impossible to tell exactly how happy the average person was that long ago when we have no hard numbers or a limitless source of literature from the average pleb to judge it by.
All that dealt with that era?
And again, we have an impossible demand for rigor.

>And they destroyed Rome with their constant wars emptying the imperial treasury and depleting the empire of good soldiers.
I would recommend you to actually read at least the wikipedia article on that era.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerva–Antonine_dynasty

Your ignorance is showing.

>At least the Roman elite of that era didn't try to teach people that unrestrained hedonism is the way for a happy life or that living without promiscuity, alcohol and drugs would lead to a boring life that would give you regrets

Panem et circenses

>Define elite
The senatorial class (political) and the students of Musonius Rufus and Epictetus (cultural). Some people were part of both.

>productivity is bad because some people abuse it and this random user is super lazy because he dared to justify modern work
Fuck off

>Not how this works.
Says who? You? I don't fucking so. From your response, I can see you have no adequate rebuttal.
And I don't disagree with any of that, but the likelihood that you'll be getting your proper vitamin D is likely and I think modern humans need them (hard work and sunlight) just as much as their/our ancestors, and we're not getting sufficient amounts of either for the average person.

Attached: Big D.jpg (817x1000, 151K)

I meant elite in this world.
>I want the advantages of the modern world in the past
Then you don’t want the past, you want the veneer of the past now. You really are a LARPer

you're completely dependent on a system that hates you and wants everyone you love to suffer. you're not riding the tiger, you're getting raped by the tiger and you like it.

Millionaires, media executives and academics.

Prove that it hates me. Mindless conjecture from you.

The Roman elite of that era didn't try to teach people that unrestrained hedonism is the way for a happy life or that living without promiscuity, alcohol and drugs would lead to a boring life that would give you regrets.

It was true until maybe the 70s, then a lot has gone downhill. If I could pick a time to live, I would be born just after WW2 and die in 2010, right before toxic feminism and victimhood culture seeped into everything. The only thing that's good about today is modern medicine - I couldn't care less about video games and the internet, if anything those have eroded natural human interactions, which sucks.

Living Conditions: Yes
Society: Debatable. I think people are more intelligent, but our culture, community, and ethics are eroding rapidly along with the advent of social media.

I've never advocated anything but, most likely, an archeofuturist perspective. The other user talking about living in Rome isn't me, but he is overall right that the values of modernity are stultifying and putrescent. And so what if I want the technological advances of the modern world and cultural and social values of the past? You have no argument but
>L-l-arper! Heh that'll show him to have ideas!
You're a waste of time and waste of education.

What is wrong with the morality of today?

because you're a human being and it wants to take away from you the things that make you human.

I'm not him. But let's take a look at one of the points, sexuality:

Here is America's newspaper of record:
nytimes.com/2018/12/07/style/modern-love-when-a-boyfriend-joins-the-marriage.html

And here is a magazine for teenage girls, teaching girls how to best ignore their parents and to be promiscuous:
teenvogue.com/story/unslut-slut-shaming-parents-talk-to-them

>But sometimes, the issue isn’t just your safety — it’s a difference in values that might be made more extreme by the cultural or religious norms your parents are used to. Those norms often put special pressure on dads to police and control their daughters’ sexuality. Like most men, your dad was probably brought up to believe that there are two kinds of female people — “good girls” and “sluts” — and that it is a father’s job to make sure his daughter is one of the “good girls.”
>But the truth is, you’re probably not going to be able to change their mind with a single conversation. Instead, plan for the long game. As you grow up, pursue your career, have healthy relationships, and discover what makes you happy, you will be demonstrating to your parents that whatever they thought of as “proper” womanhood doesn’t necessarily make sense for you. Over the course of many years and many conversations, you can show them — through the awesome life you will be leading — that women should not be categorized according to their sexuality.

And lust is hardly the only vice being promoted.

Sick people licking ice cream lids.

Do you even read your own sources?
>The concept of "The Five Good Emperors" reflects the internal Roman point of view. As regards their treatment of Roman citizens, these five Emperors clearly seem better than other Emperors – specifically, better than Domitian who immediately preceded them and Commodus who immediately followed them – and this view was taken up by later Europeans, drawing on Roman historical sources. It is, however, not necessarily the point of view of provincials and of Rome's neighbors – particularly, of those targeted by one or more of these emperors in a war of conquest or in the suppression of a revolt.
>All that dealt with that era?
You can’t name one can you

They didn’t care about teaching them at all. They just wanted to keep them fat and entertained enough to distract them from real problems.

You wrote that
>they destroyed Rome with their constant wars emptying the imperial treasury and depleting the empire of good soldiers.

Which is not true at all. And they were good Emperors for the Romans. Of course they would not very good to Rome's enemies.

Rome did not have a moral nihilistic culture like we have today.

I'm This is not exactly unique to Rome. I can't think of many societies other than the modern West that have a morally nihilistic culture like ours.

You failed to notice that a distinction was made between citizens (who formed the small privileged upper class before Caracalla) and provincials who made up the majority of people living within Rome’s borders.

You keep trying to paint Roman elites as these great wise men when the truth is that they were par for the course.

Why the fuck are you guys arguing with the autistic fascists? Just learn martial arts and release your fist when super necessary.

You are just grasping at straws "maybe some people in the provinces hated them". When they were harsh against enemies and against rebels, which is obvious they would be.
And tell me more about how "they destroyed Rome with their constant wars emptying the imperial treasury and depleting the empire of good soldiers". Please, don't pretend to forget it. You didn't even know the period you were criticizing.

The Roman elite of that era was particularly good. Some other eras also had good elites.
And the fact is, we have an elite nowadays that is particularly awful. It is not very hard to have an elite that is better than ours.

>You didn't even know the period you were criticizing.
Do you? The reigns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius were marked by near constant warfare.

Nerva didn't rule for a long time.
Trajan was a more aggressive Emperor, but he left a very strong empire to his successor.
Hadrian, Antoninus and Marcus Aurelius didn't try to expand Rome with constant wars. Of course, if someone was invading Rome they would defend it. What should Marcus Aurelius do to avoid "near constant warfare"? Let them invade Rome?

I didn't read any post in this thread, but the answer is no. The events that occur in the progression of time are arbitrary.

A short story I like about this is What Has Passed Shall in Kinder Light Appear, by Bao Shu

It is if you're an upper class kiddie diddling j____h nepotist enjoying yourself in Epstein's private jet

Attached: serveimage.png (1097x800, 968K)

Nope

i mean just look at that guys fucking face.
>i got bullied and i gave in please dont hurt me
how the FUCK does he have anything of worth to say? the fact that pinkboy exists proves that white privilege exists

Anyone else always think of Candide when you see pic related?

there is far more potential for the individual who can detach from modern addictions/vices
it is also far easier to succumb, but higher peaks can be reached

the collective is dying though and it is due to the corruption of capitalism
the purification and ‘un-degenerification’ is the only path for a culture to succeed but it must be pure and that is hard to find

japan would be this example if it was not so brutally plagued by the brutality of alcohol, sex, work addiction and the perfectly horrendous interplay of the three

The Past caused the present.
The present can't affect the past. [Delayed Choice experiment is a confusion of science, photons are timeless, they have no past.]
The Past transcends the present.

Marvel movies

Midwit detected

>the rise of international terror
Holy shit what a bugman

>A. Proof
blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/08/29/why-a-medieval-peasant-got-more-vacation-time-than-you/
>B. They had much harder work and more people needed to do the harder work as opposed to clerical jobs
That hard work would be in relatively short spurts, unlike the modern worker they werent in perpetual crunch.

No, progressive linear time is a meme and Pinker is the manifestation of a naturalistic fallacy.

I hate pinker so fucking much i want to punch him in his stupid mouth