EDIT : BORDEL j'avais raison
Créateur du délire "n'existe pas"
en vrai ça m’étonnerais même pas qu'une merde comme suumas soit un sale pedo
Post.
Why The Sexual Revolution Was Worse Than You Thought
Sexual morality is one of the biggest aspect of any civilization. For over 1 000 years, western nations or kingdoms lived by christian sexual morality. Christianity especially catholicism teaches that sexuality is meant for marriage and violating this standard is a sin. The supposedly liberal attitude from Greeks and Romans are exaggerated. Although a bit different from the Christian morality they still believed in some sexual standard. The sexual world in western nations only came relatively recently under regimes that we still live under. In the US at the beginning of 20th century, 95% of the country identified as christian and abortion, pornography and sodomy were outlawed. Divorce and illegitimacy were more rare although legal. The progressive moment of the time was concerned about strenghtening the country's moral value. This was known as anti vice. In the 2020s today a majority of American have developed libertarian values on moral and sexual issues. Many of the vices once illegal are now allowed. Casual sex, abortion and divorce are common. Christianity has been replaced by a widespread sense of nihilism, being the believe that morality doesn't exist and values doesn't matter. Despite this a lot of people know deep down that something is wrong. Polls show that the majority think that the morals has gotten worse. Sexual revolution movement came in the 1950s and the 1960s. It sought to change American modest moral values to an unrestricted free for all. An America of strong families was turned into a mess.
Christian sexuality immorality has rules that are not liberal. The Bible contains several passages containing sexual immorality that they condemn : sodomy, bestiality, adultery, crossdressing and more. All are condemned in various biblical passages. In the book of Matthew, Jesus said that marriage is between on man and one women for life. The Christian churches develop doctrines that reflected this modern sexual morality. As such modesty and chastity are christian virtues while lust and hedonism are sins. Satan isn't only a manipulator but a tempter who offers short term pleasure at the expense of their eternal soul. Christianity deeped and fully explained the concept of natural law developed by the ancient Greek philosophers. By this account sexual morality wasn't a matter of arbitrary, or changing value but of objective truth. Modesty and chastity are virtues because they push man towards the full realization of his nature and finality. There is a natural order for human sexuality ordained by God and it's correct for humans to obey it. This is the basis of much of the Catholic morale philosophy. All of this is why Christians oppose sexual liberation. America began as an english colony so inherited the Protestant direction that England had been going down since King Henri VII. Originally it was a Catholic nation but they broke from the churches under the reigns of King Henry VII and Elizabeth I in the 1500s. Therefor in the young US Protestantism was the dominant religion. However Catholics were tolerated in certain parts of the country. Religious views ot eh American Founding Fathers were complicated. Most came from Protestant background and believed that religion was critical to American society. Some like Jefferson or Madison were more deistic. They picked what parts of God and the Bible they believed in based on what they deemed retional. This was contrasted by founders such as Samuel Adams and John Jay who is president of American Bible Society.
The American founding fathers were also influenced by the ideas of the so called enlightenment and the philosophy of John Locke. Locke emphasized what he called the natural rights granted by God that could be determined through reason alone. He also advocated the indifference of the state toward religion. This was very different from traditional governing philosophy where the state tended to work with the church towards religious objectives. founders adopted many of Locke's ideas and what they created became known as the American liberalism. Since founders were of various Christian denominations and some deists, they wrote religious tolerance into the US Constitution. Some of the founders wanted a vague form of Christianity to be made the official religion of the US government. The proposal lost out. The founders were not religiously Orthodox but they were not hardcore secularists who believed taht religion should be banned from public life like modern atheists do. John Adams famously said : " Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. " Despite founding fathers admiring religion, the Constitution and the American liberalism put vague ideas of liberty and equality above all else, even God. Founding ideology also never resolved the conflict between the objective morality and the natural law vs moral relativism and apathy. All of this opened the door for long term negative consequence for American morality. American federal judge and author Robert Bork wrote : " The signers of the Declaration of Independance took the moral order that they inherited for granted. It did not occur to them that the document's rethorical flourishes might one day become dangerous if that morale order weakened. "
America's lack of official religious direction combined with it being founded on vague notions of liberty would go on to be exploited heavily for so called sexual liberation, far beyond the intention of any of the founders. Colonial America had anti obscenity laws including laws against buggery. After, this offense carried severe penalties and no founding father expressed a problem with it. All of this notwithstanding Christianity remained the dominant religion of the US through the 1 700s, 1 800s and early 1 900s, most of this was Protestant denominations but Catholics didn't make up an important minority. As time went on, their important would increase at time. In fact by 1 900, Catholicisme was the single largest church within the USA. By the early 1900s the USA was a global superpower. Government still banned things like porn, abortion, sodomy, etc... Devout Christian like Anthony Comstock used their government position to fight hard against vice and degeneracy. Comstock laws were a series of laws that banned transport of obscene material through the mail and they were strictly enforced. Liberty in America was not seen to do whatever you wanted. To protect liberty, hedonism had to be restrained. Positive freedom is view that true freedom comes from being allowed to pursue virtue. negative freedom asserts that freedom comes from lac of personal restraints. Despite this there were cracks in the American foundation freedom. Freedom of religion meant that Christianity despite its power had no official, legal position as part of the government. This left openings for anti Christian actors to enter and subvert the state. At the same time affluence and decadence began to make American complacent and materialistic. In the 1920s, President Calvin Coolidge warned the country : " We must not sink into pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which our fathers had for the things that are holy. " July 4th speech in 1926.
Like most of educated Americans back then he believed morality was vital. People start thinking that material goods are a valid replacement for the divine and that technology is a valid replacement for God. This thinking becomes more common with societal affluence. To make things worse, WW1 created a sense of nihilism and sadness that spread across the whole Western World. European civilization and history started to be called into question.Still today most of the countries who fought WW1 never had the power and influence they had prior to it. Pope Benedict the 15th referred WW1 as the suicide of civilized Europe. The forces hostile to European civilization saw this as their opening to start seizing power. It's no coincidence that after WW1, marxism and modern art grew vastly in popularity. At the same time American protestant elites began losing their faith and turn their attention to moneymaking. They began to adopt early aspects of the sexual revolution. Anglicanism for example approved birth control as morally valid in 1930. By the 1950s most protestants became pro birth control. Many Christians denominations became about being nice, being tolerant rather than any serious moral value. When your goal is simply to be nice it's easy to be manipulated and walked over. Nice and good are not the same thing. Jesus drove moneychangers from the temple after all. Being good doesn't mean someone has to be nice or tolerant toward everything. On top of this, Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe. also came to the US and began to promote their own morality which was often directly at oods with the majority of Christian morality. Jewish sources note how they became prominent in Hollywood and the media industry. This would have a profound impact on America. American Jews tended to be more permissive on all issues related to sex than the general population. But there was some backlash to the slipping of American standard.
Why The Sexual Revolution Was Worse Than You Thought
Sexual morality is one of the biggest aspect of any civilization. For over 1 000 years, western nations or kingdoms lived by christian sexual morality. Christianity especially catholicism teaches that sexuality is meant for marriage and violating this standard is a sin. The supposedly liberal attitude from Greeks and Romans are exaggerated. Although a bit different from the Christian morality they still believed in some sexual standard. The sexual world in western nations only came relatively recently under regimes that we still live under. In the US at the beginning of 20th century, 95% of the country identified as christian and abortion, pornography and sodomy were outlawed. Divorce and illegitimacy were more rare although legal. The progressive moment of the time was concerned about strenghtening the country's moral value. This was known as anti vice. In the 2020s today a majority of American have developed libertarian values on moral and sexual issues. Many of the vices once illegal are now allowed. Casual sex, abortion and divorce are common. Christianity has been replaced by a widespread sense of nihilism, being the believe that morality doesn't exist and values doesn't matter. Despite this a lot of people know deep down that something is wrong. Polls show that the majority think that the morals has gotten worse. Sexual revolution movement came in the 1950s and the 1960s. It sought to change American modest moral values to an unrestricted free for all. An America of strong families was turned into a mess.
Christian sexuality immorality has rules that are not liberal. The Bible contains several passages containing sexual immorality that they condemn : sodomy, bestiality, adultery, crossdressing and more. All are condemned in various biblical passages. In the book of Matthew, Jesus said that marriage is between on man and one women for life. The Christian churches develop doctrines that reflected this modern sexual morality. As such modesty and chastity are christian virtues while lust and hedonism are sins. Satan isn't only a manipulator but a tempter who offers short term pleasure at the expense of their eternal soul. Christianity deeped and fully explained the concept of natural law developed by the ancient Greek philosophers. By this account sexual morality wasn't a matter of arbitrary, or changing value but of objective truth. Modesty and chastity are virtues because they push man towards the full realization of his nature and finality. There is a natural order for human sexuality ordained by God and it's correct for humans to obey it. This is the basis of much of the Catholic morale philosophy. All of this is why Christians oppose sexual liberation. America began as an english colony so inherited the Protestant direction that England had been going down since King Henri VII. Originally it was a Catholic nation but they broke from the churches under the reigns of King Henry VII and Elizabeth I in the 1500s. Therefor in the young US Protestantism was the dominant religion. However Catholics were tolerated in certain parts of the country. Religious views ot eh American Founding Fathers were complicated. Most came from Protestant background and believed that religion was critical to American society. Some like Jefferson or Madison were more deistic. They picked what parts of God and the Bible they believed in based on what they deemed retional. This was contrasted by founders such as Samuel Adams and John Jay who is president of American Bible Society.
The American founding fathers were also influenced by the ideas of the so called enlightenment and the philosophy of John Locke. Locke emphasized what he called the natural rights granted by God that could be determined through reason alone. He also advocated the indifference of the state toward religion. This was very different from traditional governing philosophy where the state tended to work with the church towards religious objectives. founders adopted many of Locke's ideas and what they created became known as the American liberalism. Since founders were of various Christian denominations and some deists, they wrote religious tolerance into the US Constitution. Some of the founders wanted a vague form of Christianity to be made the official religion of the US government. The proposal lost out. The founders were not religiously Orthodox but they were not hardcore secularists who believed taht religion should be banned from public life like modern atheists do. John Adams famously said : " Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. " Despite founding fathers admiring religion, the Constitution and the American liberalism put vague ideas of liberty and equality above all else, even God. Founding ideology also never resolved the conflict between the objective morality and the natural law vs moral relativism and apathy. All of this opened the door for long term negative consequence for American morality. American federal judge and author Robert Bork wrote : " The signers of the Declaration of Independance took the moral order that they inherited for granted. It did not occur to them that the document's rethorical flourishes might one day become dangerous if that morale order weakened. "
America's lack of official religious direction combined with it being founded on vague notions of liberty would go on to be exploited heavily for so called sexual liberation, far beyond the intention of any of the founders. Colonial America had anti obscenity laws including laws against buggery. After, this offense carried severe penalties and no founding father expressed a problem with it. All of this notwithstanding Christianity remained the dominant religion of the US through the 1 700s, 1 800s and early 1 900s, most of this was Protestant denominations but Catholics didn't make up an important minority. As time went on, their important would increase at time. In fact by 1 900, Catholicisme was the single largest church within the USA. By the early 1900s the USA was a global superpower. Government still banned things like porn, abortion, sodomy, etc... Devout Christian like Anthony Comstock used their government position to fight hard against vice and degeneracy. Comstock laws were a series of laws that banned transport of obscene material through the mail and they were strictly enforced. Liberty in America was not seen to do whatever you wanted. To protect liberty, hedonism had to be restrained. Positive freedom is view that true freedom comes from being allowed to pursue virtue. negative freedom asserts that freedom comes from lac of personal restraints. Despite this there were cracks in the American foundation freedom. Freedom of religion meant that Christianity despite its power had no official, legal position as part of the government. This left openings for anti Christian actors to enter and subvert the state. At the same time affluence and decadence began to make American complacent and materialistic. In the 1920s, President Calvin Coolidge warned the country : " We must not sink into pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which our fathers had for the things that are holy. " July 4th speech in 1926.
Like most of educated Americans back then he believed morality was vital. People start thinking that material goods are a valid replacement for the divine and that technology is a valid replacement for God. This thinking becomes more common with societal affluence. To make things worse, WW1 created a sense of nihilism and sadness that spread across the whole Western World. European civilization and history started to be called into question.Still today most of the countries who fought WW1 never had the power and influence they had prior to it. Pope Benedict the 15th referred WW1 as the suicide of civilized Europe. The forces hostile to European civilization saw this as their opening to start seizing power. It's no coincidence that after WW1, marxism and modern art grew vastly in popularity. At the same time American protestant elites began losing their faith and turn their attention to moneymaking. They began to adopt early aspects of the sexual revolution. Anglicanism for example approved birth control as morally valid in 1930. By the 1950s most protestants became pro birth control. Many Christians denominations became about being nice, being tolerant rather than any serious moral value. When your goal is simply to be nice it's easy to be manipulated and walked over. Nice and good are not the same thing. Jesus drove moneychangers from the temple after all. Being good doesn't mean someone has to be nice or tolerant toward everything. On top of this, Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe. also came to the US and began to promote their own morality which was often directly at oods with the majority of Christian morality. Jewish sources note how they became prominent in Hollywood and the media industry. This would have a profound impact on America. American Jews tended to be more permissive on all issues related to sex than the general population. But there was some backlash to the slipping of American standard.
post
le méchant forum haineux de males privilégiés
Post.
American Catholics were ont of the last group fighting for traditional sexual morality. They created the production code, a censorship code that Catholic businessmen forced Hollywood in the film industry to follow. It banned all sexual degeneracy from films, for many years obliged and if Hollywood didn't oblige, Catholics would boycott their films and devastate their profits. On top of banning things like sex and nudity, the code required that no picture shall be produce that will lower the morale standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime wrongdoing, evil or sin. It's the Hayes Code. For over 30 years these standards would remain in place and produce some of the best films in American history. But WW2 and its aftermath would change everything. In the wake of the rise of fascism and communism, the new field of psychology began to be used for political objectives. it started painting traditional sexual values as a contributor of what it called the authoritarian tendencies. Sexual liberation was proposed as a supposed antidote. Psychologists like Theodore Adorno decided that the Western morality would have to be destroyed and replaced in order for fascism to never rise again. Many of these psychologists were directly founded by American intelligence agencies like the CIA who found their ideas useful in deradicalizing political opposition to American liberalism. To quote the 2002 British documentary " The century of the self " : " Those in power used Freud's theories to try to control the dangerous crowd in the age of mass democracy. " Psychology ceased to be about trying to understand human mind and became about controlling it. Decadence and materialism already has been developing in America. The sexual revolution has begun.
Invention and spread of home television was decisive in changing the morality of America. In 1950, 15% of American households had a TV. By 1960, it was 85%. Almost every TV channel at this time was controlled by one of three networks : ABC, NBC and CBS. These were heavily tied to the US intelligence agencies who used them to push their political agenda. This was Operation Mockingbird. When cultural revolution began in the 1960s, new stations gave the protesters overwhelmingly positive coverage meanwhile those who defended American culture and Western traditions were painted as the villains. A new pop culture based on the latest shows movies and music began to develop in America, replacing much of its ancient European culture that has been passed down for generations. It resulted into the loss of people's roots. Culture of Hollywood and Washington DC were exported to the entire USA and Regional cultures started to decline. Despite the motion culture the producer code still being in effect in TV and film industry began to push the boundaries of sexual immorality. The capitalistic pursuit of profit and the liberal pursuit of sexual hedonism ended up being a match made in heaven or should we say, hell. By mid 1960 the production code was broken so often it was abandoned. The floodgates were open for total media degeneracy and companies happily obliged sex, drugs, abortion, homosexuality and more all flooded American culture.Both high level institutions and youth movements were the backbone of the new sexual culture. Elite universities began broadcaste pornography to their students and encouraged them to attend. Liberal and marxist professors saw the 1960s as an opportunity to destory the long held Christian values of the West that they could paint as authoritarian and fascist. But in the judicial system the sexual revolution found its true success. With American morality transformed, judges began to do their part.
In 1947, Everson vs Board of education, the Supreme Court commanded states that they could not grant religious privileges to anyone prior to that point. States didn't have to abide by freedom of religion as outlined in the federal constitution and they often gave Christians preferential treatments. Separation of church and state as we know today is less than 80 years old. This decision set the stage for a new form of secularism. So severe we can call it anti religious. The Supreme Court then took direct aim at America's morality. Anti pornography laws were the first things gutted. Roth vs USA in 1957, Miller vs California rendered all anti pornogrpahy law moot. Birth control was the next thing to be legalized nationwide in 1965 with Griswold v Connecticut. Author Eichel Michael Jones explains why contraception is so signifiant it's the thin end of the wedge that disconnects sex from its natural purpose of reproduction. Once sex loses its original purpose, moral chaos is in far behind. After the legalization of contraception in the 1960s as he predicted, abortion would follow with Roe vs Wade in the 1970s. All of this legalized from the same anti Christian hyper individualist moral philosophy. That personal pleasure is the highest value of life. This is continued into modern America with things like LGBT movement and transgenderism. The slippery slope was real because the same arguments for legalizing porn can be copy paste into all other sexual issues. Over years the American left became anti Soviet and instead embraced embraced individualistic arguments about personal freedom. The new left is defined as a mix of marxism and libertianism. Race and sexual issues become more important than class and economic ones. The idea of sexual revolution justified itself through ideas of people like John Stuart Mill who in 1858 wrote a book on liberty : " Liberty consists in doing what one desires. " No other line encapsulates better the sexual revolution than this.
Mill advocated for a form of radical individualism that created adversial relationship between the individual and society. Mill's ideas were far from the only philosophy that drove the sexual revolution. Some psychologists, writers and scientists pushed it. Alfred Kinsey originally an insect zoologist. Paid by the CIA backed Rockefeller foundation to change his research to humans. He authored books like : " Sexual behavior in the human male " The book claimed that sexuality was a spectrum and people should be able to identify as whatever they want. He created the Kinsey scale which asserted that people don't fit into by binary sexual categories. John Money performed transgender experiments to try to proof that gender was socially constructed. This in volved forcing a young boy to live as a girl and having him perform sexual acts on his own twin brother. Both twins had lifelong trauma from this experiment and would later commit suicide. These brothers were Brian and David Reimer. Theodore Adorno is the author of the " Authoritarian personality " that declared all people with traditional sexual values as potential fascists. The purpose of the book was to pathologize people who preferred normal sexual views and family life. Traditional family was identified as something that created fascism. Genderless family model had to take its place to protect democracy. That's really what the book says. Michel Foucault was french homosexual and pro pedophilia writer who petitioned to abolish its age of consent laws and demanded that children be given the individual freedom to consent to sex with adults. His writings were a major influence on European branch of sexual Revolution. Freedom was the excuse and justification but a more realistic look at their philosophy could simply looking at them as perverts looking for any excuse to normalize their behavior.
The right wing response to the sexual revolution was weak. Sincre WW2, conservatices adopted liberal notions of individual liberty and anti authoritarianism because of wold war and battle with communism. They ignored how capitalistic companies were directly using sexual degeneracies for profit. Their argument against authoritarian communism undermined their own ability to oregulate culture in the US. Also let's face it : many of the conservatices were more concerned abotu conserving their money than conserving traditional values. Today they gave up on governing and adopted libertarianism. Seeing the fruits of the sexual revolution, it's just a failure. Illetimacy rates were less than 10% in 1960 and in the 2010s they rose to above 40%. Among the consequences : increasing crime and lowering educational attainment. Family formation became hard in modern America. Decline of family structure led to mental illness, suicide, drug use. Male suicide in particulary increased because male role in society is now unclear. Men went from being leaders of Western civilization to cogs in a genderless machine. Female's anti depressant use and victimhood of rape are much higher today than in the patriarchal model. Feminism and free love led to more rapes and crimes against women. Crime and child abuse exploded in the 1960s and remain high today. Almost 70 million of abortions since Roe vs Wade decision in 1973. Birth rates are going down. Wang Huning, Chinese political scientist observed about America : " The individual has replaced the family as the cell of society. In spirit, the family is being hollowed out. " He wrote it in " America against America ". " Fragmentation of the family has deprived society of many human feelings, which is also detrimental to a harmonious society. " Only people who benefited from the sexual revolution are those who hated the family, hated Christianity and wanted a mindless society of atomized individuals with no moral standards.
This kind of soceity is easier to control and corrupt than a virtuous and dutiful o ne. Accusations of racism, homophobia, etc.. aren't part of moral code but used to shut down any rational discussion and assert power over other. Inherent flaws of American founding liberalism never went away.
American Catholics were ont of the last group fighting for traditional sexual morality. They created the production code, a censorship code that Catholic businessmen forced Hollywood in the film industry to follow. It banned all sexual degeneracy from films, for many years obliged and if Hollywood didn't oblige, Catholics would boycott their films and devastate their profits. On top of banning things like sex and nudity, the code required that no picture shall be produce that will lower the morale standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime wrongdoing, evil or sin. It's the Hayes Code. For over 30 years these standards would remain in place and produce some of the best films in American history. But WW2 and its aftermath would change everything. In the wake of the rise of fascism and communism, the new field of psychology began to be used for political objectives. it started painting traditional sexual values as a contributor of what it called the authoritarian tendencies. Sexual liberation was proposed as a supposed antidote. Psychologists like Theodore Adorno decided that the Western morality would have to be destroyed and replaced in order for fascism to never rise again. Many of these psychologists were directly founded by American intelligence agencies like the CIA who found their ideas useful in deradicalizing political opposition to American liberalism. To quote the 2002 British documentary " The century of the self " : " Those in power used Freud's theories to try to control the dangerous crowd in the age of mass democracy. " Psychology ceased to be about trying to understand human mind and became about controlling it. Decadence and materialism already has been developing in America. The sexual revolution has begun.
Invention and spread of home television was decisive in changing the morality of America. In 1950, 15% of American households had a TV. By 1960, it was 85%. Almost every TV channel at this time was controlled by one of three networks : ABC, NBC and CBS. These were heavily tied to the US intelligence agencies who used them to push their political agenda. This was Operation Mockingbird. When cultural revolution began in the 1960s, new stations gave the protesters overwhelmingly positive coverage meanwhile those who defended American culture and Western traditions were painted as the villains. A new pop culture based on the latest shows movies and music began to develop in America, replacing much of its ancient European culture that has been passed down for generations. It resulted into the loss of people's roots. Culture of Hollywood and Washington DC were exported to the entire USA and Regional cultures started to decline. Despite the motion culture the producer code still being in effect in TV and film industry began to push the boundaries of sexual immorality. The capitalistic pursuit of profit and the liberal pursuit of sexual hedonism ended up being a match made in heaven or should we say, hell. By mid 1960 the production code was broken so often it was abandoned. The floodgates were open for total media degeneracy and companies happily obliged sex, drugs, abortion, homosexuality and more all flooded American culture.Both high level institutions and youth movements were the backbone of the new sexual culture. Elite universities began broadcaste pornography to their students and encouraged them to attend. Liberal and marxist professors saw the 1960s as an opportunity to destory the long held Christian values of the West that they could paint as authoritarian and fascist. But in the judicial system the sexual revolution found its true success. With American morality transformed, judges began to do their part.
In 1947, Everson vs Board of education, the Supreme Court commanded states that they could not grant religious privileges to anyone prior to that point. States didn't have to abide by freedom of religion as outlined in the federal constitution and they often gave Christians preferential treatments. Separation of church and state as we know today is less than 80 years old. This decision set the stage for a new form of secularism. So severe we can call it anti religious. The Supreme Court then took direct aim at America's morality. Anti pornography laws were the first things gutted. Roth vs USA in 1957, Miller vs California rendered all anti pornogrpahy law moot. Birth control was the next thing to be legalized nationwide in 1965 with Griswold v Connecticut. Author Eichel Michael Jones explains why contraception is so signifiant it's the thin end of the wedge that disconnects sex from its natural purpose of reproduction. Once sex loses its original purpose, moral chaos is in far behind. After the legalization of contraception in the 1960s as he predicted, abortion would follow with Roe vs Wade in the 1970s. All of this legalized from the same anti Christian hyper individualist moral philosophy. That personal pleasure is the highest value of life. This is continued into modern America with things like LGBT movement and transgenderism. The slippery slope was real because the same arguments for legalizing porn can be copy paste into all other sexual issues. Over years the American left became anti Soviet and instead embraced embraced individualistic arguments about personal freedom. The new left is defined as a mix of marxism and libertianism. Race and sexual issues become more important than class and economic ones. The idea of sexual revolution justified itself through ideas of people like John Stuart Mill who in 1858 wrote a book on liberty : " Liberty consists in doing what one desires. " No other line encapsulates better the sexual revolution than this.
Mill advocated for a form of radical individualism that created adversial relationship between the individual and society. Mill's ideas were far from the only philosophy that drove the sexual revolution. Some psychologists, writers and scientists pushed it. Alfred Kinsey originally an insect zoologist. Paid by the CIA backed Rockefeller foundation to change his research to humans. He authored books like : " Sexual behavior in the human male " The book claimed that sexuality was a spectrum and people should be able to identify as whatever they want. He created the Kinsey scale which asserted that people don't fit into by binary sexual categories. John Money performed transgender experiments to try to proof that gender was socially constructed. This in volved forcing a young boy to live as a girl and having him perform sexual acts on his own twin brother. Both twins had lifelong trauma from this experiment and would later commit suicide. These brothers were Brian and David Reimer. Theodore Adorno is the author of the " Authoritarian personality " that declared all people with traditional sexual values as potential fascists. The purpose of the book was to pathologize people who preferred normal sexual views and family life. Traditional family was identified as something that created fascism. Genderless family model had to take its place to protect democracy. That's really what the book says. Michel Foucault was french homosexual and pro pedophilia writer who petitioned to abolish its age of consent laws and demanded that children be given the individual freedom to consent to sex with adults. His writings were a major influence on European branch of sexual Revolution. Freedom was the excuse and justification but a more realistic look at their philosophy could simply looking at them as perverts looking for any excuse to normalize their behavior.
The right wing response to the sexual revolution was weak. Sincre WW2, conservatices adopted liberal notions of individual liberty and anti authoritarianism because of wold war and battle with communism. They ignored how capitalistic companies were directly using sexual degeneracies for profit. Their argument against authoritarian communism undermined their own ability to oregulate culture in the US. Also let's face it : many of the conservatices were more concerned abotu conserving their money than conserving traditional values. Today they gave up on governing and adopted libertarianism. Seeing the fruits of the sexual revolution, it's just a failure. Illetimacy rates were less than 10% in 1960 and in the 2010s they rose to above 40%. Among the consequences : increasing crime and lowering educational attainment. Family formation became hard in modern America. Decline of family structure led to mental illness, suicide, drug use. Male suicide in particulary increased because male role in society is now unclear. Men went from being leaders of Western civilization to cogs in a genderless machine. Female's anti depressant use and victimhood of rape are much higher today than in the patriarchal model. Feminism and free love led to more rapes and crimes against women. Crime and child abuse exploded in the 1960s and remain high today. Almost 70 million of abortions since Roe vs Wade decision in 1973. Birth rates are going down. Wang Huning, Chinese political scientist observed about America : " The individual has replaced the family as the cell of society. In spirit, the family is being hollowed out. " He wrote it in " America against America ". " Fragmentation of the family has deprived society of many human feelings, which is also detrimental to a harmonious society. " Only people who benefited from the sexual revolution are those who hated the family, hated Christianity and wanted a mindless society of atomized individuals with no moral standards.
This kind of soceity is easier to control and corrupt than a virtuous and dutiful o ne. Accusations of racism, homophobia, etc.. aren't part of moral code but used to shut down any rational discussion and assert power over other. Inherent flaws of American founding liberalism never went away.
Post.
Why America's Foreign Wars Are Worse Than You Thought
.
In colonial era it conquered native American neighboor but it was still weak and fragile and avoided conflict with Europe. George Washington warned about entangling alliances that could draw the country into not necessary wars. First signs of American aggression to Europe came with Monroe doctrine in 1821. It declared the north and south America to be in US government's sphere of influence. 2 whole continents saw as their exclusive territories. In turn those who made the Monroe Doctrine agreed America should stay out of old world affairs in exchange. That promess is reneged later. Next era of US policy came after the US industrialized and after they recovered from the civil war. This would be called the open imperialism era. The Spanish American war is 1898 is considered by historian as the beginning of the American Empire. In 1898 had been fighting to put down a revolt in its province of Cuba. which it had held for almost 500 years. The US government used the opportunity to launch war against Spain who was smaller and less prepared for war. Spain didn't even provoke America but in the US it was justified through exaggerated stories of Spanish atrocities against Cubans. The explosion of the USS was also blamed on Spain to stoke support for war. Investigations later confirmed the ship sunk from internal explosion, not external one. Support for this war was created through manufactured consent. Powerful journalists like Joseph Pulitzer and William Hurst gained up support for war with false stories and propaganda. Spain was suppressing a violent rebellion in his territory as almost any nation would. Yet it was treated as the devil incarnate. American ruling class supported war because it was beneficial to their interests. Official explanation was that the US would bring freedom to Cuba. The US ended up seizing Cuba, Puerto Rico, Philippines. It was the beginning of a trend that characterizd most of American wars since.
Atrocities propaganda and false flags. For the first time the US undermined European global power in favor of itself. Next was WW1. American bankers loan vast sums of money to the Entente, mainly Britain and France. Arms dealers engaged in blatant war, profiteering the sinking of the Lusitania supposedly carrying Americans, was used as major pretext for war. In reality the ship carried weapons and ammunitions. 90% of atrocities the British reported were fake. This resulted in war on Germany. Zimmermann telegram offered a defensive alliance with Mexico in case America joined against Germany. In other words regardless of the Zimmerman telegram, the US were going to join. Germany believed this. As for WW2 a lot think that the US sat on isolationism until Japan randomly attacked. But they weren't isolationist at all. The public leaned towards it but not government. Henry Ford and Charles Lindberg advocated neutrality. Ford refused manufacturing war material for the British. Father Charles Coughlin, one of the most popular broadcaster warned against those trying to get the USA into another European war. Despite this the Roosevelt administration had other ideas. Professor F. Braumoeller of Harvard University wrote about the myth of American isolationism. The US governement was already in undeclared war against Germany and Japan months before Pearl Harbor. This included fighting German ships and putting a full embargo on Japan. Only Hitler's unwillingness to provoke formal American opposition kept the US out of the war on paper. US's lend lease to Soviet Union began on summer 1941. In fact the irony is that Germany wanted peace with the US more than the other way around. Axis Power didnt' have the desire nor the power to conquer and divide America. Japan and Germany attacked the US as a last resort. During cold war, it was decades of American interventionism. Any government in Africa or South America swaying from the US interests were targeted with regime changes.
Vietnam war was the most disastrous and it started with a false flag again : the Gulf of Tonkin incident. No such attacked of American ship by the North Vietnamese ever happened. Lyndon Johnson used this event. It was also justified by the idea of domino telling that if any country became communist, it would make other countries become communists. This theory was wrong. Between 1964 and 1973, it was disaster.
Why America's Foreign Wars Are Worse Than You Thought
.
In colonial era it conquered native American neighboor but it was still weak and fragile and avoided conflict with Europe. George Washington warned about entangling alliances that could draw the country into not necessary wars. First signs of American aggression to Europe came with Monroe doctrine in 1821. It declared the north and south America to be in US government's sphere of influence. 2 whole continents saw as their exclusive territories. In turn those who made the Monroe Doctrine agreed America should stay out of old world affairs in exchange. That promess is reneged later. Next era of US policy came after the US industrialized and after they recovered from the civil war. This would be called the open imperialism era. The Spanish American war is 1898 is considered by historian as the beginning of the American Empire. In 1898 had been fighting to put down a revolt in its province of Cuba. which it had held for almost 500 years. The US government used the opportunity to launch war against Spain who was smaller and less prepared for war. Spain didn't even provoke America but in the US it was justified through exaggerated stories of Spanish atrocities against Cubans. The explosion of the USS was also blamed on Spain to stoke support for war. Investigations later confirmed the ship sunk from internal explosion, not external one. Support for this war was created through manufactured consent. Powerful journalists like Joseph Pulitzer and William Hurst gained up support for war with false stories and propaganda. Spain was suppressing a violent rebellion in his territory as almost any nation would. Yet it was treated as the devil incarnate. American ruling class supported war because it was beneficial to their interests. Official explanation was that the US would bring freedom to Cuba. The US ended up seizing Cuba, Puerto Rico, Philippines. It was the beginning of a trend that characterizd most of American wars since.
Atrocities propaganda and false flags. For the first time the US undermined European global power in favor of itself. Next was WW1. American bankers loan vast sums of money to the Entente, mainly Britain and France. Arms dealers engaged in blatant war, profiteering the sinking of the Lusitania supposedly carrying Americans, was used as major pretext for war. In reality the ship carried weapons and ammunitions. 90% of atrocities the British reported were fake. This resulted in war on Germany. Zimmermann telegram offered a defensive alliance with Mexico in case America joined against Germany. In other words regardless of the Zimmerman telegram, the US were going to join. Germany believed this. As for WW2 a lot think that the US sat on isolationism until Japan randomly attacked. But they weren't isolationist at all. The public leaned towards it but not government. Henry Ford and Charles Lindberg advocated neutrality. Ford refused manufacturing war material for the British. Father Charles Coughlin, one of the most popular broadcaster warned against those trying to get the USA into another European war. Despite this the Roosevelt administration had other ideas. Professor F. Braumoeller of Harvard University wrote about the myth of American isolationism. The US governement was already in undeclared war against Germany and Japan months before Pearl Harbor. This included fighting German ships and putting a full embargo on Japan. Only Hitler's unwillingness to provoke formal American opposition kept the US out of the war on paper. US's lend lease to Soviet Union began on summer 1941. In fact the irony is that Germany wanted peace with the US more than the other way around. Axis Power didnt' have the desire nor the power to conquer and divide America. Japan and Germany attacked the US as a last resort. During cold war, it was decades of American interventionism. Any government in Africa or South America swaying from the US interests were targeted with regime changes.
Vietnam war was the most disastrous and it started with a false flag again : the Gulf of Tonkin incident. No such attacked of American ship by the North Vietnamese ever happened. Lyndon Johnson used this event. It was also justified by the idea of domino telling that if any country became communist, it would make other countries become communists. This theory was wrong. Between 1964 and 1973, it was disaster.
Post.
Why People Like Anime Girls
Odds are high that you saw yourself someone using an anime girl as their avatar. The anime and manga industry is produced by Japan. This art industry has become very popular around the world especially on the internet. Unlike western animations which typically gears itself toward children, the anime industry targets a wide variety of age demographics. Western companies attempted live actions adaptation with really mediocre success. A key factor that stands out in anime's success is its female characters who garner fan bases in and of themselves. The term waifu, the variation of the word wife, is commonly used in anime circles to refer to one's favorite female character. Anime girls have special charm that viewers in the West are picking up on. Firstly, appearance. These characters are professionally designed to be feminine and attractives. There are entire animation methods devoted to their styles. The physical traits that are highlighted in anime include flowing hair, large and detailed eyes and slim or curvaceous bodies. These features are highlithed because they are widely accepted as beautiful. Some might argue that beauty is subjective but there are physical traits that people are biologically wired to be attracted to. Those creating anime don't try to obscure this. These female designs go hand to hand with clothings that accentuate their feminine features such as ribbons, bows or other hair accessories. Meanwhile some other design are child like which intend to act as a trigger protective instincts from the viewer. Cute or comfy factor. Anime doesn't just exist in vacuum. In western media by contrast there has been an effort to reduce character designs that even differentiate between men and women. Some linked this to the fat acceptance in androgynous movements. But these 2 movements are 2 branches of the entire source. That source is feminism. Hollywood and television studios consistently identify more as feminist and liberal than the general public.
This is reflected in their portrayal of women. In a great irony, feminism rejects the value of feminity and works as a conduit to make the female masculine The biological differences between both sexes are seen not as something to be celebrated but as obstacles to be destroyed. These natural differences are thus downplayed and studios put ridiculous efforts into making female characters look and behave like their male counterparts. This kind of feminism influence doesn't exist in most of anime studios. That played an enormous part in this contrast of character designs. Beyond this issue of feminism, solid portion of the animation that gets propped up by corporations in the West is downright hideous. So the physical appearance is a factor. But there is an even greater factor going far deeper than the physical appearance. Anime girls are liked because of their virtues and personality traits. A femal character protraying bashfulness is common in anime but extinct in western media. Generally, these characters demonstrate attributes that make them ideal candidates for wives including loyalty, modesty and a positive view of marriage and children. It's a common sight in anime especially in the slice of life genre to see characters outright fantasize about marriage. Characters are written this way intentionally because not only do these virtues make them good love interests, but they are also admirable traits in and of themselves. I noticed that chastity in particular is a value that anime likes to highlight. This applies to both male and female characters. Even female protagonists that are designed in a sexualized way are written carefully to have these virtues like the character Albedo in the anime Overlord who is said to be a virgin despite her sexualized appearance. It's a stark contrast to both Western media and Wester societies.
Values like chastity, modesty and romantic exclusivity are increasingly treated as unecessary or antiquated. This is despite the fact that most researchs show that these things are critical to developing healthy long term relationship. A 2019 research report of families studies found that traditionally minded and religious couples reported the highest level of relationship quality and sexual satisfaction. Other research has shown that women who engage in promiscusous sex are more likely to have failed marriages, more likely to be single mothers, more likely to get abortions and less likely to report personnal happiness than women who didn't have sexual partners before getting married.
It truthfully turns out that the sexual revolution and free love were an utter disaster.In spite of this most of Western societies continue to to double down on normalizing promiscuity. Survey data shows report that those with more than 2 sexual partners are undesirable for long term relationship. The problem is that Americans report having between 4 and 7 sexual partners. This created an extreme gap between the kind of person people want a long term relationship with and the kind they can actually choose from. Furthermore the average age people report first having sex is 17. Add to it the fact that datas shows marriage has a negative correlation with number of sex partners that is the more sex partners a person has, the less successfull their marriage is likely to be. 
All these things come together to create a relationship wasteland in the West. It created a situation where the average person has to choose between settling for a spouse with many past sexual partners which they don't want or dropping the idea of marriage entirely. Rather than trying to reverse this, Western media led the carge in exacerbating this crisis. Studio executives practically fall over themselves to put forward female characters that are sexually promiscuous and masculine. As an exemple, in the show Game of Thrones, nearly every single female character is written to be either involved in numerous sexual relationships or to have no interest in men whatsoever. Other shows that focus on teenage relationships are rife with premarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, and marriage being treated as backwards institution. Anime has done the opposite. It's now effectively one of the last reliable places young men can look to find idealized female portrayals that would make good wives. Thus it shouldn't be surprising that it garnered a large male audience. Now a lot of anime fans may recognize this fact implicitly but not actually be cognisant of it. There are after all many anime fans who are degenerate. Part of the reason these people exist is because they were never able to recognize what makes anime girls unique in the first place. Not saying anime is perfect or that Japan is a perfect country. All things have their flaws. But what is clear here is that anime's female portrayal show feminine nature in a positive light that feminist media never can or will. In essence, it exposes the current cultural crisis in the West in both medias and public attitudes. When a huge portion of your male population has to look to a foreign medium to find virtuous female portrayals, that's a serious problem.
Why People Like Anime Girls
Odds are high that you saw yourself someone using an anime girl as their avatar. The anime and manga industry is produced by Japan. This art industry has become very popular around the world especially on the internet. Unlike western animations which typically gears itself toward children, the anime industry targets a wide variety of age demographics. Western companies attempted live actions adaptation with really mediocre success. A key factor that stands out in anime's success is its female characters who garner fan bases in and of themselves. The term waifu, the variation of the word wife, is commonly used in anime circles to refer to one's favorite female character. Anime girls have special charm that viewers in the West are picking up on. Firstly, appearance. These characters are professionally designed to be feminine and attractives. There are entire animation methods devoted to their styles. The physical traits that are highlighted in anime include flowing hair, large and detailed eyes and slim or curvaceous bodies. These features are highlithed because they are widely accepted as beautiful. Some might argue that beauty is subjective but there are physical traits that people are biologically wired to be attracted to. Those creating anime don't try to obscure this. These female designs go hand to hand with clothings that accentuate their feminine features such as ribbons, bows or other hair accessories. Meanwhile some other design are child like which intend to act as a trigger protective instincts from the viewer. Cute or comfy factor. Anime doesn't just exist in vacuum. In western media by contrast there has been an effort to reduce character designs that even differentiate between men and women. Some linked this to the fat acceptance in androgynous movements. But these 2 movements are 2 branches of the entire source. That source is feminism. Hollywood and television studios consistently identify more as feminist and liberal than the general public.
This is reflected in their portrayal of women. In a great irony, feminism rejects the value of feminity and works as a conduit to make the female masculine The biological differences between both sexes are seen not as something to be celebrated but as obstacles to be destroyed. These natural differences are thus downplayed and studios put ridiculous efforts into making female characters look and behave like their male counterparts. This kind of feminism influence doesn't exist in most of anime studios. That played an enormous part in this contrast of character designs. Beyond this issue of feminism, solid portion of the animation that gets propped up by corporations in the West is downright hideous. So the physical appearance is a factor. But there is an even greater factor going far deeper than the physical appearance. Anime girls are liked because of their virtues and personality traits. A femal character protraying bashfulness is common in anime but extinct in western media. Generally, these characters demonstrate attributes that make them ideal candidates for wives including loyalty, modesty and a positive view of marriage and children. It's a common sight in anime especially in the slice of life genre to see characters outright fantasize about marriage. Characters are written this way intentionally because not only do these virtues make them good love interests, but they are also admirable traits in and of themselves. I noticed that chastity in particular is a value that anime likes to highlight. This applies to both male and female characters. Even female protagonists that are designed in a sexualized way are written carefully to have these virtues like the character Albedo in the anime Overlord who is said to be a virgin despite her sexualized appearance. It's a stark contrast to both Western media and Wester societies.
Values like chastity, modesty and romantic exclusivity are increasingly treated as unecessary or antiquated. This is despite the fact that most researchs show that these things are critical to developing healthy long term relationship. A 2019 research report of families studies found that traditionally minded and religious couples reported the highest level of relationship quality and sexual satisfaction. Other research has shown that women who engage in promiscusous sex are more likely to have failed marriages, more likely to be single mothers, more likely to get abortions and less likely to report personnal happiness than women who didn't have sexual partners before getting married.
All these things come together to create a relationship wasteland in the West. It created a situation where the average person has to choose between settling for a spouse with many past sexual partners which they don't want or dropping the idea of marriage entirely. Rather than trying to reverse this, Western media led the carge in exacerbating this crisis. Studio executives practically fall over themselves to put forward female characters that are sexually promiscuous and masculine. As an exemple, in the show Game of Thrones, nearly every single female character is written to be either involved in numerous sexual relationships or to have no interest in men whatsoever. Other shows that focus on teenage relationships are rife with premarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, and marriage being treated as backwards institution. Anime has done the opposite. It's now effectively one of the last reliable places young men can look to find idealized female portrayals that would make good wives. Thus it shouldn't be surprising that it garnered a large male audience. Now a lot of anime fans may recognize this fact implicitly but not actually be cognisant of it. There are after all many anime fans who are degenerate. Part of the reason these people exist is because they were never able to recognize what makes anime girls unique in the first place. Not saying anime is perfect or that Japan is a perfect country. All things have their flaws. But what is clear here is that anime's female portrayal show feminine nature in a positive light that feminist media never can or will. In essence, it exposes the current cultural crisis in the West in both medias and public attitudes. When a huge portion of your male population has to look to a foreign medium to find virtuous female portrayals, that's a serious problem.
Post.
What Fake Democracies Look Like
1. Japan. Creation of current japanese state dates back to WW2. Prior to the war, Japanese empire was the only non European great power in the world. Its government was semi absolute monarchy with Emperor has head of state. And a powerful military with high degree of autonomy. The empire had influence from Mandchuria to Guam. Japan attempted to create an Asian co prosperity sphere through conquest. They were eventually defeated by the United States. In many ways liberla democracy in Japan has its origin in the smoldering rubble of once great cities and deaths of thundreds of thousands of people. Following this, the country was occupied and the Constitution written by the occupiers. Writers of the constitution included the 22 years old jewish feminist Beate SIrota Gordon who wrote several articles pertaining to women's rights and anti discrimination. Furthermore, article 9 of the new japanese constitution states renounces forever its right to declare war.
It removed the nation's right to declare war. This article also abolishes the Japanese's entire miltiary though a small force defense was allowed several decades later. This constitution has not been amended in over 70 years, raising questions of legitimacy given it was imposed by foreign powers, was accepted during duress, and rendered the Japanese state almost defenseless without foreign help, making us wonder what liberal democracy really is about. Today this country is declining in population with one of the lowest birth rates in the world.
2. Italy. Its government is also connected to WW2. Mussolini's rise was due to many factors. Italy lost 1 million men in WW1, received nothing for it, leading italians to feel enraged at the existent parliamentary order which was seen as weak and ineffective. At the same time marxist movements were causing chaos both nationally and internationally with strikes and revolutions across Europe. Italy also had conflict with Catholic Church over land in Rome unresolved for over 50 years. Between 1918 and 1922, Italy experienced 6 different governments and 4 different prime ministers. It was when the immigration from Italy to the USA exploded. The fascist party came in power in 1922. WW2 led to the party's demise.
3. Germany.
How Democracies Implode - The Spanish Civil War (Part 1)
The struggle saw an alliance of monarchists, phalangists, traditionalists, landowners and more battle for supremacy against the coalition of communist, anarchist, liberal and republican forces. The Second Spanish Republic went down in 1936. WW1 led to the death of almost 20 millions of people. 4 major empires in Europe, the German, Russian, Austrian and Ottoman fell. The Spanish flu caused 25 millions of people to die. Those known between 1880 and 1900 became known as the lost generation. While Spain was neutral in WW1, it was experiencing its own problems. The nation was a shadow of its former empire, having lost some of its overseas colonies in the 1800s to revolutions. At home Spain couldn't decide on its own future. It underwent multiplie civil conflicts like Trieno liberal in 1820, Carlist wars between 1833 and 1877. General trend was more power taken away from the King and the Church then given to the parliamentary bodies. Between 1874 and 1931, Spain was in a period known as the Restauration where it was a monarchy led by a restored king of the House of Bourbons. However under the liberal 1876 Constitution, the king wasn't absolute and had to rely on the parliament to pass most laws. The parliament was dysfunctional and hardly any prime minister could accomplish. Neither monarchists nor republicans really got what they wanted. As the in dustrial revolution spread through Spain, it became clear why changes would be necessary. By the 1920s, Spain saw the rise of multiple extreme issues. The Rif war, a costly colonial war in Morocco between 1921 and 1926 was draining the government's finances. At the same time, communist and anarchist sentiment was rising internationally. Bolshevik revolution in Russia and republican revolution in Germany inspired liberals and marxists alike to seek similar revolts in Spain.
For the republicans the aim was to abolish the old world order and the instauration of a liberal democracy that will pursue the ideals of the french revolution, or so they said. The monarchy, the Catholic Church and the military to all have their power vastly reduced or destroyed. Meanwhile for marxists the aim was a workers revolution. Some were anarchists, some sought for the workers to rule themselves, while other admired the Soviet Union and wanted a similar government in Spain. All marxists agreed that capitalism had to be abolished. So did all those who in their view enabled capitalism. They decided that morality was a bourgeoisie invention and that reality of life was an endless class struggle between rich and poor. Some poor Spanish were attracted by the idea because some of them felt like they were treated badly by the Spanish landowners. Spain had been slow to adopt some of the pro workers reforms that other industrializing nations already had. Fueled by international networks spreading propaganda through Spain, republicans and marxists staged strikes, street violence and anarchy that caused havoc for the government. Losing control of public order, king Alfonso VIII was forced to allow the military to run the country. In 1923, captain general of Catalonia Miguel Primoe de Rivera launched a bloodless coup, dissolved the parliament,
What Fake Democracies Look Like
1. Japan. Creation of current japanese state dates back to WW2. Prior to the war, Japanese empire was the only non European great power in the world. Its government was semi absolute monarchy with Emperor has head of state. And a powerful military with high degree of autonomy. The empire had influence from Mandchuria to Guam. Japan attempted to create an Asian co prosperity sphere through conquest. They were eventually defeated by the United States. In many ways liberla democracy in Japan has its origin in the smoldering rubble of once great cities and deaths of thundreds of thousands of people. Following this, the country was occupied and the Constitution written by the occupiers. Writers of the constitution included the 22 years old jewish feminist Beate SIrota Gordon who wrote several articles pertaining to women's rights and anti discrimination. Furthermore, article 9 of the new japanese constitution states renounces forever its right to declare war.
2. Italy. Its government is also connected to WW2. Mussolini's rise was due to many factors. Italy lost 1 million men in WW1, received nothing for it, leading italians to feel enraged at the existent parliamentary order which was seen as weak and ineffective. At the same time marxist movements were causing chaos both nationally and internationally with strikes and revolutions across Europe. Italy also had conflict with Catholic Church over land in Rome unresolved for over 50 years. Between 1918 and 1922, Italy experienced 6 different governments and 4 different prime ministers. It was when the immigration from Italy to the USA exploded. The fascist party came in power in 1922. WW2 led to the party's demise.
3. Germany.
How Democracies Implode - The Spanish Civil War (Part 1)
The struggle saw an alliance of monarchists, phalangists, traditionalists, landowners and more battle for supremacy against the coalition of communist, anarchist, liberal and republican forces. The Second Spanish Republic went down in 1936. WW1 led to the death of almost 20 millions of people. 4 major empires in Europe, the German, Russian, Austrian and Ottoman fell. The Spanish flu caused 25 millions of people to die. Those known between 1880 and 1900 became known as the lost generation. While Spain was neutral in WW1, it was experiencing its own problems. The nation was a shadow of its former empire, having lost some of its overseas colonies in the 1800s to revolutions. At home Spain couldn't decide on its own future. It underwent multiplie civil conflicts like Trieno liberal in 1820, Carlist wars between 1833 and 1877. General trend was more power taken away from the King and the Church then given to the parliamentary bodies. Between 1874 and 1931, Spain was in a period known as the Restauration where it was a monarchy led by a restored king of the House of Bourbons. However under the liberal 1876 Constitution, the king wasn't absolute and had to rely on the parliament to pass most laws. The parliament was dysfunctional and hardly any prime minister could accomplish. Neither monarchists nor republicans really got what they wanted. As the in dustrial revolution spread through Spain, it became clear why changes would be necessary. By the 1920s, Spain saw the rise of multiple extreme issues. The Rif war, a costly colonial war in Morocco between 1921 and 1926 was draining the government's finances. At the same time, communist and anarchist sentiment was rising internationally. Bolshevik revolution in Russia and republican revolution in Germany inspired liberals and marxists alike to seek similar revolts in Spain.
For the republicans the aim was to abolish the old world order and the instauration of a liberal democracy that will pursue the ideals of the french revolution, or so they said. The monarchy, the Catholic Church and the military to all have their power vastly reduced or destroyed. Meanwhile for marxists the aim was a workers revolution. Some were anarchists, some sought for the workers to rule themselves, while other admired the Soviet Union and wanted a similar government in Spain. All marxists agreed that capitalism had to be abolished. So did all those who in their view enabled capitalism. They decided that morality was a bourgeoisie invention and that reality of life was an endless class struggle between rich and poor. Some poor Spanish were attracted by the idea because some of them felt like they were treated badly by the Spanish landowners. Spain had been slow to adopt some of the pro workers reforms that other industrializing nations already had. Fueled by international networks spreading propaganda through Spain, republicans and marxists staged strikes, street violence and anarchy that caused havoc for the government. Losing control of public order, king Alfonso VIII was forced to allow the military to run the country. In 1923, captain general of Catalonia Miguel Primoe de Rivera launched a bloodless coup, dissolved the parliament,
Post.
How To Win A Civil War - The Spanish Civil War (Part 2)
First shots of the civil war in Spain get fired July 17th 1936. Spanish military units have to choose between defecting to the nationalists uprising or fighting for the republic. Most chose the former. Eastern and northern spain regions that heavily voted for CEDA in 1936 election, are the first joining the revolt. Spanish Morocco was quickly seized by general Franco. Franco wasn't the only leader of the nationalists. General Jose Sanjurjo and general Emilio Mola were also chief architects of the military coup. However both die shortly into the war in airplane crashes leaving Franco as de facto the leader. Justifying the revolt, Franco issues a manifesto. In it he proclaims : " Anarchy reigns in most of the countryside and towns. Government appointed authorities encourage revolts. Revolutionary strikes of all kinds paralyzed the life of the nation, destroying its source of wealth and creating hunger, forcing working men to the point of desperation. The most savage attacks are made upon national monuments and artistic treasures by revolutionary hordes who obey the orders of foreign governments with the complicity and negligence of local authorities. " The Republic armed the workers to withhold the initial coup in Madrid. But it wasn't just workers who were given arms but also the criminals and dangerous. In some cases jails were opened and their prisoners led onto the streets. This added to the already bloodthirsty attitude of the communists created a deadly combination. They didn't just plan to use their arms against soldiers. They quickmly turn them on anyone into Republican territory they deemed to be an enemy. This led to a series of executions and massacres throughout republican Spain known sa the red terrors. During these atrocities, business owners, Catholic priests, nuns and anyone deemer sympathic to the nationalist cause was dragged into the street and shot without trial.
The treatment of the clergy was especially heinous. Many clergy weren't simply killed but tortured. The graves of the nuns were dug out and their bodies put on public display as a demoralization tactic. Pope Pius XI responded to the attacks b y issuing an urgent papal encyclical " Divini redemptoris ". In it he called atheistic communism a threat to all of Christian civilization. Ultimatly the red terrors hurt the republican cause as they created immense destruction in their own territory. They murdered many of the most productive and well to do members of the spanish community. By the end, even the leader of the socialist party Indalecio Prieto made a radio broadcast demanding the violence to stop. But by then it was too late and the damage was done. As news of the events spread to the international community, more in the public opinion turn against the Republic. On top of this it also fueled a crusader like zeal in the national aside as they now viewed republicans not as just political opponents but as their mortal enemies. While Catholicism and communism share a few minor similarities such as advocating justice for the working class, in totality they have irreconcilable differences. At the root of this conflict is the fact that communism isn't merely a system of economics but an entire philosophical worldview. In this worldview, material conditions matter more than any kind of spiritual or moral issues. Humans are viewed as nothing but matter and there is no afterlife. Every social structure that exists, marriage, family, religion, are the result of arbitrary material events, so can be abolished at will. From this, communists believe that all hierarchy should be ended and power is to be wielded by the collective mass of people. Class struggle and revolution take on a messianic nature that communists believe will bring about an utopian world where everyone is equal.
Communism believes that any kind of violence is justified to bring about this supposedly inevitable utopia. In practise none of this ever happened. Communist revolutions merely succeeded in destroying a traditional ruling class and instaling a new atheistic one. Catholicism is also a wordview through which all things are filtered. it views spiritual and moral issues as more important than material conditions, the opposite of communism. Humans are not merely seen as matter but as eternal souls who will spend their afterlife in either heaven or hell. Catholicism calls for generosity to the needy as a virtue but not for class struggle or class antagonism. The Catholic Church even acknowledged many of the abuses against the working class by industrialists but it rejected communism solutions as a deception. Catholics also believe in hierarchy and divinely instituted authority in roles like parents and clergy. Marriage and the family are not merely arbitrary institutions but ordained by God. The mass collective has no right to tamper with God's design.
Spain in the 1930s was the battleground of the latest iteration of this struggle. When battle raged inside Spain, some coutries chose neutrality. France announced the policy of non intervention and closed its Spanish borders. Meanwhile, the USA banned the export of weapons to Spain. But other countries chose direct involvment. Germany and Italy recognized the nationalist government is legitimate and sent military aid. On top of furthering their geopolitical interests, the war was seen as an opportunity to practise the new art of air warfare. It would be the German aircraft that flew general Franco to the spanish mainland from Morocco. Meanwhile the Soviet Union prepared their own intervention, creating the international brigades. These were volunteer units from around the world who would be deployed to Spain to fight for the republicans. They were heavily advertised as going to fight fascism and could perhaps be described as the original antifa. Around 60 000 were ultimatly sent. The Soviet Union also sent tanks and members of the NKVD secret police to aid the republicans. In exchange the republicans transfered 70% of Spain's gold reserves worth hundreds of millions to the Soviets. This caused critics in the United Kingdom who also declared neutrality. To believe this made republicans the puppets of Stalin. Around this time, "Lord of the ring" writer John Tolkien was one of many to throw moral support behind the nationalists. All of this shows us one major factor in winning a civil war : getting international aid. The aid given to the nationalists by Germany and Italy proved more decisive than the aid given to the republicans by the Soviets. The German and Italian air attacks in particular proved devastating to the republican forces. Ultimatly for the republicans, the combination of being seen as the puppets of the Soviets and enemies of religion crippled their reputation and made it much harder to get international support.
However, winning a civil war comes down to more than just international support. Another factor is unifying the factions on your side. The nationalist faction was ideologically diverse. While marxist ideologies developed around the concept of class struggle other ideologies were developping around class collaboration. One of these factions was The Falange Española, the Spanish Falange, a new movement on the Spanish right. Founded by Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. Its aim was united Spain that would embark on a campaign of national rejuvenation. This was to be achieved through dictatorship and major economic overhaul. It was not conservatice but revolutionary, a bit like the fascist movement in Italy. The Falanges manifesto the 27 points laid their primary aims. They sought a one party state, an economy based on national syndicalism and nationalization of the financial system with usury being banned. Antonio Primo de Riveira declared the essence of what Falangism sought do : " Spain has fallen on hard times due to a threefold division. " " Division engendered by local separatism, division engendered between political parties, division engendered by class struggle. " " When Spain finds a common which overcomes all of these differences, Spain will be great like in its heyday. " Falange ideology was more innovative than any of the other Spanish movements on the Spanish right. it was different from even Franco's worldview who was more of a traditionalist and justified the rebellion primarily as a way to bring law and order back to Spain. The Falange was banned months before the war by the Popular Front government but it saw its ranks massively fell after the war started. It went from a meager few thousands, about 7 000, into over 150 000 in the end who fought for the nationalist cause. Unfortunatly for the movement most of its leaders were executed by the republicans within weeks of the civil war beginning.
How To Win A Civil War - The Spanish Civil War (Part 2)
First shots of the civil war in Spain get fired July 17th 1936. Spanish military units have to choose between defecting to the nationalists uprising or fighting for the republic. Most chose the former. Eastern and northern spain regions that heavily voted for CEDA in 1936 election, are the first joining the revolt. Spanish Morocco was quickly seized by general Franco. Franco wasn't the only leader of the nationalists. General Jose Sanjurjo and general Emilio Mola were also chief architects of the military coup. However both die shortly into the war in airplane crashes leaving Franco as de facto the leader. Justifying the revolt, Franco issues a manifesto. In it he proclaims : " Anarchy reigns in most of the countryside and towns. Government appointed authorities encourage revolts. Revolutionary strikes of all kinds paralyzed the life of the nation, destroying its source of wealth and creating hunger, forcing working men to the point of desperation. The most savage attacks are made upon national monuments and artistic treasures by revolutionary hordes who obey the orders of foreign governments with the complicity and negligence of local authorities. " The Republic armed the workers to withhold the initial coup in Madrid. But it wasn't just workers who were given arms but also the criminals and dangerous. In some cases jails were opened and their prisoners led onto the streets. This added to the already bloodthirsty attitude of the communists created a deadly combination. They didn't just plan to use their arms against soldiers. They quickmly turn them on anyone into Republican territory they deemed to be an enemy. This led to a series of executions and massacres throughout republican Spain known sa the red terrors. During these atrocities, business owners, Catholic priests, nuns and anyone deemer sympathic to the nationalist cause was dragged into the street and shot without trial.
The treatment of the clergy was especially heinous. Many clergy weren't simply killed but tortured. The graves of the nuns were dug out and their bodies put on public display as a demoralization tactic. Pope Pius XI responded to the attacks b y issuing an urgent papal encyclical " Divini redemptoris ". In it he called atheistic communism a threat to all of Christian civilization. Ultimatly the red terrors hurt the republican cause as they created immense destruction in their own territory. They murdered many of the most productive and well to do members of the spanish community. By the end, even the leader of the socialist party Indalecio Prieto made a radio broadcast demanding the violence to stop. But by then it was too late and the damage was done. As news of the events spread to the international community, more in the public opinion turn against the Republic. On top of this it also fueled a crusader like zeal in the national aside as they now viewed republicans not as just political opponents but as their mortal enemies. While Catholicism and communism share a few minor similarities such as advocating justice for the working class, in totality they have irreconcilable differences. At the root of this conflict is the fact that communism isn't merely a system of economics but an entire philosophical worldview. In this worldview, material conditions matter more than any kind of spiritual or moral issues. Humans are viewed as nothing but matter and there is no afterlife. Every social structure that exists, marriage, family, religion, are the result of arbitrary material events, so can be abolished at will. From this, communists believe that all hierarchy should be ended and power is to be wielded by the collective mass of people. Class struggle and revolution take on a messianic nature that communists believe will bring about an utopian world where everyone is equal.
Communism believes that any kind of violence is justified to bring about this supposedly inevitable utopia. In practise none of this ever happened. Communist revolutions merely succeeded in destroying a traditional ruling class and instaling a new atheistic one. Catholicism is also a wordview through which all things are filtered. it views spiritual and moral issues as more important than material conditions, the opposite of communism. Humans are not merely seen as matter but as eternal souls who will spend their afterlife in either heaven or hell. Catholicism calls for generosity to the needy as a virtue but not for class struggle or class antagonism. The Catholic Church even acknowledged many of the abuses against the working class by industrialists but it rejected communism solutions as a deception. Catholics also believe in hierarchy and divinely instituted authority in roles like parents and clergy. Marriage and the family are not merely arbitrary institutions but ordained by God. The mass collective has no right to tamper with God's design.
Spain in the 1930s was the battleground of the latest iteration of this struggle. When battle raged inside Spain, some coutries chose neutrality. France announced the policy of non intervention and closed its Spanish borders. Meanwhile, the USA banned the export of weapons to Spain. But other countries chose direct involvment. Germany and Italy recognized the nationalist government is legitimate and sent military aid. On top of furthering their geopolitical interests, the war was seen as an opportunity to practise the new art of air warfare. It would be the German aircraft that flew general Franco to the spanish mainland from Morocco. Meanwhile the Soviet Union prepared their own intervention, creating the international brigades. These were volunteer units from around the world who would be deployed to Spain to fight for the republicans. They were heavily advertised as going to fight fascism and could perhaps be described as the original antifa. Around 60 000 were ultimatly sent. The Soviet Union also sent tanks and members of the NKVD secret police to aid the republicans. In exchange the republicans transfered 70% of Spain's gold reserves worth hundreds of millions to the Soviets. This caused critics in the United Kingdom who also declared neutrality. To believe this made republicans the puppets of Stalin. Around this time, "Lord of the ring" writer John Tolkien was one of many to throw moral support behind the nationalists. All of this shows us one major factor in winning a civil war : getting international aid. The aid given to the nationalists by Germany and Italy proved more decisive than the aid given to the republicans by the Soviets. The German and Italian air attacks in particular proved devastating to the republican forces. Ultimatly for the republicans, the combination of being seen as the puppets of the Soviets and enemies of religion crippled their reputation and made it much harder to get international support.
However, winning a civil war comes down to more than just international support. Another factor is unifying the factions on your side. The nationalist faction was ideologically diverse. While marxist ideologies developed around the concept of class struggle other ideologies were developping around class collaboration. One of these factions was The Falange Española, the Spanish Falange, a new movement on the Spanish right. Founded by Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. Its aim was united Spain that would embark on a campaign of national rejuvenation. This was to be achieved through dictatorship and major economic overhaul. It was not conservatice but revolutionary, a bit like the fascist movement in Italy. The Falanges manifesto the 27 points laid their primary aims. They sought a one party state, an economy based on national syndicalism and nationalization of the financial system with usury being banned. Antonio Primo de Riveira declared the essence of what Falangism sought do : " Spain has fallen on hard times due to a threefold division. " " Division engendered by local separatism, division engendered between political parties, division engendered by class struggle. " " When Spain finds a common which overcomes all of these differences, Spain will be great like in its heyday. " Falange ideology was more innovative than any of the other Spanish movements on the Spanish right. it was different from even Franco's worldview who was more of a traditionalist and justified the rebellion primarily as a way to bring law and order back to Spain. The Falange was banned months before the war by the Popular Front government but it saw its ranks massively fell after the war started. It went from a meager few thousands, about 7 000, into over 150 000 in the end who fought for the nationalist cause. Unfortunatly for the movement most of its leaders were executed by the republicans within weeks of the civil war beginning.
Post.
These killings backfired as Primo de Rivera became a martyr and icon to Spanish nationalists. Another faction that joined the nationalists were the carlists, a hardline Catholic monarchist faction. They already had been fighting the liberalization of Spain for over 100 years so fighting republicanism and communism was just another day for them. They favored another royal line within the House of Bourbons and they dreamed of Spain returning to absolute monarchy. Besides these ideological factions, the nationalists were also composed of military officers, church officials, spanish business class. As time went, more and more joined simply because they were anti communist, It fell on Franco to unite these diverse forces into a cohesive unit. He began by merging the Falanges and the Carlists into a single movement : the Falange Espanola Traditionalista. This was done despite major philosophical differences between the 2 groups. Franco also appointed himself as the new party leader. From there the nationalists adopted the state : " One state, one country, one chief." Franco himself didn't have a revolutionary ideology. He was more of a standard monarchist. As time went on he basically became a pragmatist. His goals above all else were to end communist and masonic influence in Spain, protect the Catholic Church and revive Spain on the world stage. The nationalist side's ability to keep the distinct groups within its coalition from infighting would prove a key factor to its success. But while the nationalists found ways to achieve unity among their groups, the republican side struggled. From the outset of the war, they sufferred several schisms. The communists, anarchists and liberals were frequently at each other's throats. As soon as the Soviet Union got involved, it tasked the central leadership of the republic with wiping out those in their ranks who preferred Leon Trotsky, the arch rival of Stalin.
Shortly into the war, the leadership of the workers party of marxist unification pro Trotsky communists were arrested and tortured to death by republican authorities. But it by no means stopped there. Trade unions and anarchists launched their own revolts in Catalonia that fought both sides. Revolutionary Catalonia as it came to be known is a source of admiration of many leftist groups today. This is in spite of the fact that it cost the republican side greatly and was eventually crushed. All of this inner conflict and sabotage would cripple republican efforts for the rest of the civil war. In the first months of the war in 1936, the nationalists struck hard and fast they began by liberating cities where the military garrisons had joined their side. The most famous of these came in Toledo in south of Madrid where the pro nationalist garrison took refuge in the ancient Alcazar fortress. A fierce siege ensured for months and republican troops couldn't dislodge the garrison. Franco eventually arrived, lifted the siege and scored a major propaganda victory for the nationalist cause. Franco could now credibly style himself as the savior of Spain and the heroic effort by the garrison set the standard for the nationalist troops around the country. But it wouldn't be as easy in other cities. In Madrid, the military garrison was massacred by the republican militias. By the time the nationalists arrived to try to take the city, they were stopped by a massive republican force bolstered by the international brigades. Instead of a speedy capture of the city, Franco had to settle for a lenghty siege. While troops set up their positions, he turned his focus on capturing the other republican held regions in Spain. In 1937, the nationalists launched a northern campaign that saw them swiftly capture the republican aligned Basque region. The region was important due to its rich industry and minerals. The capture of the Basque capital Bilbao effectively ended the war in the north.
This campaign saw the sloppy bombing of Guernica by German and Italian aircrafts which led to the death of hundreds of civilians. Historians despute how intentional these deaths were as aerial bombing was still a very new method of warfare and there was heavy fog on the day of the bombing. Regardless of these factors, the aircraft did aid in a quick nationalist victory. By this time, throughout Spain, it was clear that the republicans were on the back foot and were losing city after city. The republicans decided they had to reseize the initiative. To do this they launched an attack on the Aragon front to break a salient created by the nationalists. This resulted in the 3 months long battle of Teruel. After intense fighting with over 150 000 combatants involved, the republicans were able to take the town but this victory was short lived. Nationalist reinforcements led by Franco eventually arrived and retook the town. This battle proved extremely costly for the republicans as on top of its failure, they lost many of their best troops and equipments. Franco would waste no time and 1 month later, reached the Spanish coast, cutting off Catalonia and threatening Valencia. Republican territory was now split in 2 and they would have to resort to increasingly desperate tactics to turn the tide. As the war raged on, the Catholic Church would receive justice against those who persecuted it. The conflict was taking the character of a crusade against all godless forces in Spain. The archbishop of Zaragoza declared the war was for the benefit of order, the Fatherland and religion. The bishop of Pamplona denounced the republicans as enemies of God and Spain. The war was no longer just about a system of government. It became a spiritual and civilizational struggle. Many bishops declared the nationalists as having met Saint Augustin's requirements for just war. The republic and communism were condemned as an earthly city of those without God.
In a Catholic majority country, these moral condemnations had a lot of weight and they increased the nationalist's determination. In summer of 1938, republicans tried to reconnect their territory and gathered their largest army yet. They attacked the nationalist forces along the Ebro river hoping to break and surround them. Unfortunatly for the republican side, they lacked air support, armor, heavy artillery and had to make a dangerous river crossing. The nationalists, knowing that victoy here leant breaking the back of the republican army, dug in and engaged in a battle of attrition. After 5 months of battle, the republican side suffered egregious losses and were driven back. Estimates put republican losses as between + 15 000 to 30 000 deads for only 6 000 for the nationalists. This outcome opened the way for the nationalists to take Catalonia and its most important city Barcelona. The war by now had all but been decided in favor of the nationalists. All that was left was cleaning up the pockets of republican resistance. By this time, the international brigades were all wthdrawing from the country. The famous British writer George Orwell was among the volunteers who left. While strongly against the nationalist cause, over the course of the war, he became dismayed at the dysfunction and backstabbing in the republican leadership. When he first came to Spain, he naively believed he would find a virtuous anti fascist movement. This turned out to be merely a fantasy constructed by the international press. When he departed from the coutry, he lamented how the so called progress he imagined for Spain never materialized. Barcelona, already weaked by the infighting between the republican government and the anarchist trade unions fell in January 1939. The city was in such poor shape that many welcomed the nationalists as liebrators. Only Madrid and a few other strongholds remain loyal to the republican. In February, both France and the UK recognized Franco's government.
Knowing he won the war, Franco slowed down and wanted to break the will of his opponents. During the final siege of Madrid, Franco stated he would rather completly destroy the city rather than completly leave it to the marxists. The city was finally captured on March 28th, 1939. Franco declared victory on April 1st 1939. Mass arrests and tribunals of those who supported the republican side followed. Some marxists were even studied by Franco's psychiatrists to see what mental traits made them become marxists. The research determined that marxism tended to attract people who were psychologically and morally degenerate. Former president of the republic Manuel Azaña fled to France and died a year later in 1940. For the first time in what seemed like forever, Spain was at peace. Spain was a battered nation. Over 500 000 people died, economic recovery would take years. Under the new new nationalist government created by Franco, political parties, freemasons, communists and similar groups were banned, voting restricted and limited to rare circumstances. Catholicism was once again made the state religion and clergy were given back many roles in Spanish society. Franco would rule Spain as its ruler for over 3 decades, between 1939 and 1975. By then, Spain had reemerged as a stable and prosperous nation. Franco's legacy as a leader remains controversial. To some, the Second Spanish Republic failed to provide the most basic duties of a state. It had attempted to throw major parts of Spanish culture in the trash can. Its politics had also turned the people against each other in vicious nad homicidal ways. By contrast, the new Spanish government pursued Falange ideals of national unity. Still Franco's government couldn't be called a full fledged Falange state. This is because many of the anti capitalist and fascist like goals of the original Falange were watered down. Some point to this as the main reason why Spain became a republic again after Franco's death.
These killings backfired as Primo de Rivera became a martyr and icon to Spanish nationalists. Another faction that joined the nationalists were the carlists, a hardline Catholic monarchist faction. They already had been fighting the liberalization of Spain for over 100 years so fighting republicanism and communism was just another day for them. They favored another royal line within the House of Bourbons and they dreamed of Spain returning to absolute monarchy. Besides these ideological factions, the nationalists were also composed of military officers, church officials, spanish business class. As time went, more and more joined simply because they were anti communist, It fell on Franco to unite these diverse forces into a cohesive unit. He began by merging the Falanges and the Carlists into a single movement : the Falange Espanola Traditionalista. This was done despite major philosophical differences between the 2 groups. Franco also appointed himself as the new party leader. From there the nationalists adopted the state : " One state, one country, one chief." Franco himself didn't have a revolutionary ideology. He was more of a standard monarchist. As time went on he basically became a pragmatist. His goals above all else were to end communist and masonic influence in Spain, protect the Catholic Church and revive Spain on the world stage. The nationalist side's ability to keep the distinct groups within its coalition from infighting would prove a key factor to its success. But while the nationalists found ways to achieve unity among their groups, the republican side struggled. From the outset of the war, they sufferred several schisms. The communists, anarchists and liberals were frequently at each other's throats. As soon as the Soviet Union got involved, it tasked the central leadership of the republic with wiping out those in their ranks who preferred Leon Trotsky, the arch rival of Stalin.
Shortly into the war, the leadership of the workers party of marxist unification pro Trotsky communists were arrested and tortured to death by republican authorities. But it by no means stopped there. Trade unions and anarchists launched their own revolts in Catalonia that fought both sides. Revolutionary Catalonia as it came to be known is a source of admiration of many leftist groups today. This is in spite of the fact that it cost the republican side greatly and was eventually crushed. All of this inner conflict and sabotage would cripple republican efforts for the rest of the civil war. In the first months of the war in 1936, the nationalists struck hard and fast they began by liberating cities where the military garrisons had joined their side. The most famous of these came in Toledo in south of Madrid where the pro nationalist garrison took refuge in the ancient Alcazar fortress. A fierce siege ensured for months and republican troops couldn't dislodge the garrison. Franco eventually arrived, lifted the siege and scored a major propaganda victory for the nationalist cause. Franco could now credibly style himself as the savior of Spain and the heroic effort by the garrison set the standard for the nationalist troops around the country. But it wouldn't be as easy in other cities. In Madrid, the military garrison was massacred by the republican militias. By the time the nationalists arrived to try to take the city, they were stopped by a massive republican force bolstered by the international brigades. Instead of a speedy capture of the city, Franco had to settle for a lenghty siege. While troops set up their positions, he turned his focus on capturing the other republican held regions in Spain. In 1937, the nationalists launched a northern campaign that saw them swiftly capture the republican aligned Basque region. The region was important due to its rich industry and minerals. The capture of the Basque capital Bilbao effectively ended the war in the north.
This campaign saw the sloppy bombing of Guernica by German and Italian aircrafts which led to the death of hundreds of civilians. Historians despute how intentional these deaths were as aerial bombing was still a very new method of warfare and there was heavy fog on the day of the bombing. Regardless of these factors, the aircraft did aid in a quick nationalist victory. By this time, throughout Spain, it was clear that the republicans were on the back foot and were losing city after city. The republicans decided they had to reseize the initiative. To do this they launched an attack on the Aragon front to break a salient created by the nationalists. This resulted in the 3 months long battle of Teruel. After intense fighting with over 150 000 combatants involved, the republicans were able to take the town but this victory was short lived. Nationalist reinforcements led by Franco eventually arrived and retook the town. This battle proved extremely costly for the republicans as on top of its failure, they lost many of their best troops and equipments. Franco would waste no time and 1 month later, reached the Spanish coast, cutting off Catalonia and threatening Valencia. Republican territory was now split in 2 and they would have to resort to increasingly desperate tactics to turn the tide. As the war raged on, the Catholic Church would receive justice against those who persecuted it. The conflict was taking the character of a crusade against all godless forces in Spain. The archbishop of Zaragoza declared the war was for the benefit of order, the Fatherland and religion. The bishop of Pamplona denounced the republicans as enemies of God and Spain. The war was no longer just about a system of government. It became a spiritual and civilizational struggle. Many bishops declared the nationalists as having met Saint Augustin's requirements for just war. The republic and communism were condemned as an earthly city of those without God.
In a Catholic majority country, these moral condemnations had a lot of weight and they increased the nationalist's determination. In summer of 1938, republicans tried to reconnect their territory and gathered their largest army yet. They attacked the nationalist forces along the Ebro river hoping to break and surround them. Unfortunatly for the republican side, they lacked air support, armor, heavy artillery and had to make a dangerous river crossing. The nationalists, knowing that victoy here leant breaking the back of the republican army, dug in and engaged in a battle of attrition. After 5 months of battle, the republican side suffered egregious losses and were driven back. Estimates put republican losses as between + 15 000 to 30 000 deads for only 6 000 for the nationalists. This outcome opened the way for the nationalists to take Catalonia and its most important city Barcelona. The war by now had all but been decided in favor of the nationalists. All that was left was cleaning up the pockets of republican resistance. By this time, the international brigades were all wthdrawing from the country. The famous British writer George Orwell was among the volunteers who left. While strongly against the nationalist cause, over the course of the war, he became dismayed at the dysfunction and backstabbing in the republican leadership. When he first came to Spain, he naively believed he would find a virtuous anti fascist movement. This turned out to be merely a fantasy constructed by the international press. When he departed from the coutry, he lamented how the so called progress he imagined for Spain never materialized. Barcelona, already weaked by the infighting between the republican government and the anarchist trade unions fell in January 1939. The city was in such poor shape that many welcomed the nationalists as liebrators. Only Madrid and a few other strongholds remain loyal to the republican. In February, both France and the UK recognized Franco's government.
Knowing he won the war, Franco slowed down and wanted to break the will of his opponents. During the final siege of Madrid, Franco stated he would rather completly destroy the city rather than completly leave it to the marxists. The city was finally captured on March 28th, 1939. Franco declared victory on April 1st 1939. Mass arrests and tribunals of those who supported the republican side followed. Some marxists were even studied by Franco's psychiatrists to see what mental traits made them become marxists. The research determined that marxism tended to attract people who were psychologically and morally degenerate. Former president of the republic Manuel Azaña fled to France and died a year later in 1940. For the first time in what seemed like forever, Spain was at peace. Spain was a battered nation. Over 500 000 people died, economic recovery would take years. Under the new new nationalist government created by Franco, political parties, freemasons, communists and similar groups were banned, voting restricted and limited to rare circumstances. Catholicism was once again made the state religion and clergy were given back many roles in Spanish society. Franco would rule Spain as its ruler for over 3 decades, between 1939 and 1975. By then, Spain had reemerged as a stable and prosperous nation. Franco's legacy as a leader remains controversial. To some, the Second Spanish Republic failed to provide the most basic duties of a state. It had attempted to throw major parts of Spanish culture in the trash can. Its politics had also turned the people against each other in vicious nad homicidal ways. By contrast, the new Spanish government pursued Falange ideals of national unity. Still Franco's government couldn't be called a full fledged Falange state. This is because many of the anti capitalist and fascist like goals of the original Falange were watered down. Some point to this as the main reason why Spain became a republic again after Franco's death.
Post.
How Liberalism Corrupts Christianity
In USA and Europe in the 2020s, things are happening in Christianity that were unheard for over 2 000 years. Christian denominations teach Christian denominations teach nowadays that sexual morality doesn't exist, that there is no difference between men and women, that all religions are equally valid. One major cause is influence of liberalism on Christianity. Both democrat and Republican parties are liberal. They both believe and support the political philosophy of liberalism. With liberal democracies from France to USA experiencing a period of rapid decline. Christian thinkers actually predicted liberalism's flaws. Liberalism emerged in Western Europe as political movement seeing to put what they saw as enlightenment principles into government. Liberalism defines itself as individualistic, anti authoritarian and focused on natural rights. Christianity as a religion of collective responsabilities traditionalistic values and some authoritarian rules was treated by liberalism with suspicion. In principle political real and religious can work in harmony. Liberalism is heavily associated with principles of 1789 from french revolution : the abolition of any political authority derived from God. It's a trait of not just french liberalism but all liberalism which supports religious agnosticism of the state, meaning no religion takes priority over any other, at least on paper, considering how the US for example lack separation between the synagogue and the state. A lot of things liberals believe almost sounds Christian : human rights, protecting freedom, justice for all. But the devil is in the details. But both Christianity and liberalism have different definitions and foundations. While Christians believe in a divine basis of morality that guides theri view of rights and freedom, liberals do not. Liberalism natural rights simply exist and have nothing to do with God.
Christians believe society should be based on families while liberalism believes it should be based on minority groups and individuals.
Abortion Rebuttal: DEBUNKING Pro-Abortion Propaganda from AsapSCIENCE
AsapScience who has 10 million suscribers is hosted by 2 openly homosexual men : Mitchell Moffet and Gregory Brown from Canada. The channel has been promoted by CBS News and Bill Bye. The vide begins with attempting to portray itself as neutral source or uninvolved observer. But the video is essentially pro choice talking points. The video description is more direct :
They say 90% of US legal abortions take place within the 13 first weeks of gestation. It's true but they try to downplay the number of abortions taking place after. Because general public is against abortion taking place after the first trimester. 
How Liberalism Corrupts Christianity
In USA and Europe in the 2020s, things are happening in Christianity that were unheard for over 2 000 years. Christian denominations teach Christian denominations teach nowadays that sexual morality doesn't exist, that there is no difference between men and women, that all religions are equally valid. One major cause is influence of liberalism on Christianity. Both democrat and Republican parties are liberal. They both believe and support the political philosophy of liberalism. With liberal democracies from France to USA experiencing a period of rapid decline. Christian thinkers actually predicted liberalism's flaws. Liberalism emerged in Western Europe as political movement seeing to put what they saw as enlightenment principles into government. Liberalism defines itself as individualistic, anti authoritarian and focused on natural rights. Christianity as a religion of collective responsabilities traditionalistic values and some authoritarian rules was treated by liberalism with suspicion. In principle political real and religious can work in harmony. Liberalism is heavily associated with principles of 1789 from french revolution : the abolition of any political authority derived from God. It's a trait of not just french liberalism but all liberalism which supports religious agnosticism of the state, meaning no religion takes priority over any other, at least on paper, considering how the US for example lack separation between the synagogue and the state. A lot of things liberals believe almost sounds Christian : human rights, protecting freedom, justice for all. But the devil is in the details. But both Christianity and liberalism have different definitions and foundations. While Christians believe in a divine basis of morality that guides theri view of rights and freedom, liberals do not. Liberalism natural rights simply exist and have nothing to do with God.
Christians believe society should be based on families while liberalism believes it should be based on minority groups and individuals.
Abortion Rebuttal: DEBUNKING Pro-Abortion Propaganda from AsapSCIENCE
AsapScience who has 10 million suscribers is hosted by 2 openly homosexual men : Mitchell Moffet and Gregory Brown from Canada. The channel has been promoted by CBS News and Bill Bye. The vide begins with attempting to portray itself as neutral source or uninvolved observer. But the video is essentially pro choice talking points. The video description is more direct :
Post.
Should Christians Support Israel?
Israel crossed the red line of moral standards way too many times. Whever it's shooting childrens in the head, blowing up churches and hospitals, killing United Nations aid workers.
We are talking abotu ethnic cleansing funded with tax dollars and weapons of majority christian countries. To know if Christians across the US and Europe should support Israel let' go through some things to notice. First the difference between christianity and judaism. Christianity believes in Jesus and the Gospels while Judaism rejects them. Judaism also rejects the entire New Testament, all the Christian saints, all the Christian holidays and the Christian moral system. Judaism follows the Talmud while Christianity does not. 
Most Jews today identify as secular meaning they don't believe in any particular religion at all. This differ in belief has tangible real world impact.
A majority of Jews hold beliefs today that are against the teachings of the Bible.
Surveys found that American Jews support gay marriage and abortion with a large majority. Some may say that Jews believing this aren't real Jews. But then where are the real Jews? The majority are this way. Ironically most of these Jews also identify as zionists. They support nationalism for themselves but oppose it for everyone else. If we compare, the majority of Christians are much more conservative on all cultural issues in term of sexual morality. There is no comparison. It's the official teachings of denominations like the Catholic Church that sex is for one man and one woman in marriage. Only a tiny minority of Jews support this view. There is a massive rift between Christian and Jewish values in not only religion but culture itself. This alone is a serious reason for Christians to question Israel. From a Christian perspective, Zionist claims to the holy land are offensive and absurd like Pope Pius X recognize any validity whatsoever to the zionist movement. Despite these extreme differences in religious and cultural values, there are still Christians supporting Israel 
Note that this number is shrinking especially amoung the youth. Nevertheless there are still allowed self avowed Christians in powerful positions who fanatically support Israel. Such people are generally known as Christian zionists. Like John Hagee. So called Christian outlets like Christian broadcasting news and the Baabylon Bee regularly push zionist propaganda. Even in the White House you can see some Christian zionists in good positions.
As a result we see some people blaming Christians for what Israel does. But these Christian zionists are not devout believers motivated by faith. They are mostly motivated by money and personal gain. Firstly the idea that Christian zionists have any actual control over America is easily proven wrong. If Christian zionists controlled America's policies towards Israel, why don't they get what they want on any other issues? When it comes to abortion, pornography, LGBT and other issues that most Christians are against, these things all remain legal and even celebrated in some Western countries like the US. Evangelical Christians are clearly not running the American government. People only say this to avoid confronting the real power structure. This power structure is groups like AIPAC, ADL, and other zionist lobbying groups. who make or break political races for the most important offices in America. Early in 2024 Democrat, congresswomen Cori Bush was ousted from her seat due to zionist packs like United Democraty Project spending over 8 million dollars against her.
This United Democraty Project sounds innocent at first but until you realize it's an arm of the American Israeli public affairs committee. Another exeample of that was the primary of anti Israel democrat Jamal Bowman where AIPAC spent 15 million dollars to put him away. 
Their spending was so high the primary became one of the most expensive in America history. For all the talk of foreign interference in elections these days, Israel always seems to get a pass.
It's not only Democrats because zionists have similar control over Republican elections. Republican representative Thomas Massie reported that every GOP member of Congress has an AIPAC person who dictates how they should vote. In many Republican states like Florida and South Dakota, Republican politicians pass laws against anti Israel speech and boycotts
In these states they want to make it illegal to boycott Israel but not America. It tells you where their loyalty lies. John Mearsheimer wrote an entire book alongside Stephen Walt called " The Israel lobby ", detailing how zionist money has a strangle hold over America and by proxy, America's allies. 
Most of the Christian zionists aren't motivated by Christianity. They are just puppets following the power structure of America. Their religion is merely an excuse to try to blend in with conservative Americans. Another thing to consider is that Israel's wars aren't just motivated by religion. The argument saying that Israel are fighting muslims so they must be good guys is non sense. First of all the Middle East isn't just full of Muslims but also people of other faiths, including many Christians. 
Some Christian groups in the Middle East sided against Israel. While Bachar Al Assad in Syria protected Christians from persecution, Israel worked hand in glove with Islamic extremists AL Qaida fighters who are known for beheading Christians. 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-221329.png
It's not about Judaism versus Islam. Israel will work with any insane Islamic group as long as they don't get in the way of zionism. Obama ordered the CIA to overthrow Assad. So that started in 2011. Because Israel has run American foreign policy in the Middle East for over 3 decades at least. Israel's actions are motivated by ethnicity as they are by religion. Zionism wants toe holy land for Jews as a race not just for Judaism as a religion. Israel's wars are nothing short of race wars. Their history is trying to take over chunks of the Middle East and expel the existing population. To put it simply, Christians have no obligation to support Israel in violent race wars against all of its neighbors. Another undiscussed fact is that Israel is behind much of the Islamic immigration into the West today. Half of the reasons Muslim immigrants are even in Europe or America in the first place is because of Israel's wars. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222030.png It was the US and Israel who destroyed the governments of Libya, Irak and Syria, leading to the Syrian refugee crisis. So supporting Israel means supporting mass immigration. Also even if you don't like Islam, that doesn't justify bombing them in their own countries and killing childrens. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-221959.png That brings us to the final point. The way Israel conducts warfare is immoral regardless of what religion you follow. When a coutry deliberatly targets children civilians, journalists and aid workers as a matter of official military doctrine, all things Israel does are wrong. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222209.png When a country bombs churches, hospitals and daycares while laughing about it, that's wrong.
When soldiers engage in rapes and their government defends them and refuses to punish them, that's wrong. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222253.png Israel chooses to do all of this. They are running out of international laws to break. I didn't see any other army killing women and then steal their underwear to wear them. Guess what? Israel's army does that. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222506.png How many armies masturbate to the sight of a destroyed city? https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222515.png There is a reason why almost every country in the world at the United Nations besides America votes for resolutions against Israel. It's legally and morally a rogue state. Despite everything he has done, Netanyahu still still has the support of the vast majority of Israeli people. https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222704.png
Should Christians Support Israel?
Israel crossed the red line of moral standards way too many times. Whever it's shooting childrens in the head, blowing up churches and hospitals, killing United Nations aid workers.
A majority of Jews hold beliefs today that are against the teachings of the Bible.
As a result we see some people blaming Christians for what Israel does. But these Christian zionists are not devout believers motivated by faith. They are mostly motivated by money and personal gain. Firstly the idea that Christian zionists have any actual control over America is easily proven wrong. If Christian zionists controlled America's policies towards Israel, why don't they get what they want on any other issues? When it comes to abortion, pornography, LGBT and other issues that most Christians are against, these things all remain legal and even celebrated in some Western countries like the US. Evangelical Christians are clearly not running the American government. People only say this to avoid confronting the real power structure. This power structure is groups like AIPAC, ADL, and other zionist lobbying groups. who make or break political races for the most important offices in America. Early in 2024 Democrat, congresswomen Cori Bush was ousted from her seat due to zionist packs like United Democraty Project spending over 8 million dollars against her.
It's not only Democrats because zionists have similar control over Republican elections. Republican representative Thomas Massie reported that every GOP member of Congress has an AIPAC person who dictates how they should vote. In many Republican states like Florida and South Dakota, Republican politicians pass laws against anti Israel speech and boycotts
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-221329.pngIt's not about Judaism versus Islam. Israel will work with any insane Islamic group as long as they don't get in the way of zionism. Obama ordered the CIA to overthrow Assad. So that started in 2011. Because Israel has run American foreign policy in the Middle East for over 3 decades at least. Israel's actions are motivated by ethnicity as they are by religion. Zionism wants toe holy land for Jews as a race not just for Judaism as a religion. Israel's wars are nothing short of race wars. Their history is trying to take over chunks of the Middle East and expel the existing population. To put it simply, Christians have no obligation to support Israel in violent race wars against all of its neighbors. Another undiscussed fact is that Israel is behind much of the Islamic immigration into the West today. Half of the reasons Muslim immigrants are even in Europe or America in the first place is because of Israel's wars.
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222030.png It was the US and Israel who destroyed the governments of Libya, Irak and Syria, leading to the Syrian refugee crisis. So supporting Israel means supporting mass immigration. Also even if you don't like Islam, that doesn't justify bombing them in their own countries and killing childrens. 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-221959.png That brings us to the final point. The way Israel conducts warfare is immoral regardless of what religion you follow. When a coutry deliberatly targets children civilians, journalists and aid workers as a matter of official military doctrine, all things Israel does are wrong. 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222209.png When a country bombs churches, hospitals and daycares while laughing about it, that's wrong.When soldiers engage in rapes and their government defends them and refuses to punish them, that's wrong.
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222253.png Israel chooses to do all of this. They are running out of international laws to break. I didn't see any other army killing women and then steal their underwear to wear them. Guess what? Israel's army does that. 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222506.png How many armies masturbate to the sight of a destroyed city? 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222515.png There is a reason why almost every country in the world at the United Nations besides America votes for resolutions against Israel. It's legally and morally a rogue state. Despite everything he has done, Netanyahu still still has the support of the vast majority of Israeli people. 
https://image.noelshack.c[...]ran-2025-10-20-222704.pngPost.
The Truth About The "Dark Ages"
When it comes to the dark ages, it generally goes like this : between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, everything was horrible, Europe lived in a state of darkness, the church persecuted and killed all scientists, everyone was poor. Then in the 1500s, the Renaissace and Reformation saved Europe from darkness and stupidity. Some versions go even further, believing it wasn't until the political change of the 1700s that the Dark Ages ended. Carl Sagan was one of the best at describing this myth. He referred to this period as " A millenium gap... a poignant lost opportunity for the human species. " in Cosmos. Thing to note is that the use of Dark Ages isn't used by real historians
Countless works by academic sources show why the whole concept is wrong. Yet the idea keeps influencing the popular imagination. It's still common in the USA where there is a tendency to dismiss the European history as backwards or unimportant. Despite the fact that America wouldn't exist without Europe. This myth is also spread online that people that don't really care about facts.
The Middle Ages covered 1 000 years that doesn't fit into one box. Generally historians break the period between 3 parts : Early Middle Ages, high Middle Ages and Late Middle Ages. By the time it officially ceased to exist in 476, the Roman Empire already declined for almost 2 centuries prior to it. The collapse wasn't sudden but slow and gradual. Over the course of decades, the Roman administration had become so corrupt and ineffective that by the end when it finally disappeared, Roman citizens either didn't notice or were glad it was gone. The Eastern Roman Empire continued though never really matched the strenght and the influence of the original Roman Empire. Same things why some people attack the Middle Ages : low life expectancy, high infant mortality, spread of plagues, these things were also true for ancient Rome and Greece. It's hypocritical to attack the Middle Ages for these things while in the same time either not doing the same for ancient Rome and Greece, or actually glorifying them. With the passing of the Roman Empire came new kingdoms who rose upon the ashes across Europe. THe most influencial ones were ruled by Germanic people such as the Goths and the Franks. This began in the early Middle Ages which lasted from 476 until roughly the 900s so the 10th century. In this period, the dark ages narrative has a kernel of truth. For many years before and after the end of Western Rome, its territories had fallen into poverty and disnunityitiy. Knowledge on how to maintain the Roman law and infrastructure was lost. For centuries, Pagans, Vikings and Arab invasions brought the former Roman world to its knees. The Mediterranean sea suffered heavily from piracy that made trade very difficult. Plagues ravaged not only Europe but the entire world hindering development. Nevertheless, even in this time of darkness, there were beacons of light. Europeans weren't just sitting around waiting to die off.
They were constantly at work trying to improve and develop their societies. Trade and economic growth gradually improved due to the rebuilding of infrastructure and the improvement of banking. In the 9th century, Europe experienced an economic boom. It helped that many Vikings realized they could live better lives by trading than pillaging. Rest of Europe's economy also began to grow. New financial instruments were developed that allowed investors to fund trade expeditions that crisscrossed Europe by land and sea. Regular markets became held in public forums. Large towns might have a daily market which moved around different parts of the city depending on the time of the day. These markets offered people specific goods like meat, fish or bread. While the cost of long distance transportation remained high, people weren't simply starving in the streets like some narratives suggest. Then there was the Church and we can't understand the Middle Ages without understanding the role that monasteries played in the development of society. The Church gradually rose in power and influence throughout the early Middle Ages. This culminated in the pope officially getting his own state in 756, becoming know as the Papal states. Under this government, the Pope directly controlled Rome and its surrounding territories. With this position of power, papacy could now exert great influence on the entire European Church. Far from repressing knowledge, they got hard at work preserving and spreading it. Monasteries networks developed across the continent where devout men fathered to study, interpret and spread works of Christian knowledge. People came to these monasteries to live Christian lives of work, self sacrifice and strict religious observance. Monasteries served many valuable functions. Their primary goal was religious. They were a place for the most devoted Christians to come and live a life of dedication to God.
Many monks took vow of poverty and spent time doing missionary activities The rule of Saint Benedict, one of the early codes for monastic life, charged followers with reading holy writings every day. Monks worked with biblical texts and developed religious stories and biographies. These monks along with priests and nuns educated Christians across Europe in the principles of the faith. Saint Bernard de Clairvaux later wrote : " There are those who seek knowledge for the seek of knowledge; that is curiosity. There are those who seek knowledge to be known by others; that is vanity. There are those who seek knowledge in order to serve; that is love. " Monasteries also provided valuable assets to the surrounding community. Science and mathematic were studied there. The knowledge of the Greeks and Romans was preserved and promoted. New students learned grammar, rhetoric, logic. When they mastered these, it was common to move on to arithmetic, geometry and astronomy. Books were prized as treasures. If a monastic community came under attackn monks would take manuscripts into hiding in the forest or other remote areas until danger passed. Monastic education eventually expanded to layman and this would develop into the medieval university system. This historian Melissa Snell wrote that :" Modern scholars will forever be in the debt of the monastics. " Many modern academics now don't recognize this debt unfortunatly. Clerical brothers and sisters also serve the community by growing gain, raising livestocks and producing wine. It was common for towns and cities to grow around a monastery. In times of scarcity as the early Middle Ages was, those who were willing to live on little for the benefit of others were an immense good. It thus shouldn't be a surprise at all that Catholicism rapidly spread through Europe, eventually becoming the dominant religion. Monks and priests led by example and were respected for it.
The high Middle Ages began around the 900s so 10th century and ended around the 1300s so the 14th century. This is where the dark ages myth becomes really absurd. Europe was surging ahead in economic development, science and political as well as religious unity. The journalist Feb Falk in " The light ages " wrote : " Recent research has exploded almost every myth about the scientific stagnation of the Middle Ages. Historians have shown it to be a period of impressive innovation and ingenuisity. " It's true that during this period, many medieval problems like disease outbreaks remained but these things weren't unique to Europe. The entire globe suffered from plagues. So when people criticize the standards of living in the Middle Ages, one must always asks : " Compared to what? " The high middle ages saw the rise of italian citystates and north Germany as major economic hubs. Venice, Genoa and Pisa emerged as some of the most important cities of the period. The Italian navies at last fought back against piracy and reestablish some semblance of order in the Mediterranean. At the same time the Holy Roman Empire, England and France emerged as important kingdoms. Domestic manufacturing of goods grew. Germans at this time became experts at mining. They exported iron, copper, tin to the rest of Europe. Other Europeans states exported goods like linen, cotton, wool, salt. Silk and porcelain from China, gold from Japan, ivory from Africa, all became highly in demand goods. Traveling trade fairs became popular and gave people greater access to goods than they would usually find in their local market. Fairs boomed in Western Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries. The development of ccurrency and loans further boosted economic development. Investors could now have a stake in the international economy. Guilds were also establishe across Europe that kept up the standards of manufacturing professions.
The Truth About The "Dark Ages"
When it comes to the dark ages, it generally goes like this : between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, everything was horrible, Europe lived in a state of darkness, the church persecuted and killed all scientists, everyone was poor. Then in the 1500s, the Renaissace and Reformation saved Europe from darkness and stupidity. Some versions go even further, believing it wasn't until the political change of the 1700s that the Dark Ages ended. Carl Sagan was one of the best at describing this myth. He referred to this period as " A millenium gap... a poignant lost opportunity for the human species. " in Cosmos. Thing to note is that the use of Dark Ages isn't used by real historians
The Middle Ages covered 1 000 years that doesn't fit into one box. Generally historians break the period between 3 parts : Early Middle Ages, high Middle Ages and Late Middle Ages. By the time it officially ceased to exist in 476, the Roman Empire already declined for almost 2 centuries prior to it. The collapse wasn't sudden but slow and gradual. Over the course of decades, the Roman administration had become so corrupt and ineffective that by the end when it finally disappeared, Roman citizens either didn't notice or were glad it was gone. The Eastern Roman Empire continued though never really matched the strenght and the influence of the original Roman Empire. Same things why some people attack the Middle Ages : low life expectancy, high infant mortality, spread of plagues, these things were also true for ancient Rome and Greece. It's hypocritical to attack the Middle Ages for these things while in the same time either not doing the same for ancient Rome and Greece, or actually glorifying them. With the passing of the Roman Empire came new kingdoms who rose upon the ashes across Europe. THe most influencial ones were ruled by Germanic people such as the Goths and the Franks. This began in the early Middle Ages which lasted from 476 until roughly the 900s so the 10th century. In this period, the dark ages narrative has a kernel of truth. For many years before and after the end of Western Rome, its territories had fallen into poverty and disnunityitiy. Knowledge on how to maintain the Roman law and infrastructure was lost. For centuries, Pagans, Vikings and Arab invasions brought the former Roman world to its knees. The Mediterranean sea suffered heavily from piracy that made trade very difficult. Plagues ravaged not only Europe but the entire world hindering development. Nevertheless, even in this time of darkness, there were beacons of light. Europeans weren't just sitting around waiting to die off.
They were constantly at work trying to improve and develop their societies. Trade and economic growth gradually improved due to the rebuilding of infrastructure and the improvement of banking. In the 9th century, Europe experienced an economic boom. It helped that many Vikings realized they could live better lives by trading than pillaging. Rest of Europe's economy also began to grow. New financial instruments were developed that allowed investors to fund trade expeditions that crisscrossed Europe by land and sea. Regular markets became held in public forums. Large towns might have a daily market which moved around different parts of the city depending on the time of the day. These markets offered people specific goods like meat, fish or bread. While the cost of long distance transportation remained high, people weren't simply starving in the streets like some narratives suggest. Then there was the Church and we can't understand the Middle Ages without understanding the role that monasteries played in the development of society. The Church gradually rose in power and influence throughout the early Middle Ages. This culminated in the pope officially getting his own state in 756, becoming know as the Papal states. Under this government, the Pope directly controlled Rome and its surrounding territories. With this position of power, papacy could now exert great influence on the entire European Church. Far from repressing knowledge, they got hard at work preserving and spreading it. Monasteries networks developed across the continent where devout men fathered to study, interpret and spread works of Christian knowledge. People came to these monasteries to live Christian lives of work, self sacrifice and strict religious observance. Monasteries served many valuable functions. Their primary goal was religious. They were a place for the most devoted Christians to come and live a life of dedication to God.
Many monks took vow of poverty and spent time doing missionary activities The rule of Saint Benedict, one of the early codes for monastic life, charged followers with reading holy writings every day. Monks worked with biblical texts and developed religious stories and biographies. These monks along with priests and nuns educated Christians across Europe in the principles of the faith. Saint Bernard de Clairvaux later wrote : " There are those who seek knowledge for the seek of knowledge; that is curiosity. There are those who seek knowledge to be known by others; that is vanity. There are those who seek knowledge in order to serve; that is love. " Monasteries also provided valuable assets to the surrounding community. Science and mathematic were studied there. The knowledge of the Greeks and Romans was preserved and promoted. New students learned grammar, rhetoric, logic. When they mastered these, it was common to move on to arithmetic, geometry and astronomy. Books were prized as treasures. If a monastic community came under attackn monks would take manuscripts into hiding in the forest or other remote areas until danger passed. Monastic education eventually expanded to layman and this would develop into the medieval university system. This historian Melissa Snell wrote that :" Modern scholars will forever be in the debt of the monastics. " Many modern academics now don't recognize this debt unfortunatly. Clerical brothers and sisters also serve the community by growing gain, raising livestocks and producing wine. It was common for towns and cities to grow around a monastery. In times of scarcity as the early Middle Ages was, those who were willing to live on little for the benefit of others were an immense good. It thus shouldn't be a surprise at all that Catholicism rapidly spread through Europe, eventually becoming the dominant religion. Monks and priests led by example and were respected for it.
The high Middle Ages began around the 900s so 10th century and ended around the 1300s so the 14th century. This is where the dark ages myth becomes really absurd. Europe was surging ahead in economic development, science and political as well as religious unity. The journalist Feb Falk in " The light ages " wrote : " Recent research has exploded almost every myth about the scientific stagnation of the Middle Ages. Historians have shown it to be a period of impressive innovation and ingenuisity. " It's true that during this period, many medieval problems like disease outbreaks remained but these things weren't unique to Europe. The entire globe suffered from plagues. So when people criticize the standards of living in the Middle Ages, one must always asks : " Compared to what? " The high middle ages saw the rise of italian citystates and north Germany as major economic hubs. Venice, Genoa and Pisa emerged as some of the most important cities of the period. The Italian navies at last fought back against piracy and reestablish some semblance of order in the Mediterranean. At the same time the Holy Roman Empire, England and France emerged as important kingdoms. Domestic manufacturing of goods grew. Germans at this time became experts at mining. They exported iron, copper, tin to the rest of Europe. Other Europeans states exported goods like linen, cotton, wool, salt. Silk and porcelain from China, gold from Japan, ivory from Africa, all became highly in demand goods. Traveling trade fairs became popular and gave people greater access to goods than they would usually find in their local market. Fairs boomed in Western Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries. The development of ccurrency and loans further boosted economic development. Investors could now have a stake in the international economy. Guilds were also establishe across Europe that kept up the standards of manufacturing professions.
Post.
The growth and development of of Europe in the Middle Ages was also aided by scientific advncement. According to the dark ages myth, science stopped in the Middle Ages but it's not true. One place science was clearly felt was the improvement of engineering. Roads, canals and ships were all greatly advanced. As these technologies improved, it cut down transportation time of goods, increased their capacity, and reduced loss. Scientific advancement came in the field of agriculture. Europe experienced an agricultural revolution between 1050 and 1300. Crop yields multiplied by over 3 fold. Things like wheeled plow came into wide use. It made farming easier and more productive. The horse collar also appeared and was one of the most important inventions in history of agriculture. It replaced the old harness system and allowed beasts of of burdens to exert their full strenght when plowing fields. This enabled them to work for longer and to carry heavier loads. Bronze horseshoes became popular and were eventually upgraded to iron. Then there was the development of the windmill who used wind power to grind grain which would then be made into bread. Prior to this, people had to rely on animal labor to grind their grain. Now it could be done with the wind. Hand tools also saw improvements. Better axes made forrest clearance easier and faster. The scythe was used to mow and reap crops. Before people had lawnmowers, this is what they would do. Medieval agriculture still has weaknesses of course. It was susceptible to bad weather and this could lead to famines if the weather was bad for multiple years straight. However again this was not specifically limited to Europe. The dark ages myth tries to make Europeans look uniquely stupid as if they were unable to do basic things that other societies could do. But in reality, people were doing the best with the tools that were available to them.
Many medieval inventions are taken for granted today but they are very important : eyeglasses and hourglasses are 2 big examples. Look at the development of military technology. At the start of the Middle Ages even elite warriors were lucky to have chain mail, iron swords and wooden shields. By the end of the Middle Ages, the soldiers had access to steel plate armors and tempered steel swords and shields. A medieval knight would destroy a roman centurion due to his superior weapons and armor. By the end of 15th century, even gun cannons, and advanced siege weapons were developed. Feudalism was also criticized but feudalism is a system that adapted the conditions of medieval life The common people needed the protection of nobles who could afford the arms and materials to fight invasions. During the Middle Ages depending on where you lived your village could come under attack at any moment by groups like Mongols, Muslims or even Briggins. The military organization that kings and dukes provided was valuable to everyone. Feudalim didn't develop due to some kind of deliberate repression but due to the material conditions of Europe and the world at the time. Peasants also weren't just pushovers that lived under brutal tyranny. Peasants were though workers who could make their anger felt if they really wanted to. While they obviously have to live more physical demanding lives than a modern person, they weren't worked as slaves either. The average medieval worker had many holidays and feast days where they weren't required to work. There were big celebrations like Easter, Christmas, Epiphany. These didn't last one but multiple days. Christmas holiday in the Middle Ages lasted 12 days. On Saint Feast day, people would get a break from work to attend mass, feast, and make offerings to the saints being honored.
Veneration of saints was a central aspect of Christianity. Their relics were displayed in churches, carried in processions. Altogether these holidays added up to dozens of days per year where people didn't have to work for their lord. Workind hard still remained a necessity. Taking care of your animals and farm was serious business. Negleting your duties could mean famine and starvation in the community. Crime was taken seriously in the Middle Ages. Messing with someone's animals was seen as attempting murder on their entire family. If authorities could get their hands on criminals, punishment was swift and severe. Execution of briggins and murderers was a norm.
.
The growth and development of of Europe in the Middle Ages was also aided by scientific advncement. According to the dark ages myth, science stopped in the Middle Ages but it's not true. One place science was clearly felt was the improvement of engineering. Roads, canals and ships were all greatly advanced. As these technologies improved, it cut down transportation time of goods, increased their capacity, and reduced loss. Scientific advancement came in the field of agriculture. Europe experienced an agricultural revolution between 1050 and 1300. Crop yields multiplied by over 3 fold. Things like wheeled plow came into wide use. It made farming easier and more productive. The horse collar also appeared and was one of the most important inventions in history of agriculture. It replaced the old harness system and allowed beasts of of burdens to exert their full strenght when plowing fields. This enabled them to work for longer and to carry heavier loads. Bronze horseshoes became popular and were eventually upgraded to iron. Then there was the development of the windmill who used wind power to grind grain which would then be made into bread. Prior to this, people had to rely on animal labor to grind their grain. Now it could be done with the wind. Hand tools also saw improvements. Better axes made forrest clearance easier and faster. The scythe was used to mow and reap crops. Before people had lawnmowers, this is what they would do. Medieval agriculture still has weaknesses of course. It was susceptible to bad weather and this could lead to famines if the weather was bad for multiple years straight. However again this was not specifically limited to Europe. The dark ages myth tries to make Europeans look uniquely stupid as if they were unable to do basic things that other societies could do. But in reality, people were doing the best with the tools that were available to them.
Many medieval inventions are taken for granted today but they are very important : eyeglasses and hourglasses are 2 big examples. Look at the development of military technology. At the start of the Middle Ages even elite warriors were lucky to have chain mail, iron swords and wooden shields. By the end of the Middle Ages, the soldiers had access to steel plate armors and tempered steel swords and shields. A medieval knight would destroy a roman centurion due to his superior weapons and armor. By the end of 15th century, even gun cannons, and advanced siege weapons were developed. Feudalism was also criticized but feudalism is a system that adapted the conditions of medieval life The common people needed the protection of nobles who could afford the arms and materials to fight invasions. During the Middle Ages depending on where you lived your village could come under attack at any moment by groups like Mongols, Muslims or even Briggins. The military organization that kings and dukes provided was valuable to everyone. Feudalim didn't develop due to some kind of deliberate repression but due to the material conditions of Europe and the world at the time. Peasants also weren't just pushovers that lived under brutal tyranny. Peasants were though workers who could make their anger felt if they really wanted to. While they obviously have to live more physical demanding lives than a modern person, they weren't worked as slaves either. The average medieval worker had many holidays and feast days where they weren't required to work. There were big celebrations like Easter, Christmas, Epiphany. These didn't last one but multiple days. Christmas holiday in the Middle Ages lasted 12 days. On Saint Feast day, people would get a break from work to attend mass, feast, and make offerings to the saints being honored.
Veneration of saints was a central aspect of Christianity. Their relics were displayed in churches, carried in processions. Altogether these holidays added up to dozens of days per year where people didn't have to work for their lord. Workind hard still remained a necessity. Taking care of your animals and farm was serious business. Negleting your duties could mean famine and starvation in the community. Crime was taken seriously in the Middle Ages. Messing with someone's animals was seen as attempting murder on their entire family. If authorities could get their hands on criminals, punishment was swift and severe. Execution of briggins and murderers was a norm.
.
post
Post.
Why The Inquisition Was Awesome, Actually
Inquisition is organized effort from Christian chuch leaders to purge heresy in their societies. It's often targeted alongside the crusades for those who want to pain Christianity in a bad light. Films, books, even video games films reinforce the same narrative. Some of the instruments device shown didn't exist back then like the gigantic pendulum, the Iron Maiden who are a 18th century myth. In the 1500s during England's transition from Catholic to Protestant, anti Inquisition was used as propaganda to denounce both Catholicism and Spain, England's main rival. In the 1700s and 1800s, similar claims were made by some anti clerical and anti Christians historians like Henry Charles Lea. Many accept the narrative because of lack of knowledge to aorgue otherwise. The word inquisition comes from old french word inquiry or investigation in Christian sense. If you wonder why policing heresy weren't necessary, look at what so called Christian say in the name of God in our current time. Like arguing that God is non binary, that Jesus had 2 dads, that Jesus is gay ( Justin Pearson said that ), some pushing for drag preachers. There were several inquisitions throughout history but inquisition always has been part of the Christian Church. From the beginning the Church had to confront people who presented their beliefs as Christians when what they said or did contradicted the faith passed won from the apostles. Early Church leadership had to combat many heresies. Early accounts in the Bible and Paul's letter shows the young Church correcting those who falsely represented the faith. Church fathers and early theologians wrote extensively against the first heresies their communities faced such as gnosticism. In response of such heresies, the famous book against heresies was written by Saint Irenaeus in 180.
The Church rightfully considered her duty to educate and guide all the baptized. Allowing false Christian teachings to run rampant would have been a death sentence for early Christianity. Without authority and order, no one would have been to define what Christianity even is. Imagine being a Roman citizen and hearing 10 different versions of Christianity. It would make much more confusing and harder to convert in those days. The Church responded to false teachings with denunciation and if persistent, expulsion from the community. Priests and Church leaders found guilty of spreading false doctrine were subject to flogging and imprisonement. These early disorganized inquisitions brought order to what could have been chaos. As Christianity became the faith of Roman Empire and European kingdoms, the faith became understood as the fundamental, unifying principle of culture. Stepping outside the faith was seen as violation of Christian unity and a denial of the correct ordering of the world. The popular community, the clergy and the secular authorities all agreed on these principles. Going into the Middle Ages inquisitions carried on as acclesial investigations, they were investigations and trials conducted by the Church through the local bishop or a member of the religious order. These inquisitions became active in the time of serious widespread heresy that needed to be adressed as the Church became more powerful and tens of millions of people look to it for guidance. New more organized methods of inquisition became necessary. This led to new inquisitional courts judges were inquired to be impeachable reputation, disguised for virtue and wisdom and masters of theology. An inquisitor was thus one of the most educated and respectable people you could find in Europe during the Middle Ages. These courts would revolutionize concepts of due process and evidence gathering that are still used today.
Inquisitions typically involved a judicial process that aimed a confession and conversion. Their goal was to secure a person's repentance for heretical views and stop them from engaging in such acts. If the guilty persisted, he would be turned over to the secular authorities. In other words the Church conducted investigations and trials while punishment was left to the Civil state. The first large organized inquisition came in 1184 in France as a response to the catharist heresy. This was known as the medieval inquisition. Catherism was not some kind of early protestantism or anything like that. It was essentially its own new religion. It blended together gnosticism which claimed to have a secret source of religious knowledge, and manichaeism that belief that worldly matter is evil. The catherist believed in 2 gods : the good God of the New Testament and the evil God of the Old Testament. " Following their belief that the material world is evil, they engaged in ritualistic suicide, rejected procreation, refused to take any oaths. In feudal society this meant they opposed all government authority. Because of this, catherism was both a moral and political danger. The original responded of the Church was persuasion through dialogue but the catherers continued to engage in violent openly rebellious acts and even assassinated a papal diplomat. All of this led to Pope Innocent 3 who has been favourable to peaceful dialogue to call on french leaders to launch a crusade to defeat catherism. Although the war was successfull in breaking catherism's power, it was much more chaotic and deadly than the pope wanted with thousands of innocent people caught in the crossfire. After this the Church decided that inquisitions had to become even more organized and less dependent on secular powers. They had to stop heresy preemptively before it could get out of control. The newly created Franciscan and Dominican orders began to take a leading role in the process.
Why The Inquisition Was Awesome, Actually
Inquisition is organized effort from Christian chuch leaders to purge heresy in their societies. It's often targeted alongside the crusades for those who want to pain Christianity in a bad light. Films, books, even video games films reinforce the same narrative. Some of the instruments device shown didn't exist back then like the gigantic pendulum, the Iron Maiden who are a 18th century myth. In the 1500s during England's transition from Catholic to Protestant, anti Inquisition was used as propaganda to denounce both Catholicism and Spain, England's main rival. In the 1700s and 1800s, similar claims were made by some anti clerical and anti Christians historians like Henry Charles Lea. Many accept the narrative because of lack of knowledge to aorgue otherwise. The word inquisition comes from old french word inquiry or investigation in Christian sense. If you wonder why policing heresy weren't necessary, look at what so called Christian say in the name of God in our current time. Like arguing that God is non binary, that Jesus had 2 dads, that Jesus is gay ( Justin Pearson said that ), some pushing for drag preachers. There were several inquisitions throughout history but inquisition always has been part of the Christian Church. From the beginning the Church had to confront people who presented their beliefs as Christians when what they said or did contradicted the faith passed won from the apostles. Early Church leadership had to combat many heresies. Early accounts in the Bible and Paul's letter shows the young Church correcting those who falsely represented the faith. Church fathers and early theologians wrote extensively against the first heresies their communities faced such as gnosticism. In response of such heresies, the famous book against heresies was written by Saint Irenaeus in 180.
The Church rightfully considered her duty to educate and guide all the baptized. Allowing false Christian teachings to run rampant would have been a death sentence for early Christianity. Without authority and order, no one would have been to define what Christianity even is. Imagine being a Roman citizen and hearing 10 different versions of Christianity. It would make much more confusing and harder to convert in those days. The Church responded to false teachings with denunciation and if persistent, expulsion from the community. Priests and Church leaders found guilty of spreading false doctrine were subject to flogging and imprisonement. These early disorganized inquisitions brought order to what could have been chaos. As Christianity became the faith of Roman Empire and European kingdoms, the faith became understood as the fundamental, unifying principle of culture. Stepping outside the faith was seen as violation of Christian unity and a denial of the correct ordering of the world. The popular community, the clergy and the secular authorities all agreed on these principles. Going into the Middle Ages inquisitions carried on as acclesial investigations, they were investigations and trials conducted by the Church through the local bishop or a member of the religious order. These inquisitions became active in the time of serious widespread heresy that needed to be adressed as the Church became more powerful and tens of millions of people look to it for guidance. New more organized methods of inquisition became necessary. This led to new inquisitional courts judges were inquired to be impeachable reputation, disguised for virtue and wisdom and masters of theology. An inquisitor was thus one of the most educated and respectable people you could find in Europe during the Middle Ages. These courts would revolutionize concepts of due process and evidence gathering that are still used today.
Inquisitions typically involved a judicial process that aimed a confession and conversion. Their goal was to secure a person's repentance for heretical views and stop them from engaging in such acts. If the guilty persisted, he would be turned over to the secular authorities. In other words the Church conducted investigations and trials while punishment was left to the Civil state. The first large organized inquisition came in 1184 in France as a response to the catharist heresy. This was known as the medieval inquisition. Catherism was not some kind of early protestantism or anything like that. It was essentially its own new religion. It blended together gnosticism which claimed to have a secret source of religious knowledge, and manichaeism that belief that worldly matter is evil. The catherist believed in 2 gods : the good God of the New Testament and the evil God of the Old Testament. " Following their belief that the material world is evil, they engaged in ritualistic suicide, rejected procreation, refused to take any oaths. In feudal society this meant they opposed all government authority. Because of this, catherism was both a moral and political danger. The original responded of the Church was persuasion through dialogue but the catherers continued to engage in violent openly rebellious acts and even assassinated a papal diplomat. All of this led to Pope Innocent 3 who has been favourable to peaceful dialogue to call on french leaders to launch a crusade to defeat catherism. Although the war was successfull in breaking catherism's power, it was much more chaotic and deadly than the pope wanted with thousands of innocent people caught in the crossfire. After this the Church decided that inquisitions had to become even more organized and less dependent on secular powers. They had to stop heresy preemptively before it could get out of control. The newly created Franciscan and Dominican orders began to take a leading role in the process.
Post.
How Hentai Destroys Your Mind
Anime is the definition of a medium with big ups and downs. On one hand it can be a beautiful art style that produces brillant shows. Anime can produce many meaningful discussions about and messages. But just as the culture surrounding anime has its highs and its dark lows, Hentai is the darkest of them all. Hentai is a work of anime or manga or any similar medium that contains sexual or pornographic art. While anime and manga actually focus on telling stories, hentai focuses on being sexual material. Yet somehow some people think that hentai doesn't have the same bad effects as porn. It's false. Hentai websites generate tens of millions of views from people across the planet. PornHub, the biggest porn site in the world released a report in 2019 and 2021 that found that hentai was its most researhed category. It started in Japan but in a way it's also not truly Japanese. Before 1945, Japan enforced strict censorshipts law that forbade depiction of the sex acts shown in hentai. japan like much of the world had strict moral values that the population was expected to abide by. Hentai began to emerged after WW2 when liberal governement was imposed by the USA. Regardless of its origins, hentai is no longer exclusively Japanese. It's gone international. Some scientifically effect of hentai porn : high chance of addiction, increased erectile dysfunction, loss of motivation, desensitization to normal sex, dulling of dopamine receptors, higher chance of divorce. Some people say it only affects people viewing it and not broader society but that's wrong. It's broadcast on internet to millions. Japanese sociologist Kimio Ito stufied Hentai's effects for years and found in its researchs that it was causing men to retreat from real life into a world of imagination. Such men were no longer interested in real women or real relationships and were content to spend their days masturbating to fantasies. The affect of this trend on society is catastrophic.
70% of Japanese men aged from 18 to 34 aren't in a relationship and about half of this group have no interest in one. Japanese culture became full of bizarre and freakish sexual things such as public masturbation booths and buying smellable panties from vending machines. The trend in Japan can be extrapolated to the rest of the world. Something that makes hentai potentially even worse than regular porn is that due to being animated and cartoonish, it's especially likely to draw young people. The average age people first see porn online is 11 years old. Any young person could stumble upon hentai because its animation looks like any other cartoon they watched. To make it worse even worse pornographers often use characters from popular kids shows like Pokemon, Dragon Ball Z, even western shows, in extreme porn. Scientific researchs found that almost nothing stunts a young person's sexual development more than using online porn. Some say that their parents simply shouldn't let them watch it. That's true but not all parents take proper care of their kids.As for hentai advocates, they just want more people like them. About hentai let's start with one of its darkest genre : lolicon genre. It's based on the phrase Lolita which is synonym for young prepubescent girl. It shows sex involving young prepubescent girls from pre teens down to toddlers. It popularizes and gorifies child sex abuse to a wider audience. Psychoatherapist Sam Loule explains : " As a psychotherapist who specializes in sexuality, one trend i've seen over the years is how prolonged viewing of hentai can eventually impact one's arousal template. In other words, what people used to find arousing may not be enough and the most deviant forms of sexualization become the new norm of arousal. "
" What can be problematic is that these types of cartoon depictions of willing, child like sexual encounters normalize childrens as appropriate sexual partners. When a child is sexualized, the old social norms that protected childrens as off limits are chipped away at and blurred. " " Thus, any kind of objectification of children as sex objects can legitimize child sexual abuse or minimize its impact. " Some might argue that's is a drawed girl that doesn't exist, etc... But the issue is the viewer, not the character. People arguing in favor of this do not do so in good faith. They are all either terminally online porn addicts or actual pedophiles. They destroyed with lifestyle and identity so much with their porn habit that it's now all they can identify with. On youtube there is a highly viewed video defending lolicon.
His online name is Mr Cynical. He also changes his name. One key argument of the video if that fiction supposedly doesn't impact a person in reality. Also it claims that someone can be sexually attracted to anime childrens without being sexually attracted to real childrens. 
The same Mr Cynical admitted having engaged in sex tourism in Thailand with child prostitutes. 
He also posted sexualized pictures of his sister's feet to the internet. It's not only lolican because hentai is full of disgusting and unnatural fetishes that it seels to its viewers : rape, torture, bestiality, even gore.
Hentai industry actively create people who views of sex ae utterly horrifying. It doesn't only impact minors because adults also suffer frommany negative health outcomes both physical and mental from watching it.
It affects men the worst but women, especially young women, are also badly impacted. Look at this story of this girl whose boyfriend introduced her to hentai : 
She was 16. 
There isn't such thing as wholesome hentai. Hentai depicts se with the goal of inspiring lust in the viewer. Argument saying that is just pixels is also wrong because any media is just pixels. The substance of what is being portrayed is what matters. Just because it's animated, effects on your mind don't magically disappear. Hentai also taints anime as a whole. Some anime fans became coomers and some popular anime youtubers are shilling hentai and other things like that especially in their clickbait videos, which doesn't help anime's reputation.
How Hentai Destroys Your Mind
Anime is the definition of a medium with big ups and downs. On one hand it can be a beautiful art style that produces brillant shows. Anime can produce many meaningful discussions about and messages. But just as the culture surrounding anime has its highs and its dark lows, Hentai is the darkest of them all. Hentai is a work of anime or manga or any similar medium that contains sexual or pornographic art. While anime and manga actually focus on telling stories, hentai focuses on being sexual material. Yet somehow some people think that hentai doesn't have the same bad effects as porn. It's false. Hentai websites generate tens of millions of views from people across the planet. PornHub, the biggest porn site in the world released a report in 2019 and 2021 that found that hentai was its most researhed category. It started in Japan but in a way it's also not truly Japanese. Before 1945, Japan enforced strict censorshipts law that forbade depiction of the sex acts shown in hentai. japan like much of the world had strict moral values that the population was expected to abide by. Hentai began to emerged after WW2 when liberal governement was imposed by the USA. Regardless of its origins, hentai is no longer exclusively Japanese. It's gone international. Some scientifically effect of hentai porn : high chance of addiction, increased erectile dysfunction, loss of motivation, desensitization to normal sex, dulling of dopamine receptors, higher chance of divorce. Some people say it only affects people viewing it and not broader society but that's wrong. It's broadcast on internet to millions. Japanese sociologist Kimio Ito stufied Hentai's effects for years and found in its researchs that it was causing men to retreat from real life into a world of imagination. Such men were no longer interested in real women or real relationships and were content to spend their days masturbating to fantasies. The affect of this trend on society is catastrophic.
70% of Japanese men aged from 18 to 34 aren't in a relationship and about half of this group have no interest in one. Japanese culture became full of bizarre and freakish sexual things such as public masturbation booths and buying smellable panties from vending machines. The trend in Japan can be extrapolated to the rest of the world. Something that makes hentai potentially even worse than regular porn is that due to being animated and cartoonish, it's especially likely to draw young people. The average age people first see porn online is 11 years old. Any young person could stumble upon hentai because its animation looks like any other cartoon they watched. To make it worse even worse pornographers often use characters from popular kids shows like Pokemon, Dragon Ball Z, even western shows, in extreme porn. Scientific researchs found that almost nothing stunts a young person's sexual development more than using online porn. Some say that their parents simply shouldn't let them watch it. That's true but not all parents take proper care of their kids.As for hentai advocates, they just want more people like them. About hentai let's start with one of its darkest genre : lolicon genre. It's based on the phrase Lolita which is synonym for young prepubescent girl. It shows sex involving young prepubescent girls from pre teens down to toddlers. It popularizes and gorifies child sex abuse to a wider audience. Psychoatherapist Sam Loule explains : " As a psychotherapist who specializes in sexuality, one trend i've seen over the years is how prolonged viewing of hentai can eventually impact one's arousal template. In other words, what people used to find arousing may not be enough and the most deviant forms of sexualization become the new norm of arousal. "
" What can be problematic is that these types of cartoon depictions of willing, child like sexual encounters normalize childrens as appropriate sexual partners. When a child is sexualized, the old social norms that protected childrens as off limits are chipped away at and blurred. " " Thus, any kind of objectification of children as sex objects can legitimize child sexual abuse or minimize its impact. " Some might argue that's is a drawed girl that doesn't exist, etc... But the issue is the viewer, not the character. People arguing in favor of this do not do so in good faith. They are all either terminally online porn addicts or actual pedophiles. They destroyed with lifestyle and identity so much with their porn habit that it's now all they can identify with. On youtube there is a highly viewed video defending lolicon.
Hentai industry actively create people who views of sex ae utterly horrifying. It doesn't only impact minors because adults also suffer frommany negative health outcomes both physical and mental from watching it.
Post.
Why The Protestant Reformation Was Worse Than You Thought
The biggest denomination of christianism is catholicism with over 1 billion followers of the Roman Catholic Church. There are also the Orthodox. Then the Protestants following independent churches rejecting catholicism. Some protestant groups disagree with each other. In 1517 the Catholic Church had its legitimacy and existence challenged. Priests like Martin Luther established their own churches, rejecting the authority of the Pope. Contrary of what some thing they didn't simply revolt against what they saw as corruption or abuses within the Church. The main factor is something else. What made protestants protestants is that they declared the very Church itself illegitimate and started to preach doctrines of their own. 40% of christians today identify as part of a protestant Church. Between 500 AD and 1500 AD it was the Middle Age and the Church played an enormous role in european history. The majority of Europe was catholic. Despite trials like the West schism, the Pope's authority held strong. Even the most powerful kings and emperors sought the pope's favors and blessings. The Catholic Church was leading universities, hospitals, monasteries. It had the leading scientists, intellectuals, philosophers, theologians and philantropists. The Church wasn't perfect neither was it bad like any human institution. It had its good and bad. Overall it still provided a valuable moral structure for Europe and the world. Many saints and historic achievements were produced during the Middle Ages. But by the end of the 1500s some issues were plaguing the Church. Medieval Church's bureaucracy was expensive and this required the Church to have vast sum of money while this wealth was moslty used responsably it also attracted people more interested in gaining lucrative financial position than performing their religious duties. Many bishops and prelates began to live lavish lives which contrasted with the poverty of the lower clergy .
There was also a problem called absenteeism when a bishop controlled multiple dicese to collect their incomes while failing to do the spiritual duties. It led certain parts of christendom with poor religious education. Renaissance had positive aspects in the fields of art, philosophy, architecture and science. The papacy itself participated. But the Renaissance had its dark side. Many elites and intellectuals in Europa began focusing on human virtues as being purely human rather than coming from God. Many in the higher classes developed an admiration for Greco Roman luxury which contrasted with the self discipline that Catholics were required to practice. Immoral poems and romances, biting satires on religious figures and institutions and revolutionary books, pamphlets and plays became more popular. The Church during the Reform time had also problems with priests following their oath of celibacy. Sometimes powerful figures in the Church had illegitimate families. Many bishops were faithfully celibate but some other were not. Historian Pihllip Hugues wrote in his book ' popular history of Reformation ' : There were bishops who, in despite of all law, managed to have families of their own... and to provide for them out of the wealth of the Church. ' ' They brought them forward, acknowledged them, enobled them, married them well and spent not an inconsiderable amount of their diplomatic efforts to bring them into the families of the reigning princes. ' Things like caused damaged the clergy's reputation. Then there were the infamous practices of indulgences.. By definition indulgences weren't sold as it's often said. There were spiritual work of penance where someone would repent of their sins and offer good works and compensation monetary donations to the Church could be accepted as part of the penance. Compensation was for the damage caused by a person's sin, and didn't reduce the spiritual penalty of sin. Which only God could forgive.
Indulgences payment were usually used to pay for things like of public utility like bridges and roads. This doctrine was consistently upheld in Catholicism and on paper it makes sense but it was often abused. Heavy emphasis was put on monetary donations above other good works. Indulgence workers often sought to collect as much money as possible in connections with the indulgences. This led to the appearance that people's spiritual standing was tied to their socioeconomic status. This wasn't the teaching of the Church but it could often appear that way. This added to the growing sense that the Church was becoming over commercialized. Albert of Bradenburg ( a bishop ), engaged in a campaign to raise money to pay back the Pope for letting him control multiple seas at once. He would become one of the Church leaders called out by Martin Luther directly. Hard to keep your house entirely clean when an institution like the Church encompass so many in Europe. Neverless as a holy institution the Church should be held to a high standard and prior to the Reformation it was struggling to meet that standard. As for the general Catholic populations, historians still note that there were many examples of moral christian lifes. THe late 1400s actually produced many saints but in some regions, superstition, ignorance and religious indifference were rif. Moral anxiety laxity was increasisng although nowhere near the level of today's laxity. During the 900s there were a series of Pope and anti Popes who continuously disposed each other. Reforms came and as a result, Catholicism experienced a new era of prosperity and strenght. Wise Catholics during the 1500s urged reforms to clear out corruption and abuse within the Church. The fifth Lateran Council was called by Pope Julius II from 1512 - 1517. He tried to make reforms like increasing standards for who could preach on behalf of th Church. However, these reforms were slow to be carried out.
The major renewal and improvement needed with Rome itself was coming too struggishly. Internal abuses within the Church were connected to the Reformation but the consensus among modern historians is that corruption wasn't the main cause of the Reformation. Despite problems the Church was still vital, popular, entrenched and servings the needs of its diverse flocks Reformation would be led by strategic individual leaders and militants. The social historien Robert Sribner said : ' There was no mass support for the Reformation, per se. " The Reformation would mainly take off in Northern and Central Europe. If the true cause was simply unrest against Church abuses and teachings, more of Europe would have become Protestant but it didn't. We must look at sociopolitical developments in Europe leading up to the Reformation. There have been challengers to the Catholic Church's authority but they were unsuccessfull. One major development was the printing press in 1440 created by the German inventor Johannes Gutenberg. It allowed the dissemination of informations on a mass scale and at a more rapid pace. The original Bibles made by the printing press were praised by the Church. One side effect is that it obviously allowed propaganda and other things. There was also the development of the concept of modern state. As kings and nobles gained more power, different countries were developing secular national consciousness that was secular and had the potential to turn hostile to the independent. With growing self consciousness of the state, secular governments sought to contrl all matters felling within their competences. Some states even desired to control the spiritual domain. In places like the Byzantine empire it was the case where the head of the state and the head of the church were the same person : the emperor. The word for this is Caesaropapism. Some German and French Kings tried to do the same thing. But the papacy managed to maintain independance and outsmart them.
Many protestant states would follow this model of caesaropapism. The rise of centralized governments over feudalism had benefits but also risks if they developed the wrong way. Historian J. P. Kirsch wrote that as national self consciousness developed in Europe : ' Th sense of unity and independance of the Christian family of nations grew weaker. Jealousy between countries increased. The rift between politicc and Christian morality grew wider, and revolutionary tendencies spread. ' The discovery of the new world and the growing prosperity of cities also destabilized the European order. Martin Luther called for a debate about the various abuses within the Church especially with indulgences. He wasn't the only one wanting this but what set him apart is that he began to preach his own ideas about salvation that were very different from the Church's. He argued that salvation could be done by faith alone and he argued against the necessity of things like good works, the sacraments or other Catholic principles. Other major breakingi point is that Luther declared that the doctrine of Sula Scriptura which is the belief that scripture alone is the infaillible authority of God which undermined the Church's authority as from Catholic perspective, the Church alone has the sole infaillible authority to interpret scripture. Catholics argue that a priest like Luther couldn't use their personal, subjective interpretation of scripture to undermine the Church. Luther also preached different understandings of the sacraments. The mass and the priesthood Luther rejected the idea of priestly celibacy, teaching that priests could marry and he himself married a nun. German theologican Karl Adam wrote in his book ' Catholicism in German future : ' It was not ecclesiastical abuses that made Luther the opponent of the Catholic Church. But rather the conviction that she was teaching falsely. '
Why The Protestant Reformation Was Worse Than You Thought
The biggest denomination of christianism is catholicism with over 1 billion followers of the Roman Catholic Church. There are also the Orthodox. Then the Protestants following independent churches rejecting catholicism. Some protestant groups disagree with each other. In 1517 the Catholic Church had its legitimacy and existence challenged. Priests like Martin Luther established their own churches, rejecting the authority of the Pope. Contrary of what some thing they didn't simply revolt against what they saw as corruption or abuses within the Church. The main factor is something else. What made protestants protestants is that they declared the very Church itself illegitimate and started to preach doctrines of their own. 40% of christians today identify as part of a protestant Church. Between 500 AD and 1500 AD it was the Middle Age and the Church played an enormous role in european history. The majority of Europe was catholic. Despite trials like the West schism, the Pope's authority held strong. Even the most powerful kings and emperors sought the pope's favors and blessings. The Catholic Church was leading universities, hospitals, monasteries. It had the leading scientists, intellectuals, philosophers, theologians and philantropists. The Church wasn't perfect neither was it bad like any human institution. It had its good and bad. Overall it still provided a valuable moral structure for Europe and the world. Many saints and historic achievements were produced during the Middle Ages. But by the end of the 1500s some issues were plaguing the Church. Medieval Church's bureaucracy was expensive and this required the Church to have vast sum of money while this wealth was moslty used responsably it also attracted people more interested in gaining lucrative financial position than performing their religious duties. Many bishops and prelates began to live lavish lives which contrasted with the poverty of the lower clergy .
There was also a problem called absenteeism when a bishop controlled multiple dicese to collect their incomes while failing to do the spiritual duties. It led certain parts of christendom with poor religious education. Renaissance had positive aspects in the fields of art, philosophy, architecture and science. The papacy itself participated. But the Renaissance had its dark side. Many elites and intellectuals in Europa began focusing on human virtues as being purely human rather than coming from God. Many in the higher classes developed an admiration for Greco Roman luxury which contrasted with the self discipline that Catholics were required to practice. Immoral poems and romances, biting satires on religious figures and institutions and revolutionary books, pamphlets and plays became more popular. The Church during the Reform time had also problems with priests following their oath of celibacy. Sometimes powerful figures in the Church had illegitimate families. Many bishops were faithfully celibate but some other were not. Historian Pihllip Hugues wrote in his book ' popular history of Reformation ' : There were bishops who, in despite of all law, managed to have families of their own... and to provide for them out of the wealth of the Church. ' ' They brought them forward, acknowledged them, enobled them, married them well and spent not an inconsiderable amount of their diplomatic efforts to bring them into the families of the reigning princes. ' Things like caused damaged the clergy's reputation. Then there were the infamous practices of indulgences.. By definition indulgences weren't sold as it's often said. There were spiritual work of penance where someone would repent of their sins and offer good works and compensation monetary donations to the Church could be accepted as part of the penance. Compensation was for the damage caused by a person's sin, and didn't reduce the spiritual penalty of sin. Which only God could forgive.
Indulgences payment were usually used to pay for things like of public utility like bridges and roads. This doctrine was consistently upheld in Catholicism and on paper it makes sense but it was often abused. Heavy emphasis was put on monetary donations above other good works. Indulgence workers often sought to collect as much money as possible in connections with the indulgences. This led to the appearance that people's spiritual standing was tied to their socioeconomic status. This wasn't the teaching of the Church but it could often appear that way. This added to the growing sense that the Church was becoming over commercialized. Albert of Bradenburg ( a bishop ), engaged in a campaign to raise money to pay back the Pope for letting him control multiple seas at once. He would become one of the Church leaders called out by Martin Luther directly. Hard to keep your house entirely clean when an institution like the Church encompass so many in Europe. Neverless as a holy institution the Church should be held to a high standard and prior to the Reformation it was struggling to meet that standard. As for the general Catholic populations, historians still note that there were many examples of moral christian lifes. THe late 1400s actually produced many saints but in some regions, superstition, ignorance and religious indifference were rif. Moral anxiety laxity was increasisng although nowhere near the level of today's laxity. During the 900s there were a series of Pope and anti Popes who continuously disposed each other. Reforms came and as a result, Catholicism experienced a new era of prosperity and strenght. Wise Catholics during the 1500s urged reforms to clear out corruption and abuse within the Church. The fifth Lateran Council was called by Pope Julius II from 1512 - 1517. He tried to make reforms like increasing standards for who could preach on behalf of th Church. However, these reforms were slow to be carried out.
The major renewal and improvement needed with Rome itself was coming too struggishly. Internal abuses within the Church were connected to the Reformation but the consensus among modern historians is that corruption wasn't the main cause of the Reformation. Despite problems the Church was still vital, popular, entrenched and servings the needs of its diverse flocks Reformation would be led by strategic individual leaders and militants. The social historien Robert Sribner said : ' There was no mass support for the Reformation, per se. " The Reformation would mainly take off in Northern and Central Europe. If the true cause was simply unrest against Church abuses and teachings, more of Europe would have become Protestant but it didn't. We must look at sociopolitical developments in Europe leading up to the Reformation. There have been challengers to the Catholic Church's authority but they were unsuccessfull. One major development was the printing press in 1440 created by the German inventor Johannes Gutenberg. It allowed the dissemination of informations on a mass scale and at a more rapid pace. The original Bibles made by the printing press were praised by the Church. One side effect is that it obviously allowed propaganda and other things. There was also the development of the concept of modern state. As kings and nobles gained more power, different countries were developing secular national consciousness that was secular and had the potential to turn hostile to the independent. With growing self consciousness of the state, secular governments sought to contrl all matters felling within their competences. Some states even desired to control the spiritual domain. In places like the Byzantine empire it was the case where the head of the state and the head of the church were the same person : the emperor. The word for this is Caesaropapism. Some German and French Kings tried to do the same thing. But the papacy managed to maintain independance and outsmart them.
Many protestant states would follow this model of caesaropapism. The rise of centralized governments over feudalism had benefits but also risks if they developed the wrong way. Historian J. P. Kirsch wrote that as national self consciousness developed in Europe : ' Th sense of unity and independance of the Christian family of nations grew weaker. Jealousy between countries increased. The rift between politicc and Christian morality grew wider, and revolutionary tendencies spread. ' The discovery of the new world and the growing prosperity of cities also destabilized the European order. Martin Luther called for a debate about the various abuses within the Church especially with indulgences. He wasn't the only one wanting this but what set him apart is that he began to preach his own ideas about salvation that were very different from the Church's. He argued that salvation could be done by faith alone and he argued against the necessity of things like good works, the sacraments or other Catholic principles. Other major breakingi point is that Luther declared that the doctrine of Sula Scriptura which is the belief that scripture alone is the infaillible authority of God which undermined the Church's authority as from Catholic perspective, the Church alone has the sole infaillible authority to interpret scripture. Catholics argue that a priest like Luther couldn't use their personal, subjective interpretation of scripture to undermine the Church. Luther also preached different understandings of the sacraments. The mass and the priesthood Luther rejected the idea of priestly celibacy, teaching that priests could marry and he himself married a nun. German theologican Karl Adam wrote in his book ' Catholicism in German future : ' It was not ecclesiastical abuses that made Luther the opponent of the Catholic Church. But rather the conviction that she was teaching falsely. '
Post.
While some critics against the Church were justifiable, exagerations and propaganda were also used to delegitimaze the papacy itself. Negociations failed and Luther was excommunicated. Holy Roman emperor of the time Charles I decided to take side with the Church and declared Luther as an outlaw. However, Luther had backers with many states in Germany seeing that they could take advantage of this situation and start seizing Church properties for themselves. Elector Frederic III of Saxony protected Luther and allowed him to keep writing. Emperor Charles couldn't respond to this because he was dealing with Ottoman invasions in Europe. Vienna, the very seat of the emperor would be put under siege in 1529. The new protestant ideas were forcefully promoted by the princes of North Germany. In regions like Saxony, Church properties were confiscated and priests resisting were expelled. In Luther's book about the Christian nobility of the German nation, he denied all temporal dominion of the priesthood. Many German princes saw the opportunity. Protestantinism wouldn't have gotten off the ground without the willingness of these princes to break away from the Pope. This was the rising of the concept of the state. It was also fueled by a long standing rivalry between the German princes and the papacy. As Lutherianism gained ground, other protestant groups sprang up. Huldrych Zwingli started another Reformation in Switzerland where he preached an even more radical and anti Catholic message than Luther. He clashed with both Lutherian and Catholic interpretations of the Mass, Sacraments and Clergy. He encouraged Swiss rulers to dissolve all religious houses and confiscate Church's lands leading to a civil war on Switzerland with Zwingli dying on the battlefield. His teachings are still today part of Christian denominations. Another denomination that is more famous comes from John Calvin of Geneva who created calvinism.
Calvin denied Catholic teaching on God's grace and predestination, creating his own version instead. He taught that not only God predestine some people to go to heaven while other were predestined to go to hell and no one could do anything about it which is completly opposite to the Catholic teachings. Politicians of Geneva made Calvin their religious leader and he used his powers in the city to spread his beliefs even further. Calvinist writer John Fox published the book : ' Foxe's book of martyrs ' in which it's claimed that Catholicism persecuted so called true Christians since the beginning. At the same time, parts of Germany rose up to the anabaptists, a new and very radical different sect who sought to restore what they saw as primitive christianity. Their ideas included the rejection of oaths, paying taxes and obeying the Civil authorities bringing conflict to Christian sects and authorities of the time, launching revolutions in some cities, even capturing a few. They established a form of Christian communism with private property abolished and the community of all goods being introduced. Also was introduced the community of women polygamy which was not only legalized but made mandatory. Anabaptist leader John of Leiden had himself 16 wives. Meanwhile they declared that the apocalypse was imminent and doped out the death penalty for minor offenses. But the reaction fo the German authorities was severe. King Henry VII of England declared himself the head of the so called Church of England and began to seize all Catholic Church's properties in his kingdom. His problem with the Pope is that he wasn't allowed to divorce his wife Kings like Henry were also centralizing royal power at the expense of independent organizations like the Church. Tragically many faithfull Catholics were martyred in the process. The movie ' A man for all seasons ( 1966 ) is a good movie about that. It's about Saint Thomas Moore featuring his life and eventual execution by King Henry.
Another English martyr was Saint Edmund Campion who said these words before being executed under Queen Elisabeth I ' In condemning us, you condemn all your own ancestors, all our ancient bishops and kings. All that was once the glory of England, the island of saints and the most devoted child of the See of Peter. ' Henry's daughter, Queen Mary I tried to restore Catholicism in England but died before this process could be completed. Despite killing far less people than Henry, protestant propaganda labeled her as Bloody Mary. Today it's still official law that the monarch cannot be a Catholic. Today England is one of the most secular countries in the world. Opposition of both Catholics and Reformers were suppressed when protestant gained power. Religious tolerance was not a consideration of any side in this time. In Northern Germany, priests who stayed loyal to Catholicism were expelled and replaced by followers of the new doctrines. The general public was even forced by law to attend new Masses. Theological arguments weren't the decisive factor in Protestantism's spread. It lasted mainly due to dynastic, political and social forces. The Reformation was truly solidified at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530 in which the Protestant German princes announced their creed in the anti Catholic Augsburg confession, showing that religious disunity was going to last for centuries. Main effect of Protestantinism was the breakup of Christendom. For over 1 000 years western christianity was united under Catholicism. But after this, Britain, Scandinavia, northern Germany and Netherlands would remain Protestant for centuries to come.For centuries to come, France successfully fought back Protestant but at the cost of many years and lives. Germany suffered many civil wars. The 30 years war was the most devastating of these conflicts. Meanwhile places like Italy and Spain never had any serious protestant movements. Since the 1500s, more protestant denominations have been created.
Eventually in countries where protestants removed Catholicism, it got tired of fighting each other and became secular liberalism. That is removing christianity from its places of importance in government and Western civilization. Britain and the US are the best examples, starting as protestant before morphing into secular liberal societies. There are many reasons but it didn't help that many powerful Protestants became friendly with Judaism and Freemasonry. As a result of this liberalism, many Protestant groups adopted horrendous openly blasphemous doctrines such as the ordination of women, prosperity gospel, pro LGBT beliefs, gender neutral God, speaking in tongues, apocalyptic fantasies, and the list goes on. That being said the Catholic Church also has a liberalization problem especially after the second Vatican Council even though the problems haven't developed to the same extent. Perhaps the most deadly heresy among the Protestants today is fanatic Zionist support. Somehow a literal Jewish state controlling the Holy land is supposed to be good for Christianity. The infamous Scofield's Bible was created by Zionists in order to manipulate Protestants into supporting Israel not only from a political perspective but also from a religious perpsective. And for many, it worked. This is seen as heresy in Catholicism and even many of the original reformers would have rejected.
One positive thing about the Reformation though is that the Catholic Church was forced to clean its own act and it spurred the Catholic Reformation which is today called the Counter Reformation. Unlike the Protestant Reformation, it didn't change the Church's doctrine, the Sacraments, morality or Church's structures but it changed the way many Catholics lived their lifes. The Council of Trent between 1545 and 1563 set tone for Catholic doctrines in issues like the original sin, the authority of sacred tradition, defining errors made by Protestants, resolving corruption and abuses like indulgences and fake Holy relics. It renewed the Church's doctrinal spiritual and moral life. The Roman Inquisition in 1542 was even established to ensure that Catholic clergy were living holy and moral lives. As if endless splits between Protestant weren't enough, some Protestant churches were taken over by the state and became nothing more than puppets of secular governments. See the Scandinavian and Anglican churches for example. Christianity's division have been exploited by atheistic and secular forces alike for their own gain to the disaster of anyone who loves the Bible or tradition. The Protestant Reformation at the end of the day caused more harm than good. The Bible itself after all calls for an unified Church.
While some critics against the Church were justifiable, exagerations and propaganda were also used to delegitimaze the papacy itself. Negociations failed and Luther was excommunicated. Holy Roman emperor of the time Charles I decided to take side with the Church and declared Luther as an outlaw. However, Luther had backers with many states in Germany seeing that they could take advantage of this situation and start seizing Church properties for themselves. Elector Frederic III of Saxony protected Luther and allowed him to keep writing. Emperor Charles couldn't respond to this because he was dealing with Ottoman invasions in Europe. Vienna, the very seat of the emperor would be put under siege in 1529. The new protestant ideas were forcefully promoted by the princes of North Germany. In regions like Saxony, Church properties were confiscated and priests resisting were expelled. In Luther's book about the Christian nobility of the German nation, he denied all temporal dominion of the priesthood. Many German princes saw the opportunity. Protestantinism wouldn't have gotten off the ground without the willingness of these princes to break away from the Pope. This was the rising of the concept of the state. It was also fueled by a long standing rivalry between the German princes and the papacy. As Lutherianism gained ground, other protestant groups sprang up. Huldrych Zwingli started another Reformation in Switzerland where he preached an even more radical and anti Catholic message than Luther. He clashed with both Lutherian and Catholic interpretations of the Mass, Sacraments and Clergy. He encouraged Swiss rulers to dissolve all religious houses and confiscate Church's lands leading to a civil war on Switzerland with Zwingli dying on the battlefield. His teachings are still today part of Christian denominations. Another denomination that is more famous comes from John Calvin of Geneva who created calvinism.
Calvin denied Catholic teaching on God's grace and predestination, creating his own version instead. He taught that not only God predestine some people to go to heaven while other were predestined to go to hell and no one could do anything about it which is completly opposite to the Catholic teachings. Politicians of Geneva made Calvin their religious leader and he used his powers in the city to spread his beliefs even further. Calvinist writer John Fox published the book : ' Foxe's book of martyrs ' in which it's claimed that Catholicism persecuted so called true Christians since the beginning. At the same time, parts of Germany rose up to the anabaptists, a new and very radical different sect who sought to restore what they saw as primitive christianity. Their ideas included the rejection of oaths, paying taxes and obeying the Civil authorities bringing conflict to Christian sects and authorities of the time, launching revolutions in some cities, even capturing a few. They established a form of Christian communism with private property abolished and the community of all goods being introduced. Also was introduced the community of women polygamy which was not only legalized but made mandatory. Anabaptist leader John of Leiden had himself 16 wives. Meanwhile they declared that the apocalypse was imminent and doped out the death penalty for minor offenses. But the reaction fo the German authorities was severe. King Henry VII of England declared himself the head of the so called Church of England and began to seize all Catholic Church's properties in his kingdom. His problem with the Pope is that he wasn't allowed to divorce his wife Kings like Henry were also centralizing royal power at the expense of independent organizations like the Church. Tragically many faithfull Catholics were martyred in the process. The movie ' A man for all seasons ( 1966 ) is a good movie about that. It's about Saint Thomas Moore featuring his life and eventual execution by King Henry.
Another English martyr was Saint Edmund Campion who said these words before being executed under Queen Elisabeth I ' In condemning us, you condemn all your own ancestors, all our ancient bishops and kings. All that was once the glory of England, the island of saints and the most devoted child of the See of Peter. ' Henry's daughter, Queen Mary I tried to restore Catholicism in England but died before this process could be completed. Despite killing far less people than Henry, protestant propaganda labeled her as Bloody Mary. Today it's still official law that the monarch cannot be a Catholic. Today England is one of the most secular countries in the world. Opposition of both Catholics and Reformers were suppressed when protestant gained power. Religious tolerance was not a consideration of any side in this time. In Northern Germany, priests who stayed loyal to Catholicism were expelled and replaced by followers of the new doctrines. The general public was even forced by law to attend new Masses. Theological arguments weren't the decisive factor in Protestantism's spread. It lasted mainly due to dynastic, political and social forces. The Reformation was truly solidified at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530 in which the Protestant German princes announced their creed in the anti Catholic Augsburg confession, showing that religious disunity was going to last for centuries. Main effect of Protestantinism was the breakup of Christendom. For over 1 000 years western christianity was united under Catholicism. But after this, Britain, Scandinavia, northern Germany and Netherlands would remain Protestant for centuries to come.For centuries to come, France successfully fought back Protestant but at the cost of many years and lives. Germany suffered many civil wars. The 30 years war was the most devastating of these conflicts. Meanwhile places like Italy and Spain never had any serious protestant movements. Since the 1500s, more protestant denominations have been created.
Eventually in countries where protestants removed Catholicism, it got tired of fighting each other and became secular liberalism. That is removing christianity from its places of importance in government and Western civilization. Britain and the US are the best examples, starting as protestant before morphing into secular liberal societies. There are many reasons but it didn't help that many powerful Protestants became friendly with Judaism and Freemasonry. As a result of this liberalism, many Protestant groups adopted horrendous openly blasphemous doctrines such as the ordination of women, prosperity gospel, pro LGBT beliefs, gender neutral God, speaking in tongues, apocalyptic fantasies, and the list goes on. That being said the Catholic Church also has a liberalization problem especially after the second Vatican Council even though the problems haven't developed to the same extent. Perhaps the most deadly heresy among the Protestants today is fanatic Zionist support. Somehow a literal Jewish state controlling the Holy land is supposed to be good for Christianity. The infamous Scofield's Bible was created by Zionists in order to manipulate Protestants into supporting Israel not only from a political perspective but also from a religious perpsective. And for many, it worked. This is seen as heresy in Catholicism and even many of the original reformers would have rejected.
One positive thing about the Reformation though is that the Catholic Church was forced to clean its own act and it spurred the Catholic Reformation which is today called the Counter Reformation. Unlike the Protestant Reformation, it didn't change the Church's doctrine, the Sacraments, morality or Church's structures but it changed the way many Catholics lived their lifes. The Council of Trent between 1545 and 1563 set tone for Catholic doctrines in issues like the original sin, the authority of sacred tradition, defining errors made by Protestants, resolving corruption and abuses like indulgences and fake Holy relics. It renewed the Church's doctrinal spiritual and moral life. The Roman Inquisition in 1542 was even established to ensure that Catholic clergy were living holy and moral lives. As if endless splits between Protestant weren't enough, some Protestant churches were taken over by the state and became nothing more than puppets of secular governments. See the Scandinavian and Anglican churches for example. Christianity's division have been exploited by atheistic and secular forces alike for their own gain to the disaster of anyone who loves the Bible or tradition. The Protestant Reformation at the end of the day caused more harm than good. The Bible itself after all calls for an unified Church.
Ma bite dans le cul de l’op, ça sera pas un fake
Vous aimez qu’on vous gratte le dos ? Rejoignez la Nambla. (North American Marlon Brando Look Alikes)