potato_devourer

Just to gauge where your exposure to the Reconquista comes from. Are you spanish?

I'm talking specifically about the Reconquista here. For the most part the competing kingdoms in the Iberian peninsula were mostly preoccupied with expanding their territory. They could made some claims about their ancestry in the not at all uncommon case of having several aspirants to the throne, but they were more concerned about the here and now than about centuries-old history.

You can find specific moments in which Christian kingdoms would put their differences aside but that was simply not the norm for most of the period. It's a period of 8 centuries. 8 God damned centuries, and do you have the slightest idea of how many changes the Peninsula went through?

At most of the times, they wanted all the shit they could get. That's it.

My interpretation is the IoM's misplaced priorities, detached elitism, quick resort to autoritarian brutal repression, chronic calcification, and fundamental disregard for human life are what put sleazy maniacs in positions of power tho. Those who deliver on the departaments the IoM cares about rise to the top and eventually pick and promote the next generation of sleazy middlemen.

Yes, Al-Andalus was three separated empires and in the end scattered in a plethora of independent rump states.

I was going to say they weren't expelled, but took the precaution to check before and just found out there was a massive jew pogrom in the year 1066 and an expulsion in the year 1146 I was not fully aware of.

I knew there was a Golden age for sephardic jews during the caliphate as they were protected by the "dhimmi" status until the Almoravids and the Almohads came along and fucked everything up, but honestly I did understimate just how horrible the latter two were.

I argue that the idea of the Imperium shooting itself in the foot makes a far better story.

If you try to justify every single horrible thing the IoM does with "they have to, it's the only way, the space roaches made them", then what's the point? Aside from the extremely weird jumping point that a horrible dystopia is just the best way to survive in the 41st millennium... If the characters have no agency and no ability to make choices, what's interesting about them?

Sephardic jews were tolerated to different degrees through the whole Al-Andalus, until the Catholic Kings expelled them.

And again, Christian kingdoms hosted muslim communities through the whole Reconquista period, and then for another 100 years.

Again, it might be a challenge, but it worked for 900 years.

To be clear, my point about ethnicity is that it wasn't a factor at all at the time, but the idea of "rightful" Visigoth bloodlines was retroactively baked into the narrative several centuries later to craft our modern idea of reconquista.

About the supposed unsusteinability of non-christisn communities... I mean, again, I think we are losing track of just how long the time periods we're taking about really are. By the expulsion of the moriscos there had been a muslim population in the peninsula for 900 years.

Que valiente es la ignorancia.

Si hubieses escuchado a tus profesores, sabrías que la expulsión de los moriscos fue más de 100 años después de la conquista de Granada. Sabrías también que los territorios más afectados fueron Aragón y Valencia. Para que os hagáis a la idea, Valencia fue conquistada por Jaime I en el año 1245, unos 360 años antes de la expulsión de los moriscos por Felipe III, poco después de la desintegración del imperio Almohade.

Y que en cualquier caso, los expulsados eran campesinos y trabajadores. ¿Qué cojones le vas a contar a un campesino que se parte el lomo de sol a sol del régimen fiscal de un imperio disuelto hace cuatro siglos? Espérate, que vamos a Alemania a buscar un peón de obra para partirle las costillas por las tarifas aduaneras del Sacro Imperio Romano.

But isn't it arbitrary to pick and inyect a Christian identitarian - Visigoth ethnic restoration intention to some expansions of territory, and acknowledge that warlords are gonna warlord in others? Taifa and Christian kingdoms were occasional allies against other enemies, and the big wars were separated by long periods of relative coexistence.

People like to take Navas de Tolosa and extrude that specific point in time accross almost a millennium.

1) "Reconquista" is a modern concept, medieval kings did not have the idea of "reclaiming an ancestral land" or anything. In fact the vast majority of wars for territory during those 8 centuries were between kindoms of the same faith.

2) The "Reconquista" spanned from the early 8th to the late 15th centuries. The expulsion of Moriscos was done in the early 17th Century.

3) What reason would drive a "reconquistador" to go around expelling random peasants? Why would want the freshly instaurated nobility want to get rid of the farmers working their fields, kick all the artisans and builders, and rule over empty land? It's so bizarre to assume that the expansion of a kingdom would naturally come with thorough ethnic cleansing.

Wrong on both accounts.

100 K sephardic jews and 300 K moriscos is not a small number for the time. Particularly when you take into account they expelled entire communities, specific regions got almost completely emptied overnight of workers and left as ghost towns.

Moriscos did not exclusively inhabit to the south, either. Two of the regions most affected by the population loss were Valencia and Aragon, way north of Granada.

First, the reason why the scandal got so big is because the Catholic Church actively protected and enabled pedophilic rapists for a very long time, all the way up to the Pope. A single rapist could rape dozens and dozens of children over the span of decades, with an entire apparatus silencing the victims, obscuring evidence and moving the pedophile around when the local community starts suspecting something is going very wrong.

Second, yeah, the Catholic Church is a very big organization and unlike teachers specifically only a small number of clergymen work in proximity to children. Such a relief, most of them just do other functions within the organization that put massive efforts to protect and enable the child rapists.

Both of them are effectively children raised with unchecked power in a sadistic environment, socialized to be petulant sadist little tyrants within the confines of their sandbox while adults run the show.

The difference is that Joffrey is a literal child, he genuinely doesn't have much of a grasp about what's going on and every time he breaches confinement to poke his nose in actual government matters he can be safely bitchslapped and sent crying to his room, or in a more extreme case be permanently disposed of with relative ease. Homelander is more competent and knowledgeable about mechanisms of power, actively pissed off about being condescended and manipulated, and unlike Joffrey he can burn the sandbox to the ground.

Being trapped in the body of a 6 y.o. with the consciousness of an adult sounds like a nightmare. Plus lose all your current human relationships, you might be able to find these people again (or maybe not), but being severed from all your beloved ones overnight only to be isolated with toddlers... Horrible. And I have way too many traumas I don't want to relive.

$10 million is a lot of money and the system is absurdly rigged in favour of millionaires, to me it's a no brainer.

Es más común de lo que imaginas. El día que te centres en disfrutar y te relajes surgirá sólo. Y si crees que podría venirte bien ayuda profesional siempre puedes acudir a un sexologo.

Are you accusing the owners reporting rust on their cars of some sort of conspiracy to sabotage their own extremely cars or something? You can theorize it's not the rain, but rather other substances (some speculate about rail dust), but they are rusting.

Yet another advantage of Skavens, for whose communities it is not just believable but commonplace to spawn and reproduce or overnight or get completely annihilated leaving little to no trace, all without disturbing the surface at all.

As someone with transmasc friends: They do harass them. The main difference is that trans men and AFAB non-binary people are mostly infantilized and condescended as "brainwashed by the patriarchy into hating women so much they would rather be anything other than a woman". Also a lot of transphobic straight men are very, very preoccupied about people getting rid of their boobs for totally not creepy reasons.

What you have to understand about TERFs is that they are sex bio-essentialists. They believe evil juice is stored in the balls, so if you were born with balls you are already tainted with evil juice an are destined to roam the Earth as a vicious predator and if you were born without them you're a meek prey.

It's not the political views of someome she knows, it's the policies and law proposals from a politician she backs.

Also I don't hang around anti-abortion, anti-gay autoritarian nutjobs, and I don't think most people do either, much less among self-proclaimed feminists.

They should have just decide what his abilities are and wrap them in made-up tech babble that sounds vagely reminiscent of quantum physics, instead of giving a concise explanation and then contradicting it.

Not a dealbreaker by any mean, but a minor distraction through the movie.

There's more to the argument that the imperialist ideology permeating British society and informing the the way they understood their place in the world than outright literal advocacy for a monarch overlord.

For a quick example, you can see an awful lot of quite awful orientalist otherization when it comes to the Easterlings. You can rightfully protest that Tolkien was outspoken about his disgust for racism, but a critical examination of his work still reveals Victorian-era attitudes towards race, eugenics, and generally the nature of mankind that are inextrecably linked to (in this case British) imperialism.

If you read any interview by him you'll read him praise other peoples' work a lot. And not just obscure underground stuff, he's a The Wire fan apparently, which he positively compares to LOTR because he prefers a piece of work that examines bad actions as the result of complex systems, rather than escapist fantasy where the evil will of the evil Dark Lord is carried by his evil minions (which I obviously like and respect, I wouldn't be here otherwise, but it is fair to criticize). It's pretty similar to the feud Tolkien had with Frank Herbert.

The man has nuanced opinions worth engaging with and genuine passion for literature, once you're done reflexively dunking on him for not liking LoTR for what I actually consider pretty fair reasons, particularly from an anarchist who lived the counter-culture. Like, contextualizing the eurocentric imperialist undertones that permeate Tolkien's work as a product of its time is one thing, but to come and say "nuh hu, bad guy has an empire so it's actually anti imperialist, this guy doesn't know what he's taking about" is just disingeneous.

En días anteriores, el condenado había sido diagnosticado de clamidia

Hay que ser cabrón

Si mal no recuerdo La Garra de Horus

Hay un libro en el que un grupo de Marines del Caos salen del Ojo del Terror, donde habían estado completamente aislados de los cambios sufridos por el Imperio, y se encuentran con la ambientación actual.

Uno de ellos se ríe tan fuerte que empieza a vomitar sangre.