There may have been smart people, but they didn't have any noticeable effect.

Seriously, do you know when raping your wife became a crime in the UK (a relatively progressive country)? 1991. I was 14. I remember seeing it on the news and being shocked.

It is still legal to rape your wife in large parts of the world. (yes, some of that is disputed, point still stands).

Not sure what you mean by "the modern era"? Women were certainly working, and have been since the dawn of man. Ruling empires? Occasionally, but only ever because their fathers were kings/emperors. Victoria might have ruled over the British empire, but if she was a commoner, she couldn't even have voted. NZ was the first country to extend the vote to women in 1893. Suffragettes are still considered to be "first wave feminists" (although I dislike the whole "xth wave" terminology).

And no, I wouldn't accept that argument, because helping the poor, treating each other with understanding, etc are not uniquely Catholic concepts; they're not even the core concepts of Catholicism. In fact, Catholics have been historically pretty goddamn awful on the whole " treating each other with understanding" front.

OTOH, feminism is, again by definition, the concept of equality for women.

When I watched the first Star Wars movies, it always seemed that the Jedi were just extremely long lived due to the Force and that the Empire had been in power for such a long time people had forgotten about the republic. Even Yoda mentioned he was many hundreds of years old.

It wasn't until the horrible prequels that this was shown to be incorrect and that it had only been a couple of decades. Of course the prequels also introduced other stupid crap like midichlorians (sp?), ship and vehicle designs that seemed far more advanced than anything the empire had 20 years later, tech like robot sized force fields that block light sabers, the Emperor's face being caused by force lightning (instead of just being ancient), etc etc.

Plus, it wasn't just Han Solo who felt this way. For instance:

Tarkin: The Jedi are extinct. Their fire has gone out of the universe. You, my friend, are all that's left of their religion.

Motti: Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader. Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes or given you clairvoyance enough to find the Rebels' hidden fort-(begin force choke).

So, to be fair, either the Jedi should have had very little presence in the Republic in the prequels (like to the point that nobody really believed in them beyond 'that's a bunch of hokum), or it should have been many years between the fall and the rebellion. Of course, that means that Luke and Leia would have to have been like great great great grandkids of Vader's, but either way would have made more sense. Having them basically 'running' the Republic's military and people seeing them use the Force all the time just doesn't fit.

Okay,
So now I have to share my photo of me with Carrie & Ian (AKA, Emperor Palpatine.)

I was lucky enough to meet Carrie and Ian in Calgary. And yes, she's so awesome to talk to, she also likes to throw Glitter.
This photo was taken the week before she had to start her diet for the new movie, which she joked about at the time.

http://people.okanagan.bc.ca/lnickel/Sagemind/CarrieAndIan.jpg

sorry for the bad scan...

There never was an issue about concessions. They always were ready to accept their fate. But even the peace talks before only included the condition that their emperor was left untouched. And thats exactly what the USA gave them later. So not accepting peace with them was a farce from the start, no matter from what side you look at it.

Truman didnt restrain Stalin. Truman provoked Stalin massively, making him think that they would invade Russia next or at least start a war with them, which started the cold war.
The USA was always provoking, especially at the start of the cold war. Theres a well known video on Youtube (prolly even here) that shows exactly where and when nuclear tests happened. It makes perfectly obvious how much the USA provoked the Soviets.

So...are we talking about Swan monogamy or situational or temporary monogamy? Because last time I checked the majority of Americans or others haven't had just one partner. Nor, even if they have, do they keep those "feelings" of relationship to one individual (Such as that soulmate feeling, sex-free.)

You could argue that boning, fucking, sucking, dating people until you decide it is convenient to settle down is monogamy, and that's fine. Well, right until most people leave/cheat/explore. Then they gotta get back into the routine eventually, because you know it's so natural...

You are born human, sexual, primal, and society tames you. You are born uncircumcised, and who tells you it is wrong? Religious freaks. Who tells you missionary is right, and sex is for procreation? Society. Basically, anything that Rome and Greece did, after they committed atrocities around the world, is now considered wrong. Orgies, emperors, GAY SEX, etc. Coincidence? Probably not.

Tell me Chaos, who did tell you polyamory was "learned"? Biologists? Or society? Or some crappy half-witted data that just says so?

No, devil's advocate here is the same, to me, as devil's advocate against homosexuals.

At least that's my heartfelt belief. I was once wholly monogamous, even turned down a threesome with my first girlfriend. Then I realized that marriage was based on ownership, a very human trait, but monogamy is inconvenient for damn near everyone who practices it.

Of course most Japanese are taught that. Who the fuck said otherwise? Oh, by hiding their history you thought I meant they didn't learn about it at all? Well that's a stupid assumption. You know back in the 1960s Americans "learned" about slavery and our part in it, yet it was often prefaced by "those Negros are inferior so it was great times" or "it was really about federal expansion and not those Negros who should know their place." "Misrepresentation" is a hell of a concept.

And I wasn't even speaking about WW2, so where you got that from I have no utter clue? I didn't even hint at it. That rape and mutilation has been going on for centuries but was significant in the Second Sino-Japanese War, a distinct war in and of itself.

I guess what really pisses me off is that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, elected by Japan (not just one side, but everyone, from the Emperor to the Diet, who themselves are elected by THE PEOPLE) is a revisionist who is allowed to say his shit by the people of Japan. This isn't a position that is allowed in the civilized world anymore. Fuck, even Iran's Ahmadinejad denied the Holocaust and had to laugh it off as misspeaking. Abe is so flaunting he even visited Yasukuni Shrine, a place that holds more than 1 thousand war criminals in it.

Imagine a German leader going to a memorial for 1 thousand Nazi heroes, perhaps including Hitler himself? Oh, and the fact that those criminals were accepted after their punishments, is terrifying.

Notice something else. I never said that China has the right to slaughter everyone--which gives plenty of pre-acknowledgement to your point that this hateful revisionism is put out by right-wingers (And condoned by all the cowards on the left.) This is because, much as Germans on the left allowed the slaughter of the Jews, most cannot be held directly responsible for a force greater than them. In this case, there is no force greater, but that is beside the point.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/opinion/mr-abes-dangerous-revisionism.html?_r=0

Except almost all these bases are in allied countries, not as an occupying force (Guantanamo predates the Communist Revolution,so tough luck for Havana). These bases provide mutual defense and security.

Countries with US bases in them don't get invaded. How much do you think it would cost to have every single allied country try and run and maintain a truly effective military for their own defense instead of using the US as a strategic partner? Way more than $100b a year.

(P.S. loving the irony of the guy with the handle of Praetor and the avatar of the Emperor arguing he doesn't live in an empire, lol)

@shinyblurry, respectfully,
The bible lies. It's stories were probably not meant to be an 'explanation' of reality in the first place, but more likely were created as fables to explain morality...thanks Constantine. (So you know, he's the emperor that ACTUALLY compiled the bible together from various oral traditions, as a political ploy to consolidate religions to make them easier to control.)

You and I have been over this claim repeatedly...Not a whit of EVIDENCE has ever been provided to me, only idiots regurgitating nonsense from 2000+ years ago-
(nonsense made up mostly by Arab/Semitic nomads thousands of years before they were written, likely made up as morality tales, also to 'explain' how they thought certain things worked before the scientific method came around to actually explain reality...examples, the sun and universe spin around the flat earth, the sun rides on a chariot, witches and demons are responsible for any bad thing that happens, etc.)
-idiots who change their interpretations when their current interpretation is shown clearly and undeniably to be completely wrong and indicative of a lack of basic understanding. As evidence goes, that's evidence that religion is wrong and harmful, not that it's correct and helpful.

If god is going to provide evidence of his existence to me, he's taking his sweet time and allowing the issue to be confused with 'facts' and 'reality'. (I'm assuming that's what you meant, and not that there would be proof of polytheism, as you wrote).

The sooner you come to grips with all that, the sooner you can stop saying ridiculous things as 'fact' and ignoring fact as either 'willful suppression of god's grace' or 'Satan tricking you'. It's odd to me that no religious people ever think the bible itself might be a creation of Satan, tricking you into terrible behavior and hatred of 'infidels', encouraging and causing behavior it specifically forbids (Eg-stoning to death/thou shalt not kill...worshiping crosses and or statues of Jesus/thou shalt not create any graven (carved) images).

I hope reality will provide everyone with evidence of it's existence, and people will stop suppressing the truth because they love their religion.

That's Emperor Fairbs the Languid.

Music needs more people like Chilly, actively labeling that the Emperor has no clothes on. Maybe Pop music would try a little harder to create music a little less insultingly, elementary and simple.

What does that even mean? Nobody is blaming America for inventing slavery, just for building a nation on it and insufficiently addressing the inequalities it engendered that remain to this day.

And I hope you're not not implying that it's thanks to white America that slavery is now globally illegal, because fuck man, Wikipedia and all...

"3rd century BC: Ashoka abolishes slave trade and encourages people to treat slaves well but does not abolish slavery itself in the Maurya Empire, covering the majority of India, which was under his rule.
221-206 BC: The Qin Dynasty's measures to eliminate the landowning aristocracy include the abolition of slavery and the establishment of a free peasantry who owed taxes and labor to the state. They also abolished primogeniture and discouraged serfdom. The dynasty was overthrown in 206 BC and many of its laws were overturned.
17: Wang Mang, first and only emperor of the Xin Dynasty, usurped the Chinese throne and instituted a series of sweeping reforms, including the abolition of slavery and radical land reform. After his death in 23 C.E., slavery was reinstituted."

Anyone in a position of power who points out that the Emperor truly is naked is awesome by default.

The Lord Of The Rings was written by a real person, who was eye witness to many actual events and also a professor, lexicographer, and scholar.
The bible is a fantasy novel of various myths complied by a pagan emperor as a political tool to consolidate power.

Not the entire rest, actually. Just the pro-austerity forces currently running the show (Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Austria, etc). Syriza have strong support in Spain (Podemos), France and Italy, the three major countries on the receiving end of austerity.

If Varoufakis' analysis of the situation in Europe is correct, almost everything the troika (ECB, IMF, European Commission) has done since the beginning of the crisis was counterproductive and the underlying economic theories were wrong, plain and simple.

It would be an open challenge to conservative ideology in European governments and to a sort of market fundamentalism that has been the overwhelming drive behind most major policies enacted over the last two decades, particularly in the last seven years.

Can't have that. The Emperor is not naked. Greece is not bankrupt, austerity leads to growth and deflation poses no risk.

25% unemployment, 50+% youth unemployment, GDP down by 25%, poverty through the roof, dumpster diving on the richest continent on the planet -- whatever led to this (hint: austerity) needs a special place on the wall of things never to be done again.

Yet they want to implement it in France and Italy as well, which is why the conflict with Greece is actually a high stakes game about the future of the entire Eurozone.

Like I said, my own views are heavily biased against austerity for a multitude of reasons. And to see my own government forcing it upon significant parts of the continent makes me sick.

About 15 months ago, at a conference in Austin aptly titled "Can the Eurozone be saved?", my favorite Greek mathematician/economist Yanis Varoufakis made center stage with his "Modest Proposal".

Now that he's in charge of Greece's finances, the media is firing broadside after broadside at him, trying their best to discredit the man. Doesn't even wear a tie, shaves his head, wears biker jackets, has a temper... the usual ad hominem bullshit. Yet it only took him three days to give the debate a new direction. Calling the austerity program "fiscal waterboarding" was a stroke of genius.

Him and Tsipras created the first crack in this bubble of lunacy that we call Eurozone. Someone might even realize that the Emperor is, in fact, naked.

Oh, and my personal word of the week: Stahlhelmökonom

(lit.: steel helmet economist, as in "a level of denial and ignorance made famous by the German military on the Eastern front" applied to economics)