Historical context feels in the details

I think you've still misunderstood my argument

? Maybe I did, chat has gotten a little chaotic

My argument is that we don't know which values illiterate people had, since they didn't express their values through time. They can learn chants all they want, that doesn't change the fact that they can't create a big library of personal values that would show their true diversity of thought.

So for us it is impossible to assume that they either did or didn't have diverse values.

Still wrong

Do you know how Grimms tales were made?

And what do they reflect?

No

I can vaguely remember a few of the stories

They were a collection of folklore of rural Germany, collected by the Grimm brothers

What they found was that these stories reflected many similar elements and often times contained missing links with Germanic Iron Age historical events

Which had been recorded elsewhere

"Many similar elements" does not equate to "values consistent through time"

It does tell us which values remained and which didn't, and couple it with historical events, you have the complete picture

No it doesn't tell us that, because it's only a collection, and it's not a word-for-word representation of any values

The main point is, there has always been a transmission of beliefs from the older generation to the younger, even when they were illiterate

It's also likely that the Grimm brothers put their own spin on the stories

So to sum it up, it proves nothing about consistent values

It proves that people propagated their beliefs regardless of literacy

Which is really a self evident point anyway

Propapagated their beliefs... through time?

So three or four generations later those beliefs would be consistent?

Across all or most people?

Mutations of beliefs occurred mainly through wars and other upheavals like famine

That's a non-answer

And even such events were recorded and passed down as folklore

*getting increasingly bored*

Not to mention, mutations didn't cause rapid changes. So for instance, it would be highly rare for a stable society to go from rejecting homosexuality to accepting it, unlike in today's post modern age

Aight, no answer then

I wanted to go to bed anyway, gn8

That's the answer

Nope it's not

Read again

Ok read it again, it's still a non-answer

> So three or four generations later those beliefs would be consistent?
> Across all or most people?

I provided the answer that it mutated very slowly, and only changed substantially if there were wars or other major events

Still a non-answer

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/topless-women-win-big-colorado-city-drops-ban-n1056701

@EmoGazebo And then one day, for no reason at all...

Don't worry, Hitler made sure no new Nazi uprising could happen in the coming decades

<:sarGOY:462286263622303754>

Just in case you don't understand the meaning of that

Hitler is at fault that Nazis are now powerless

<:sarGOY:462286263622303754>

What, you resort to trolling now? I must say I'm disappointed, you never gave up before

I thought you will understand the obvious reference by the second time

I do understand it, but it's so simplistic and boring that I don't care

It has everything to do with Hitler's faults and nothing to do with (((propaganda))) against Nazi Germany?

Oh it's both

But Hitler is the one who did the irreperable damage to his own cause

In case you can't follow the logic

The strong wins the war. But then the victims outnumber the strong. And thus the strong loses.

https://americanmind.org/post/and-you-call-yourself-a-christian/

https://news.yahoo.com/eastern-german-city-declares-nazi-emergency-173735632.html

> Frankfurt am Main (AFP) - The eastern German city of Dresden has declared a "Nazi emergency" as officials warned of a rise in far-right support and violence.
>
> The city is the birthplace of the Islamophobic Pegida movement, which holds weekly rallies here, while the anti-immigration Alternative fuer Deutschland (AfD) party won 28 percent in September regional elections.
>
> Dresden's city council on Wednesday backed a resolution against far-right extremism with the title "Nazinotstand?", or "Nazi emergency?".

@EmoGazebo I see no issue here

I mean the lifting of restrictions is generally a positive imo. But at the same time it goes against what was the shared moral values of america. Im not really sure how i feel about it.

Are you for legalizing hard drugs?

Just walk around filming.

They can't stop you from filming in a public place right?

So, you will now have hours of free film of women walking around without tops on.

which is entirely their choice.

The leftist counter to that is to remove any semblance of decency from society, so that being nude is no longer a taboo

If they don't want to be filmed, all they need to do is put a shirt on.

Then it won't matter if you film them or not

Which is not a society I would want to be a part of

I am for legalizing hard drugs

But being a public nuisance by being high and causing other problem problems should have consequences

Legalizing hard drugs only hooks up more people to addiction and degenerates society

>hooks up more people to addiction
Ah yes your being forced to do something because its legal

I must have forgot

You are being incentivized not to by the law

And on a statistical scale, it has a large effect

Banning things doesn't stop people from doing them and creates criminal groups that will encourage the buying and using of said banned things. With no oversight.

Not true

It depends on a lot of factors

Such as demographics, type of law, implementation of the law etc.

Im pretty sure the real world examples of prohibition and the war on drugs say otherwise

You do realize the difference between legalization of weed vs cocaine, right?

And why any apparent "failure" of war on drugs can't be translated into an argument for legalizing crystal meth?

The war on drugs is an abject failure and clearly it being illegal doesnt stop people from manufacturing and selling it or people doing it

Murder being illegal doesn't stop people from murdering either

That's a failure of the state, civic order and demographics

And those should be fixed than legalizing every degeneracy under the sun in the pursuit of abstract principles of libertarianism

https://youtu.be/n4kDW35wCSM

its not all about libertarian values

i think legalizing certain highly addictive drugs AND providing centres like what happened in that one country really would help in some other countries

westcoast of europe for sure

all these tiny theocracies

Make drugs legal and the clinics for them private; I don't want the NHS caring for crack-addicts at the expense of the British-taxpayer every time they overdose.

Of course though, in places such as the USA where healthcare is purely private (aside from the abortion that is Obamacare), that wouldn't be an issue.

I'd also want drug-use and overdoses to be treated in the same vein as alcohol; no driving under the influence, fines for being drunk/high and causing trouble in public, etc.

What you incentives, grows. What if we incentivised self-help rather than 'free-escapism'...

Oh wait, then the gov. wouldn't be able to justify diverting funds for rehabilitation centres that sustain users to year on out growing trends...

Seems like the more money we allow faceless institutions swallowing up, the worse we are on an individual level... Who'd have 'thunk'! <:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201907111076211343-polish-court-refuses-to-expel-russian-dad-who-took-his-daughters-from-swedish-muslim-family/

I have a hard time being against this