Search results

  1. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Massa so good to me. I now only have to work 6 days of back breaking work instead of 7. Look a step up from last month.
  2. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    This goes into Viking Trade. The Vikings in the East | ASNC Viking Age The Romans did more. 16 Roman Inventions That Helped Shape the Modern World | IE (interestingengineering.com)
  3. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    And no Medieval Europe was not more advanced than the Romans. Antikythera mechanism | Description, Purpose, & Facts | Britannica
  4. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Dude Medieval Europe couldn't even make high quality Steel. The Vikings had to trade with the Persians to get Damascus Steel which was the best you could get in that period of time. One of the reasons Viking weapons could wreck other European Weapons at the time. The Concept of Zero was...
  5. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Bullshit. In China, India and the Arab World they were way in advance of Europe at the time and were using Knowledge that was lost to Europe as a whole. The fact that Middle Age Europe had to learn about Gunpowder via an invasion is telling. When comparing them to other Eurasian powers.
  6. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    We would have had a Starbase around Alpha Centauri by now if Monarchies did not fubar all attempts for advancement in the Middle Ages. If you weren't Royal in that time period your ideas were ignored.
  7. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Our rapid technological advances have only happened because of Republics. Not Monarchies. They had 4,000 years and they best they could do was Horse and wagon. Giving a Republic just 68 years and Man walked on the moon. The proof is in the pudding. Republics are better advancement of our...
  8. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Points at World History. It has been proven over 4,000 years to be a very bad idea.
  9. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    So what you are saying the position is useless. So get rid of the Royalty since they are clearly not needed. If a Parliment and a Prime Minister can do the bulk of the job. Thank you very much for proving the uselessness of Royals.
  10. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    The head guy is a Monarch when a war starts. Then it is the Monarchs fault point blank and end of discussion. You are either the head guy or not. And if you are not then your position should not exist.
  11. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    You serious. Have you looked at the past 2,300 years of European History? This is not even counting all the other Eurasian Kingdoms that were also war happy. Let's see the King of England. The Kaiser of Germany, The Austro Hungarian Empire. Yeah all good and honest pure Republics. Nah dogs it...
  12. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    History has proven the judgement of Kings and Queens are wanting at best. And disasterous most of the time. Like I said before they are not needed.
  13. Sailor.X

    General political philosophy discussion

    Neither. Monarchies and Royalty in general are the biggest con jobs that has ever been invented by mankind. All they do is mooch off of their subjects for centuries. They cause more problems than they solve (Points at all the wars started by monarchies). And they do nothing an Elected Head of...
Top