Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Why are Continental Europeans so.... pretetious and ridiculous?
Politics board has gone to hell in the year or so that I was absent from it... not that I contributed at all, but it used to be a lot better
yeah, because the game and the community has gone to hell in the past couple years.
good thing we still have simpletons bickering about what "free" means if someone says "free healthcare" 
some things never change!
TANSTAAFL n00b
"Eh. Well often times the peasantry hated the nobility but loved the monarchy. This is why the Parisian mob believed that if Louis VII was able to see their suffering, he would side with them against the nobility."
You're wrong..
Parisians aren't peasantry, and I have no idea about wich revolt you're talking about (I could name several), please specify 
To give a bit more information though: there's a "m
Yeoman archers were important because Britain had a broader percentage of its population that was trained for war, although mostly as a very short-term force. That was one reason centralised power didnt come to britain really until the Tudors. And thats because Tudor monarchs were more able and determined to kill noble powermongers than Plantagenets would have dared. Eventually through Cromwell the political and military power of the English commons was superior in force and organization than anything King or nobles could front. From then on the nobility was just a powerful faction that helped pick kings favorable to the masses.
Thus, a crude form of democracy was born
"good thing we still have simpletons bickering about what "free" means if someone says "free healthcare" big_smile some things never change!"
It might be true for the very poor who pay little or no taxes
I prefer the term "garantueed health care"
"Yeoman archers were important because Britain had a broader percentage of its population that was trained for war, although mostly as a very short-term force. That was one reason centralised power didnt come to britain really until the Tudors. And thats because Tudor monarchs were more able and determined to kill noble powermongers than Plantagenets would have dared. Eventually through Cromwell the political and military power of the English commons was superior in force and organization than anything King or nobles could front. From then on the nobility was just a powerful faction that helped pick kings favorable to the masses."
I never denied that, but they're not that different from cities on continental Europe who were nearly unbeatable for a very long time. They were bastions against forces trying to limit their rights..
"Thus, a crude form of democracy was born"
I never denied that, but I wanted to show you that these yeomen archers weren't that different. I told you how democracy was born on continental europe, and how one case develloped into the first republic: The Netherlands..
Also, in the county of Flanders it was, when a direct heir wasn't available, the representational body (the members of Flanders, wich consisted solely out of representatives of the cities of Ghent, Ypres and Bruges) chose a new count, not the nobles (although they always had a candidate) or anything..
History's not as linear as Justinian I made it look in his post. I filtered out the errors and such, and tried to emphasize that democracy doesn't come from yeomen archers directly, or alone. I wanted to show that the whole of europe develloped means to defend their rights wether they're represented by those yeomen archers or by representative bodies who demanded rights in favour of money donations..
I have 1 last question/remark though, if the yeomen archers were so important for democracy, how did this system survive the introduction of firearms (or we might have seen a swing towards absolutism like in France)?
simple answer is the local militia were given muskets as that replaced pikes and swords. But pikes and swords remained dominant until the mid-1600s, and by that time in Britain Cromwell gave the anti-monarchists a whole standing Army, a New Model Army that was one of the best organized in Europe.
After the Restoration militia were promoted by the Crown and nobility as a great way to keep the plebs from forming another standing Army and promoting revolution.
Pretty much... not read anything about Cromwell in a few years, might dig out a book if I get the time 
I feel like a bit of an idiot here, because I can't get my head around what the hell this discussion is about.
Are we criticizing Europe for trying to make a difference or not making a difference? Quite frankly the majority of efforts by most western nations at peacekeeping went totally pear shaped anyway (and i will refrain from bringing up some of the more successful ones to hold back accusations of nationalistic penis waving) so the entire discussion seems like a pointless effort.
Nice to bring up Ukraine by the way, from my involvement in the local Ukrainian community (but I don't speak the language) I am really not surprised by what is going on over there... must be a naturally corrupt people, I guess
well not naturally. But it will take time before anything changes there. The generation that was born under soviet rule would have to die out before there is any real progress. Communism corrupted everyone and thats the only way they know how to live....
Yet another anti-Euro thread.
My guess is Justian is from the UK, so he phased it as "continental Europeans" to remove any shame off himself.
BW:
less than three hundred years ago, you were all bowing to monarches, and tossing shit out the window into the streets as well.
- And your ancestors were amongst them doing the very same things. Or else killing natives and throwing shit at passing buffalo.
Liar! We walked outside to a hole in the ground and crapped in that! None of your mangy European scatodefenestration here--even then we had American plumbing!!
Actually you burned your shit, what with wood being rather sarce on the plains.
In 1708 we werent on the plains yet. That was French and Spaniards.
Ancestors are ancestors.
I don't get it...
americans criticize europeans for being anti-american and when someone starts a thread criticizing europeans they cant wait to flame us.
I'm not against it(I believe in a little thing called freedom of speech) but its alittle weird.
we're so full of ourselves when we fart we close the window to enjoy it more, that's all.
And therein lies our greatness!!!!111one
hehe..... @ Yell.
Look, Americans like you Euros....really. Relax.... 
we poke fun at you Euros, you are easy targets
Some of you Euros trully HATE Americans. >:-[
"you are easy targets"
At this point someone will say something akin to "like Iraqi women and children?" and the cycle of American-Euro flaming will begin anew. Why oh why? This whole American-Euro thingy is so darn annoying. I sometimes feel that threads like these just started not to provoke intelligent debate, but purely to add fuel to the fire
idd loz. Its a pretty pointless debate.
@ Loz, Yea true.
And an American will reply something like
"You all let Genocides happen again in the former Yugoslav republics, before American had to lead in a force to save another Euro nation/group."
And another might say,
"American troops are STILL needed in Europe to give NATO its true Military Strength, because Euro nations, besides the UK, have no teeth when they attempt to flex their muscle."
It just goes round and round.
And someone needs to push it round and round, no?
Imperial Forum → Politics → Why are Continental Europeans so.... pretetious and ridiculous?
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.