News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
No, he's describing the second. The first was when the old entrenched powers like the British Empire, the German Empire, the Russian Tzar, the Ottomans etc got into a big kerfluffle after an archduke from the Austro-Hungarian Empire was assassinated and everyone's big alliance rings got triggered.
It was a war between strong empires that had been entrenched over centuries trying to play big power politics basically.
The second was about nationalism and strongmen. The first already had a bunch of strongmen and huge empires jockeying for position, and it was more about weakening perceived rivals. After it ended, many people wanted to return to that sort of status quo, which helped fuel nationalism and the rise of strongmen in the interwar years.
The assassin of Franz Ferdinand was literally a Bosnian nationalist immigrant in Austrian controlled Bosnia convinced by economically displaced serbians to kill the archduke of Austria.
Nationalism ✓
Flailing economy ✓ the ottoman empire would quite literally not last the war.
Rise of a charismatic strongman ✓ dude literally joined an ultra nationalist group led by a planted charismatic strongman.
The assassin of Franz Ferdinand was not an immigrant. He was born and lived in Bosnia, and he killed Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. There was no "fear of immigrants".
He was not inspired by a "strongman". He was a member of Young Bosnia, a group of socialist/anarchist students with no political power.
Similar groups had existed for decades, there was no "rise" in nationalism.
The Ottomans did not industrialize with the rest of Europe, this meant they were still agrarian in the 20th century not that they were "unable to afford to live".
The Ottoman Empire lasted through the war. It was abolished in 1922, four years after the war ended. Thus, it outlived Austria-Hungary.
The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire, like that of Austria-Hungary, was not a cause of the war. It was a result of losing the war.
Bosnian serbs weren't full citizens, and he identified as Bosnian or serbian not Austrian.
Crown Prince Alexander was their financial backer and their ideological guide in large part.
They're quite literally was, "nuh uh" without evidence is nothing.
I didn't mention industrialization, someone else did similarly industrialization did have an effect on countries that didn't industrialize, namely for the ottoman empire they lost their ass to cheaper mass produced ceramics.
No one said it was the cause bud, nor did I in fact say those are the "most important" factors. You added that for reasons unknown, honestly the argument in general is an exercise in obstinacy. You know they're factors, maybe not in your mind the most important but no one in good faith can argue they were irrelevant and you're certainly implying.
So, not immigrants. Immigration was not a factor, at all.
Someone who finances an organization that tries to influence a group of students is not a "strongman". Merely a rich man, like David Koch.
He considered himself an other in a country that wasn't his own, he's an immigrant.
No one said they were, I Said each cell had a strongmen. History shows the charismatic strongman is involved in most conflicts just not generally on the same level as conflict post 1870. More often than not theres a handful of them starting dumpster fires to push into crowds, the rare ones are people like Hitler or Mussolini who manage to actually gain power and not immediately catch the kadaffi treatment.
Bad example, David Koch is an economic strongman. In this age money =power money =speech, you're not likely to see a Hitler again, you're more likely to find a small group of shitty people doing shitty things that make it shitty for everyone else.
No, he's not an immigrant. By definition, immigrants and emigrants migrate, ie they move somewhere else. It's right there in the word.
If you live in the same place you were born, you aren't an immigrant.
"Strongman" is defined as a "one who leads or controls by force of will and character or by military methods". That does not include David Koch or anyone else who merely finances a political movement.
Well, if you're arguing that wars tend to be caused by the actions of shitty people in general then I won't dispute that fact.
There was migration ie colonials moving in and making his nation not a nation any longer. You're being tedious.
Arguably yes, historically no.
That's a definition sure, you are aware English changes through time, context and situation. He's an economic strongman, what even are you arguing for or against at this point? Do you even know?
That would be nearly as dumb, not quite but real close.
Yes, colonists were immigrants. Under colonialism, the immigrants are the ones in power.
You previously argued that wars were preceded by fear of immigrants and the rise of political leaders like Hitler. Now it seems you mean the existence of immigrants and rich people like Koch.
But that comparison is pointless. Immigrants and rich people preceded WW1, WW2, the American revolution, the invention of penicillin, every Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, and every Cat 4-5 hurricane.
That's because there are always immigrants and there are always rich people. So pointing out that they also exist right now is not particularly concerning.