Since the last one disappeared somewhere, so I'm creating another thread dedicated to my beloved Tatsuya Ishida (≧◡≦) ♡
the sinfest thread was deleted because all of Trenchrat's threads were removed when he was banned for 5 weeks after making a long rambling post accusing the moderators of pedophilia and incompetence.
>>803730Damn, usually hate namefags but that was based, rip to a real one
>>803731Wasn’t he one of those intellectuals who think everyone else who wasn’t as smart as him is a literal reactionary moron?
isnt it crazy how the only pic we have of tats is him like 40 years ago
hes probably an ugly ass balding middle aged man deep in stage 5 of twink death by now
>>803942That's everyone on this site
>>803976Doesn't this guy know kiss was jewish?
>>804035And what’s even more ironic is that this site uses the same chauvinistic language as the reactionaries they complain about.
Even have the same biases.
>>803976Would be funny if the KISS band sued Tats for copyright infringement considering how Tats makes money off the shirts with “Axis” emblazoned on it.
>>803730Wow, Trenchrat being Based? Color me surprised. A broken clock I suppose
Archives of the previous threads, including the deleted one
https://archive.ph/MdspK https://archive.ph/Hv80I/ https://archive.ph/v9pSp >>804188>This site is just like /pol/Ok lib. I think leftypol is a cesspit, but you're overdoing it.
>>804256>Ok lib. I think leftypol is a cesspit, but you're overdoing it.Who isnt "overdoing" in this site? Alot of anons on here admit to hailing from /pol/ and even screenshot ragebait posts from there.
And lets not forget about the constant threads on here about BBC.
>>804259>the constant threads on here about BBC.I know I've been away from leftypol for a while but I'm pretty sure there hasn't even been an interracial thread in over a year. Maybe some sporadic bait posts but not a lot. Certainly none that I've seen.
>Alot of anons on here admit to hailing from /pol/ I very much doubt that, the posting on this sight is so radlib in its content that I would more believe them to be from reddit or twitter than 4/pol/… then again reddit and /k/ are scarcely different from each other nowdays so you may have a point there. I miss the old days, even the more recent past of when vid rel got made was still good.
>>804262>I know I've been away from leftypol for a while but I'm pretty sure there hasn't even been an interracial thread in over a year. Maybe some sporadic bait posts but not a lot. Certainly none that I've seen. Use the searchbar and type in "bbc"
> I miss the old days, even the more recent past of when vid rel got made was still good.idk man, looking back on anything past just numbs my brain more because its just some other flavor of absurdity.
>>804262One of the mods on here straight up copies entire threads from /pol/ and posts them here
>>804264>Use the searchbar and type in "bbc"That's all from a single troll TOR user. He is also the same guy who keeps posting cuck fanfic shit like "the bull just came in my wife" in every thread. I'm also convinced he's the same poster who used to spam "I was raped" in every thread.
>>804275Not all Glownonymous posts are from the same person.
someone get him to draw cold war era comics
>>804369they're spamming the same shit over and over so this makes no difference in the end
>>804417Same for regular anons.
>>804368>Fairy Tales are Jewish Wut?
>>804274 Wow, and I thought this place was bad last year.
>beloved Tatsuya Ishida
I'm sure OP is being sarcastic
>>804435No, because I can't filter those
>>804448This has been going on for a while tbh I noticed it like 2 years ago
>>804184tatsuya ishida is basically doing a CIA psy op at gunpoint and this was a cry for help
>>804368>Christianity is a Roman psy op against the Jews<Christianity was a Jewish psy op against the Romansit was both
>>804550How dare these people throw things at scary giant half skeleton statue man
i keep forgetting whether hes a tradcath or a tradpagan and the comics geniinely dont help
>>804559oh boy Tats is in for some spicy Sino shitposts
>>804559Lol they didn't even mention he's Japanese. I wonder if they know. Has he never extended his Nazi apologia to Imperial Japan?
when are we getting a nanjing episode?
>>804188yeah we all stem from the same root, but some are more retarded than others
>>804564He has shown a Chinese Dragon as being a toy of the Jewish Bolshevik conspiracy in some panels, alongside the Russian Bear.
>>804586"The chinese as some kind of subversive jew" narrative SEAmonkeys and some japanese try to push is the most delusional thing in the world it just doesnt work at all.
Chinese are the Germans of Asia if anything: huge population, mostly farmers and craftsmen before industrialization, super influencial culture, spread everywhere on the continent & oceania, generally progressive.
It doesnt make sense foir their diaspora either because they always ends up being competent nation builders in their nearby host countries best example being Lee Kwan Yew.
>>804800He makes aryans look like total cucks and the jews as the master race
Is he doing double ironic psy-op?
>>804808Nazi-level antisemitism relies entirely on the blood libel/degeneracy smear, otherwise they're just people proudly defending their race and doing the ingroup bias way more efficiently. So basically you can depict Jews as brilliant and Aryans as total idiots, as long as you say oh they eat babies or whatever so their ethnicity isn't valid when Nazis talk of defending racial purity and 'defending' their own race.
>>805037>>803976He can't even bring himself to be nazi enpugh to sign off o generalplan ost, even as a nazi he remains a shitlib
>>805442>Smith and Wesson (including an AI-generated trademark near the handle)<revolverWhat?
>coca cola, burger and friesSo who's gonna tell him it was mostly canned foods and in an amount that would feed a single unit of the Red Army for a month (out of a 48 month war in a 30+ million man army)?
>>805538I look like this and say this
>>806100>atheists’ claims that you don’t need religion to fight to the death by citing Soviet soldiersbrother, the Russian Orthodox Church was quite active in WWII.
>>804806>Chinese are the Germans of Asia if anythingtrunami alert
>>806100neither side of the argument makes sense as most soviet soldiers would be christians or muslims though
>>806968Sinfest has lost his mind
Also, have you noticed that Tatsuya's works from his website have a watermark, but his Twitter ones don't?
>>806968For the context: Barmaley is children's book by Andrey Chukovsky where an evil kid eating pirate Barmaley was swallowed by a good crocodile from doctor Aibolit (other character from same author) and kids plead to let him go. Of course, Tats decided to imbue his schizo beliefs that "showing compassion for an enemy is jewish o algo" or something.
>>807074>Of course, Tats decided to imbue his schizo beliefs that "showing compassion for an enemy is jewish o algo" or something.Isn’t that how some leftists think as well? That showing compassion towards enemies is “bourgeois”?
>>807080Don't think it's comparable tbh.
Mostly because for the leftists violence against the opressor is natural outcome in case where opressor sees "compassion" as the sign that their enemy is a doormat against which any atrocity could be commited against without consequences.
Fascists mostly see the violence through the lenses of the primitive "might makes right" and theatrical display of power. Problem is that this kind of thinking leads to nowhere and you're likely to end up in nuclear apocalypse.
Of course, unless you're thinking about some kind of Nechayvites then I'd agree.
>>807094Except "might makes right" doesn't count for them if you're not on their team, then it becomes "jewish tricks" or some shit that allowed you to win, and that means it's invalid because only 1v1 with the full might of the state behind me is correct
>>807378Also, this uygha got caught using AI again - the Soviet soldier's weapon in the first 3 frames and in the 4th is completely different
>>807378Tats secretly wants BTD
>>807379the sights on the gun are also only there on frame 2. but it could also just be Tats having no idea how guns work. frames 2-3 looks like a rifle
also the angle on the stock on the German gun keeps changing. yeah this feels generated come to think of it
>>807378Ive been laughing at this for the last hour it's genius
>>807378>transwoman is more powerful than cis malesAlso this is just a rehash of bbc jokes from like 2007
>>807628Ishida is in late 50s
Do you think Tats is ever going give his chud schizo take on Harry Truman bombing Japan?
>>807379>>807409>>807628This right here sums up Tats.
Even if his comics didn't have his deranged chud delusions they would still suck because Tats is a lazy/mediocre artist and his 'humor' is stale and unfunny.
>>808139But this is not even suicide
>>808139Man I'm getting bored of this shit, Tats seriously has ADD or something, can't even stick to the topic without gay culture war shit
>>808171You are seeing male feminist at work
>>808207its funny because chuds dont give af about historical accuracy, hollywood always blatantly lied about history because directors think its not interesting or cool enough
>>808209Historical accuracy is largely new-age bullshit. Yes SOME accuracy to old legends or historical events should be present, but it's not a documentary, it's cinema. That's why the old Roman and Greek history and myth films from the 50s and 60s are better than a lot of the current day, 2010s+ intepretations, they tell a story first. Obviously the Spartacist uprising wasn't like how its depicted, but the ideas behind the story, the cinematography, the visual art and story told is what matters. The same can be said for the Soviet Alexander Nevsky film from the 40s. It's not meant to be hyper-historically accurate, it's the story being told and visual art that matters. The new Odyssey is just CGI, mediocre acting, lazy edginess and a nice helping of liberal identity politics slathered on top, because A) is pushes the liberal narrative and B) it gets a nice low-brow reaction out of the right-wing. Win-win for Hollywood. Who needs art when you have SPECTACLE!? Tiresome Fuckers.
>>808209It’s not just Hollywood. Theater in general, whether it be televised or live, rarely rely on historical accuracy
>>808350I agree with you that cinema shouldn’t be held to strict standards of historical accuracy but I think it should come with disclaimer messages first
Also the rest of your rants about older movies being better due to “lack of CGI” or whatever is just plain old vintage bias
>>808139so it was a PPS all along. yet it's shown with wood furniture in
>>807378 >>808381Your reading comprehension is quite poor. The issue with CGI is that it will never be realistic enough to BE real. Even the Avatar movies, which have insanely good CGI only feels truly real when in a 3D movie theater, which is a lot of prerequisites when practical effects are there. CGI should be for things that cannot be done practically.
>old vintage biasYes, older A list and even some B-list films are better. That Jumanji movie with The Rock was okay, but it lacks the charming aspect of the original film, despite the latter's comparatively primitive CGI.
>I think it should come with disclaimer messages I was going to say no, because that's irritating, but then I remember that this is a time that needs instructions for basic common sense things. Too many people look at something like Little Big Man and think it's 100% historically accurate because it fits their narrative.
>>808461>I was going to say no, because that's irritating, but then I remember that this is a time that needs instructions for basic common sense things. Too many people look at something like Little Big Man and think it's 100% historically accurate because it fits their narrative.You underestimate the ignorance/impressionability of people in the past. Most peoples ideas of history comes from movies and fiction.
And alot of these inaccuracies have been allowed to be propagated for decades.
Also you forget the ethically questionable things that were commonalities such as driving without seatbelts and smoking/drinking while pregnant.
>Your reading comprehension is quite poor. The issue with CGI is that it will never be realistic enough to BE real. Even the Avatar movies, which have insanely good CGI only feels truly real when in a 3D movie theater, which is a lot of prerequisites when practical effects are there. CGI should be for things that cannot be done practicallyFair point.
Chroma key is kinda overused too much. I prefer a hybrid of practical effects and CGI
>>808467>ou underestimate the ignorance/impressionability of people in the pastNot really. Glowies systematically degraded the American Education System and Hollywood into propaganda machines. The closer to the 21st century, the more blatant it got. Informationally you can say that the current generation is "more educated" but it's more rote-memorization of facts rather than usable intelligence.
>alot of these inaccuracies have been allowed to be propagated Some are due to incomplete information amended by new discoveries later down the line which then took time to spread, especially when internet was either nonexistent or primitive.
>the ethically questionable things that were commonalities such as driving without seatbelts and smoking/drinking while pregnant. Not ethically questionable, ignorance or misinformation. Smoking was promoted as good by the capitalist medical establishment for many decades. The USSR was very early in condemning them as poison, but either way smoking was so intrinsic to society, near everyone did it. That said, it wasn't common for women to smoke, being considered more of a man thing, especially in the second half of the 20th century and particularly in the Soviet Bloc. Men too started to smoke much less as the century progressed, as it became associated with the poor and stressed and sick.
Early cars in general were dangerous, material progression increased safety over time, but that has nothing to do with common sense of the average layman. By the 70s every automobile produced after 1969 in both the East and West Blocs had seatbelts. The dangerous nature of cars (as well as the minor complexities of a stick-shift) meant people had to be more careful about driving, which meant people were more conscientious. Nowadays people do not give a fuck and think they're indestructible. Hell the past 2 decades of driving seem to have less and less competency.
>I prefer a hybrid of practical effects and CGI THIS
>>808547> Not really. Glowies systematically degraded the American Education System and Hollywood into propaganda machines. The closer to the 21st century, the more blatant it got. Informationally you can say that the current generation is "more educated" but it's more rote-memorization of facts rather than usable intelligence. Our education system was based on rote memorization to begin with.
The K-12 education system was based on semi-militaristic intentions from seventeenth/eighteenth century Prussian think tanks. It was then adapted by Germans, some of whom immigrated to America around the mid-nineteenth century.
Alot of our academic subjects used metrics that were influenced by institutional racism/sexism
There’s been a lot of historical inaccuracies that have been taught in schools for over a century and they and haven’t been corrected.
There’s lots of articles and videos explaining some popular misconceptions taught in history.
> Early cars in general were dangerous, material progression increased safety over time, but that has nothing to do with common sense of the average layman. By the 70s every automobile produced after 1969 in both the East and West Blocs had seatbelts. The dangerous nature of cars (as well as the minor complexities of a stick-shift) meant people had to be more careful about driving, which meant people were more conscientious. Nowadays people do not give a fuck and think they're indestructible. Hell the past 2 decades of driving seem to have less and less competencyBruh, you have no idea how much more common drunk driving was back then. People used to drive immediately after a couple of beers. It didn’t result in extensive jail time. Hell, cops would escort you home.
Also, suburban development was a lot less before the 1980s especially in the South. That meant less worry about bumping into children or the elderly
There’s been alot of suburban sprawl and improper zoning. (Houses being built on high-traffic roads) which makes driving alot more a liability.
> Not ethically questionable, ignorance or misinformation. Smoking was promoted as good by the capitalist medical establishment for many decades. The USSR was very early in condemning them as poison, but either way smoking was so intrinsic to society, near everyone did it. That said, it wasn't common for women to smoke, being considered more of a man thing, especially in the second half of the 20th century and particularly in the Soviet Bloc. Men too started to smoke much less as the century progressed, as it became associated with the poor and stressed and sick. And yet, even amongst the twentieth century smoking was seen as bad for kids. Fathers who caught their kids smoking would force them to smoke the whole pack in one go as punishment.
Even though it wasn’t treated as much a scandal as nowadays.
>>808547> Some are due to incomplete information amended by new discoveries later down the line which then took time to spread, especially when internet was either nonexistent or primitive. This is fair. As Carl Sagan once said, “Science is a self-corrective disclipline”
But I also believe that there may have been scientific discoveries that will never be fully replicated due to time wearing away ancient artifacts.
And especially in the case of genealogy, humans don’t remain the same in terms of who they miscegenate with.
The popular question about when their or not Jewry is real may become less relevant as the centuries go on.
>>808655>the Nazis never harmed a single civilian, not one crime, it's all a false flagHoly shit, this is so retarded, even the most ardent allies shill can admit that things like Dresden happened
>>808657>Dresden happenedKIDF detected
>>808661France performance was so mediocre despite their objective strenght it is hard to believe they werent litteraly stabbed in the back/sabotaged by (some of) their elites.
>>808659I'm not even saying it was bad per se, obviously it was a horrible thing but somewhat understandable as part of a defensive total war, but at least allies fans bwill make justifications for it rather than being like "fake news, it never happened, they burned their own city to the ground to make us look bad"
>>808550>The K-12 education system was based on semi-militaristic intentions from seventeenth/eighteenth century Prussian think tanks. While true, the methodology of older education in the States was still different. You had thing like Civics and there was a lot of requirement to understand a subject. It helps of course that up until the Reagan era, the US Education system had to make sure it could produce people capable of at least matching Soviet education so as to have more skilled labour and so on. People also read more actual books and had to put more effort into researching a subject than nowdays when Google will give or generate a quick answer few will bother to fact-check or think about.
>Alot of our academic subjects used metrics that were influenced by institutional racism/sexism Dunno about that one. Outside of the Intelligence Quota testing system (but that's more a rich vs poor thing). Education availability for the colored and women was definitely lower.
>lots of articles and videos explaining some popular misconceptions taught in history.Problem is that plenty of them make shit up. Recently there was this trend about "le transatlantic accent" and how it was a Hollywood Fake, and if I didn't see an underrated video from an actual linguist talk about it, I would have been mislead into thinking that as well, simply because the revisionism gets repeated so much that older sources fly under the RADAR.
>There’s been a lot of historical inaccuracies that have been taught in schools for over a century and they and haven’t been corrected. Some are for propaganda purposes and intentionally so. E.g. WW2 and Soviet history with the gorillions.
>you have no idea how much more common drunk driving was back then I am well aware of it, I'm also aware that people today still do it and actually more. In 1966 about 300K people were stopped for DUI/DWI. Today its over 800K and with many more fatalities. In the past things were more relaxed but people had the common sense to usually NOT do it, statistically speaking. Today people are told to know better from school and laws are stricter, yet its more common.
>cops would escort you home.This is something important. While police were always oppressive factors in Capitalism, the current Police Force, with its militarization, is extremely aggressive compared to relatively tame policing of the past (barring racial prejudice). Even with racism, after the 60s cops would maybe beat someone. Today it almost instantly jumps to "shoot them" despite the police force being more racially diverse and less discriminatory.
>Also, suburban development was a lot less before the 1980s especially in the South. That meant less worry about bumping into children or the elderlyTrue.
>There’s been alot of suburban sprawl and improper zoning. (Houses being built on high-traffic roads) which makes driving alot more a liability. That's very true, but also just people being a lot more reckless, especially with phones. I see people on the High-way or driving heavy vehicles and just scrolling away like it's no big deal.
>Fathers who caught their kids smoking would force them to smoke the whole pack in one go as punishment.That was common sense in action, the father was already too deep into it to commit to quitting, but the kids can still be stopped, and it did work; smoking reduced over the decades.
Also it was similar to underage drinking; 'that's an adult thing, leave it to the adults'
>>808552>not JewryWas this a word filter?
>This is fair. As Carl Sagan once said, “Science is a self-corrective disclipline”>But I also believe that there may have been scientific discoveries that will never be fully replicated due to time wearing away ancient artifacts. Agreed
>>808655I too immediately thought "Batman"
This Tats is really coping hard. This is beyond Clean Wehrmacht. Goebbels would be proud.
>>808662 >>808661 They weren't stabbed in the back, you don't need active betrayal when you have geriatric incompetence. The Majority of French military high command and the Government as a whole were dinosaurs from WW1 who arrogantly believed that Germany would never win, and in 1939, France should have been able to do so. I pointed this out several threads ago but France could have invaded the Rhineland in September and the Germans would have been instantly crippled. They didn't have the military forces to fight Poland and France. On the other hand Poland also caused its own downfall because it undercutting French decisions during the 1930s by leveraging its status as an ally, refusing to support France if it took military action against Germany for rearmament and other violations of the Versailles Treaty as well as demanding French support for Poland's pursuit of Baltic territories which only stopped because the USSR threatened to step in on the latter's behalf.
>>808676>While true, the methodology of older education in the States was still different. You had thing like Civics and there was a lot of requirement to understand a subject. It helps of course that up until the Reagan era, the US Education system had to make sure it could produce people capable of at least matching Soviet education so as to have more skilled labour and so on.That’s because during the Cold War Era, technical skills were taught in schools.
Not everyone was adequate for the typical abstract/theoretical education. Less students were in AP classes back then. Those were more “elite”.
Also, less people graduated high school back then. It was socially acceptable for teens to drop out of school at twelve thru fifteen to get work at factories or mechanic shops.
Irony is, that era produced more people that were handy than nowadays.
Nowadays, we have people who can solve trigonometric and quadratic equations, people who are well versed in ethnic history but they don’t know how to to talk to the opposite sex. Nor do they know how to change a tire or change oil. Nor do they know how to fix door knobs.
Our post Gen X adult life has popularized awkwardness and crashing out.
Why else is “adulting” a thing? Academics think technical skills are unnecessary if not detrimental to childrens education
“Kids can learn life skills at home” they say. Yet, most parents don’t have knowledge nor patience to teach kids technical skills. It’s become normalised for your twenties and early thirties to be an unworldly bookworm with no technical skills.
Nowadays, any young person that’s worldly and mechanically inclined will be mistaken for a lumpen prole in the global north.
>People also read more actual books and had to put more effort into researching a subject than nowdays when Google will give or generate a quick answer few will bother to fact-check or think about. Just because we didn’t have Internet back then didn’t mean people read more throughly. We had encyclopedias and whatnot. And even know with Google, you still have to read through articles and cross-examine.
We have people making three hour long videos about academic subjects doing as much research as possible and even doing video calls with experts online to get their opinion.
>Problem is that plenty of them make shit up. Recently there was this trend about "le transatlantic accent" and how it was a Hollywood Fake, and if I didn't see an underrated video from an actual linguist talk about it, I would have been mislead into thinking that as well, simply because the revisionism gets repeated so much that older sources fly under the RADAR.Can you provide sources for a lot of “historical debunking” videos being fake?
>Some are for propaganda purposes and intentionally so. E.g. WW2 and Soviet history with the gorillions.True, but I also believe some of it is just plain old ignorance or lack of priority. Some academic trivia isn’t debunked due to people not showing enough interest.
There’s more videos dedicated to debunking WW2 myths than say for the War of 1812.
>That's very true, but also just people being a lot more reckless, especially with phones. I see people on the High-way or driving heavy vehicles and just scrolling away like it's no big dealCan you explain how people are being a lot of more reckless behind the wheel outside of phone usage?
>I am well aware of it, I'm also aware that people today still do it and actually more. In 1966 about 300K people were stopped for DUI/DWI.Maybe because policing was more lenient back then? There wasn’t a lot of patrol areas back then? Also maybe there were more cops letting people off the hook back then?
>Today its over 800K and with many more fatalities. In the past things were more relaxed but people had the common sense to usually NOT do it, statistically speaking. Today people are told to know better from school and laws are stricter, yet its more commonMaybe because cops are more reactive than before? Cops will pull you over for a broken tail light or license plate lights being off.
Cops are more draconian nowadays.
Also, we have more media coverage on incidents than ever before.
You’d be surprised at how much shit happened back then that wasn’t reported or only ended up in local news.
“What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas” was the popular mantra. That all hanged with 24-hour news television and the Internet.
>This is something important. While police were always oppressive factors in Capitalism, the current Police Force, with its militarization, is extremely aggressive compared to relatively tame policing of the past (barring racial prejudice). Even with racism, after the 60s cops would maybe beat someone. Today it almost instantly jumps to "shoot them" despite the police force being more racially diverse and less discriminatoryDo you think that the serial killer epidemic of the 1960s thru 1990s along with the delinquency epidemic of the 1980s/90s, the crack epidemic, AIDS epidemic, and the free love zeitgeist of the 1970s just made people paranoid?
Also I find it funny that equality is more prevalent in oppression than in prospect.
>That was common sense in action, the father was already too deep into it to commit to quitting, but the kids can still be stopped, and it did work; smoking reduced over the decades. Also it was similar to underage drinking; 'that's an adult thing, leave it to the adults'
While I understand this, I think it’s hypocritical. A lot of adults were enabled to become abusive due to their bad habits getting out of control.
A lot of alcoholic fathers weren’t properly punished. They were still allowed to indulge in their vices.
If anything, I think adults should be punished the same way as children when it comes to vices getting out of control.
“Do as I say not as I do” is shitty parenting.
>>808547>That said, it wasn't common for women to smoke, being considered more of a man thing, especially in the second half of the 20th century and particularly in the Soviet BlocYou sure?
I think that it was more patronized but I don’t think it was less permitted
>>808676>It helps of course that up until the Reagan era, the US Education system had to make sure it could produce people capable of at least matching Soviet education so as to have more skilled labour and so onThat was probably one of the few times that America took education seriously because of “The Space Race”.
Imagine how education was outside of urban centers before the Cold War.
You heard about the Monkey v Scopes trial of 1925? Evolution was considered blasphemous to teach in schools especially in the South
In fact, the American education system was initially centered around religious literacy
Secular books outside of classic Roman civics weren’t welcomed as much
>>808692>I think that it was more patronized but I don’t think it was less permitted Yes I'm sure. Women did smoke, but in far less numbers and far less commonly. Its reflected in films of the time and documentary footage.
>Imagine how education was outside of urban centers before the Cold War. Oh yeah. The National Defense Act of 1958 paints a clear picture.
It was listed as 96% in 1940 but the method of how literacy was determined changed as it was determined that a majority of people surveyed lied out of embarrassment. Thus it became how many people passed 5 years or more of school. Furthermore this was the result of increased education funding because in 1917 25% of Army-recruitment age men couldn't read or understand basic instructions at all, prompting The 1917 Immigration Act. And again this is in a rich country that hadn't had a war on its land in half a century. Meantime the USSR hit 94% from practically nil. American literacy has risen and dropped constantly, which is why Kennedy and Reagan presidencies had significant effort put into Education campaigns to counter it, and its still an issue.
>About 13 percent of all 17-year-olds in the United States can be considered functionally illiterate. Functional illiteracy among minority youth may run as high as 40 percent - "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." 1983 >14% of Adults are Below Basic levels of literacy according to the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy in the USA >It was listed as 96% but the method of how literacy was determined changed because it was determined that a majority of people surveyed lied out of embarrassment. Thus it became how many people passed 5 years or more of school. Furthermore this was the result of increased education funding because in 1917 25% of Army-recruitment age men couldn't read or understand basic instructions at all, prompting The 1917 Immigration Act. And again this is in a rich country that hadn't had a war on its land in half a century. Meantime the USSR hit 94% from practically nil. American literacy has risen and dropped constantly, which is why Kennedy and Reagan presidencies had significant effort put into Education campaigns to counter it, and its still an issue.
>About 13 percent of all 17-year-olds in the United States can be considered functionally illiterate. Functional illiteracy among minority youth may run as high as 40 percent - "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." 1983 >14% of Adults are Below Basic levels of literacy according to the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy in the USA >You heard about the Monkey v Scopes trial of 1925I forgot about that, goo point.
>>808690>That’s because during the Cold War Era, technical skills were taught in schools.Technical skills or not, it doesn't take a genius to hammer a nail into a wall-stud.
>Less students were in AP classes back then. Those were more “elite”. True, but that's pure education, not intelligence. Not to mention the standard levels of education were different.
>It was socially acceptable for teens to drop out of school at twelve thru fifteen to get work at factories or mechanic shops. I'm well aware, mostly because college educations were needed for high-end work like engineering, science and other intellectual pursuits rather than practical labour. Nowdays having a college degree means nothing.
>we have people who can solve trigonometric and quadratic equations Most people who went to college don't remember how to do this unless its their life's work. I did Advanced Calculus, but I couldn't tell you how to solve basic differentials at this point. It's been years and I don't use it.
>well versed in ethnic history Eh, well versed in the 'history' their politicized teachers taught them; American Intellectuals glow.
>they don’t know how to to talk to the opposite sex That's true, but also down to alienation by capitalism and the shift in society to be far more neurotic and identity-obsessed than ever before.
>Irony is, that era produced more people that were handy than nowadays. Practicality Uber Alles
>most parents don’t have knowledge nor patience to teach kids technical skills. It’s become normalised for your twenties and early thirties to be an unworldly bookworm with no technical skills. I agree
>Just because we didn’t have Internet back then didn’t mean people read more throughly. Actually they did. People today don't pay attention to the movies they watch because they're scrolling social media on their phones, so movies and media are lazier and dump exposition repeatedly so people can keep up with the 'plots'. People literally do not read anymore.
https://archive.is/w1f30 >encyclopedias and whatnot Yes but you had to go use an Index and a Glossary to find the information you need, discern what the words may mean and so on. That take effort and attention.
>We have people making three hour long videos about academic subjects doing as much research as possible and even doing video calls with experts online to get their opinion The collective number of all these people is very, very low relative to the population, and they're also part of what I mean, people don't research things themselves, they watch a video on it. I've caught myself doing the same thing because its just so 'convenient'.
>a lot of “historical debunking” videos Off the bat I gave you an example regarding the TransAtlantic Accent;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xoDsZFwF-c >There’s more videos dedicated to debunking WW2 myths than say for the War of 1812. True, but also a lot of them are ironically inaccurate, it's how we get wehraboos like Tats and other Stormfront rejects.
>Can you explain how people are being a lot of more reckless behind the wheel outside of phone usage?I posted the DUI information. Not looking at the road and being distracted while sober is stupider than driving while not completely all there. Police leniency doesn't explain a 3x increase in DUIs despite driving education becoming more compulsory than in those days. The 300K number is the maximum of arrests and the actual number is closer to 250K. 800K is just DUIs, not phone usage. The number of fatalities has reduced but that's more due to cars materially progressing and becoming safer than the human factor.
>Cops are more draconian nowadays. Yep, I did say that.
>made people paranoid? Maybe? I think the CIA's COINTEL PRO and other operations made it worse.
>funny that equality is more prevalent in oppression than in prospect. Indeed
>>808901>Most people who went to college don't remember how to do this unless its their life's work. I did Advanced Calculus, but I couldn't tell you how to solve basic differentials at this point. It's been years and I don't use itThat’s the problem with our education. Society uses non-practical academic skills as a moral compass for young people when most people over thirty don’t even use, care about, nor remember academic skills.
>True, but that's pure education, not intelligence. Not to mention the standard levels of education were differentThat’s fair. But you have to admit that there’s a lot more theoretical/abstract dross being pushed into curriculum nowadays than there were before the 1990s. Academic intelligence nowadays is defined by how much trivia a kid can recite
>American literacy has risen and dropped constantly, which is why Kennedy and Reagan presidencies had significant effort put into Education campaigns to counter it, and its still an issue. When people talk about functional illiteracy, I’m expecting people who don’t know how to read or write.
But literacy is always defined mainly by how many formal words you can use in sentences.
I especially hate how schools wanna moralize recreational reading. Literature classes always wanna force kids to do expositions and unnecessary psychoanalysis of authors rather than enjoying the story for its sake
I especially hate how literature teachers act like that reading musings of early modern writers using flowery language is a moral skill.
Fun throng is, a lot of those writers that a lot of these pretentious bookworms love were by current standards “functionally illiterate” that had a deep contempt for math and science.
I’m all for teaching kids to read but there seems to be this obnoxious drive to force kids to be enthusiastic about reading rather than making them learn what words mean and allowing them to to do ungraded writing exercises to better train their brains
In fact, I think our academic system in general seems to be about forcing kids to be enthusiastic about learning and have serious contempt for worldly/laymen things.
Academia has become intolerant of children having flaws/nuances. It’s become expected that kids are supposed to be good at all academic subjects.
A lot of academic enthusiasts often express a draconian approach to education that mirrors religious dogma.
They think of children as cute little pets who are not supposed to want/know about anything outside of academia.
Recreational or industrial.
They teach kids that academic skills are an indication of moral conscience
There’s the popular myth promoted that criminality is due to low education. Most post-Gen X people think that rigorous education will cleanse children of reactionary biases.
Anytime when there’s incidents of kids expressing racist or sexist sentiments, people think the solution is more education.
Especially Leftypol. They ignore the fact that alot of our prominent racists and sexists were mainly kids who went to school and graduated high school with relatively decent marks. They’re even in college now.
>Technical skills or not, it doesn't take a genius to hammer a nail into a wall-stud. With the way academic enthusiasts look down on technical skills, raising post-Gen X youth with such radlib aversion to them, people nowadays think knowing how to fix doorknobs and broken headphones is wizardry.
>>808901>>About 13 percent of all 17-year-olds in the United States can be considered functionally illiterate. Functional illiteracy among minority youth may run as high as 40 percent - "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." 1983 >14% of Adults are Below Basic levels of literacy according to the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy in the USA Not saying that this is right but why should kids be judged as a moral collective rather than individually. Not all kids are gonna be good at literacy. Doesn’t mean that they automatically flop at other academic subjects
I remember in school that there were kids who suck at reading but they were exceptional in math and science
Kids who were good at history probably weren’t all good in literature class
Adults are never judged based on individual skills and even if they are, adults are judged with moral individuality.
Society never offers that same consideration towards children.
>>808901>Yes but you had to go use an Index and a Glossary to find the information you need, discern what the words may mean and so on. That take effort and attentionAnd people who grew up in the age of encyclopedias still aren’t any more “cognitively complex” than those who grew up with Google.
People still did quick skimming to find info that they needed.
I think there’s this sort of obnoxious formalism in education concerning media formats of information. Education seems to be less about practicality than it is about formality
>>808901>The collective number of all these people is very, very low relative to the population, and they're also part of what I mean, people don't research things themselves, they watch a video on it. I've caught myself doing the same thing because its just so 'convenient'. By this logic, reading up about information in a book rather than traveling across the world and writing down all the academic objectives you came to investigate isn’t research either.
That’s how slot of ancient scholars felt about reading/writing when they were first introduced to plebians
>>808655he just completely abandoned the plot at this point and is just using the comics as a way to cry abt random shit he doesnt like
>>809376At least in a way that makes a modicum of sense. Because oh boy did the all Veles-Deathless crap come out of nowhere
>>809376critical support to judeo-christianity against judeo-bolshevism?
>>808954>reading up about information in a book rather than traveling across the world and writing down all the academic objectives you came to investigate isn’t research either.In a sense, but reading a book still takes effort and attention. It's easy to turn on a video and just listen to someone tell you information that you won't bother double-checking. Obviously it isn't practical for someone to do it all themselves, but there's a distinct lack of focus today that wasn't there before.
>People still did quick skimming to find info that they needed.Again, the point is that skimming was difficult, unlike Google which hands everything ready to you, skimming a book still requires a level of focus and mental work.
>Not all kids are gonna be good at literacy Excluding mental issues, everyone can be equally capable of reading and writing even accounting for divergence of learning. People with Dyslexia can overcome it.
>Doesn’t mean that they automatically flop at other academic subjects Reading and writing is the founding part of research and education, are you high? If you cannot read, you cannot learn something unless you do it yourself or have someone else do it for you. If you don't have a disability there is no reason for this outside of laziness.
>there were kids who suck at reading but they were exceptional in math and science I'm pretty sure they sucked a literary reading and excelled at math and science because it was being taught not only in text but verbally and visually. The reading portion is down to parents and early education not doing enough.
>Kids who were good at history probably weren’t all good in literature class LMAO I'm not even going to touch that statement.
>Adults are never judged based on individual skills Yes they are lmao. Skilled trades, academics and even many general labour jobs are determined by individual skill and also as a general collective, hence the disdain for blue collar work under Capitalism.
>Society never offers that same consideration towards children.You've got it all in reverse.
>>809504>In a sense, but reading a book still takes effort and attention. It's easy to turn on a video and just listen to someone tell you information that you won't bother double-checking. Obviously it isn't practical for someone to do it all themselves, but there's a distinct lack of focus today that wasn't there before. You sure? Because there’s always people looking up stuff they watched in a video to confirm what the author was saying.
>Again, the point is that skimming was difficult, unlike Google which hands everything ready to you, skimming a book still requires a level of focus and mental work. Not exactly. You still have to read through articles to compare.
>Excluding mental issues, everyone can be equally capable of reading and writing even accounting for divergence of learning. People with Dyslexia can overcome it. I’m talking about literacy at scholastic level. People expect kids to be literate at exceptional levels
>I'm pretty sure they sucked a literary reading and excelled at math and science because it was being taught not only in text but verbally and visually. The reading portion is down to parents and early education not doing enough. It could also be that adults are incapable of seeing children as individuals. There seems to be this sentiment in education that kids are supposed to be all the same in terms of skillset.
A lot of modern education also seems more geared towards passing tests than understanding information intimately.
Also a lot of reading done in early Ed is often group activites where everyone is forced to read along to some nursery rhyme rather than reading on their own.
Also, there’s been a reduction of technical skills being taught in schools.
>Reading and writing is the founding part of research and education, are you high? If you cannot read, you cannot learn something unless you do it yourself or have someone else do it for you. If you don't have a disability there is no reason for this outside of laziness. I guess there were a lot of lazy kids back then. Because illiteracy was higher in the past.
Technical skills are also important for education. But they’re dismissed. And a lot of reading and writing in schooos are based more on impractical formalities than anything.
>Yes they are lmao. Skilled trades, academics and even many general labour jobs are determined by individual skill and also as a general collective, hence the disdain for blue collar work under Capitalism. I mean in terms of academic skills. Adults are never held in contempt for not knowing random academic trivia
Also blue collar work is looked down upon because people think themselves as too good for it
>You've got it all in reverse.Adults are always complaining about kids having “too much break time” for not knowing random bits of uncommon academic trivia.
>>809508I think food stamps is due to most Americans not having enough fruit trees and vegetable plants that are wild growing.
If you’re hungry, you have to go to the store to pay for one single apple.
There’s also not enough incentives for communities to have a neighborhood food gardens.
Unique IPs: 68