Follow the lead of Spartan women

Nathan Richardson
Nathan Richardson

Spartan law codified under Lycurgus expressed the importance of child bearing to Sparta.
Bearing and raising children was considered the most important role for women in Spartan society, equal to male warrior in Spartan army.
Spartan women were encouraged to produce many children, preferably male, to increase Sparta's military population.
They took pride in having borne and raised brave warriors. Having sons who were cowards, however, was a cause for sorrow, and the ancient author Aelian claims that women whose sons died as cowards lamented this.
Spartan women that died in childbirth were honored

Motherhood should become a badge of honor again - with only those who have attempted it worthy to be called real women.
It worked in Sparta to boost birth rates.

Attached: Spartan-women.jpg (121.1 KB, 800x663)

Other urls found in this thread:

gutenberg.org/files/7524/7524-h/7524-h.htm
archive.org/stream/tacitusagricolag00taciiala/tacitusagricolag00taciiala_djvu.txt
stoa.org/diotima/anthology/wlgr/wlgr-greeklegal98.shtml
ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter5.html
israelite.info/research/sourcedocumentsfiles/spartan.html

Ayden Young
Ayden Young

remember to always filter the shield maiden fags

Jace Bell
Jace Bell

I was just reading the chapter about this in Evola’s Revolt Against the Modern World. To add to what you have listed, Evola says that Hindu women who died during childbirth were given a warrior burial ceremony

Dylan Wright
Dylan Wright

It's almost like this isn't 650 B.C anymore you dumb nigger. Your fucking retarded analogy existed for most of civilization up until recently so why you chose this time period is just stupid

Logan Cook
Logan Cook

EVOLA & MUH ARYAN QUEENS
This is why you can't find a girl that will fuck you.

Hunter Gomez
Hunter Gomez

incels, please reply

Thomas Brown
Thomas Brown

I’m married with 2 white kids you dumb faggot.

Kevin Myers
Kevin Myers

/pol3/index.html
Join faggots

Isaiah Hernandez
Isaiah Hernandez

I don't need kids, I'm gonna gas the kikes all by myself, just wait and see
Any fag who needs kids to do their job is a fag

Jose Lee
Jose Lee

Spartan women were encouraged to produce many children, preferably male, to increase Sparta's military population.
When will Zig Forums get a grasp of high school biology…why, why, why do we have to tolerate this cuck chan level OP's? Is the some sort of FUCKING POLITICS to you OP?

It is better than you not have children.
The man who has a wife and kids gives hostages to fate.

Michael Ortiz
Michael Ortiz

Buddy how don't you understand that whether you're married with mayo kids or not, it's not going to make somebo6 retract their statement?

For real my silver citizen, when has the retort "nuh uh not true" ever worked out for you?

Your wife is definitely actively searching for side dick. Even through text on a screen, your immeasurable faggotry pushes through.

Carter Thomas
Carter Thomas

Wow a feral nigger loose on Zig Forums surprise surprise. Filtered nigger.

Dominic Sanchez
Dominic Sanchez

op is a fag
<Zig Forums is a hivemind, WHY DO YOU THINK LIKE THIS Zig Forums
Can't tell who is more of a faggot, you or OP.

Chase Kelly
Chase Kelly

Your post is not very political. Yes, women should be guided to motherhood. That's hardly a debate. Holding up Sparta is not much of an argument.

Nothing is more anti-woman than the Jewish influenced system of institutions in the West. Women are like children, in motivations and agency. They need to lose all political and most legal rights, and men will take good care of them. Nothing is worse for women and better for Jewish capital than requiring women to wageslave. Expecting women to work outside the home increases production and destroys wages, and it wastes female lives in slaving for a company. Not only does it destroy the family, but male productivity also suffers from not having a trustworthy assistant in the home.

Lincoln Adams
Lincoln Adams

You just can't decide because you are too busy looking in the mirror.

Jason Jenkins
Jason Jenkins

god damn what a bad post holy shit

Nolan Sanders
Nolan Sanders

I don't even own a mirror. I'm homeless you son of a bitch.

Chase James
Chase James

It is a nigger.

So a faggot homeless dude is pointing fingers? What is your vice homeless mirrorless faggot?

Ryan Barnes
Ryan Barnes

Honor and dignity is disobedience to the Leftist cult.
They honestly think that honor is foolishness and dignity is white
male privileged.

They are CRAZY. You can't reason with them.
You are correct, but for every person you persuade, 1000 more soy boys are born, and 10,000 Chinese and Muslims are born.
We will not win. We need to start planning for a DARK future.

Samuel Morales
Samuel Morales

We will not win. We need to start planning for a DARK future.
You DNA is due to be exterminated due to your apathy. cool.

Jeremiah Cox
Jeremiah Cox

Sparta was essentially a communist country. Helots could be assailed, beaten, raped, mutilated and murdered on a whim by Spartans. Spartans lived in barracks. The family didn't exist. There were barracks for the old, for men, for women, for children by age for mothers with babies. It was 2% ruling with Marquis de Sade cruelty over the 98% who were the Helot/slaves

Andrew Stewart
Andrew Stewart

What the fuck is a helot? Oh you mean a slave.

What's going with that then?

Daniel Gray
Daniel Gray

That is why it is perfect for the (((OP))) and for the niggers in the thread.

Gabriel Murphy
Gabriel Murphy

Sparta is very attractive as an ideal but had numerous vulnerabilities that led to its destruction… they had low sexual potency, thus unsustainable recruitment, women gained significant power with little risk due to land owning laws
The Spartans were a distinct race apart from the helots, if they did not rule cruelly over them they would have been annihilated by those who outnumbered them by so much, it is extraordinary that such a dwindling race held power by sheer force for so long. Like an entire race of SS officers.

Nicholas Ross
Nicholas Ross

Slavery is retarded and it always leads to racial dissolution with the slaves because men have no standards.

Jace Bennett
Jace Bennett

That makes no sense.

The slave-society that is Sparta was more homogenous than now slavery-free America and Germany.

Heck, the slave-holden America was less mixed than the Civil rights America.

Owen Fisher
Owen Fisher

It's certainly unsustainable as a long-term strategy. PIE tactics of nomadic subjugation may be preferable

Isaac Bailey
Isaac Bailey

nigger

Brody Bennett
Brody Bennett

gynocentrism
No

Caleb Perry
Caleb Perry

ETHNOGLOBE; Death to parasites.

Caleb Turner
Caleb Turner

READ TACITUS GERMANIA!

Attached: old-dictionary-definition.jpg (98.07 KB, 667x660)

Connor Flores
Connor Flores

Slavery makes you weak.
Sparta died with a whimper and they weren't as tough as modern hollywood makes them out to be.
Sparta was actually a horrible society.
I'd much rather be an Argosian or a Theban or a Corinthian or an Athenian than a Spartan.

Xavier Robinson
Xavier Robinson

Sparta was actually one of the last resisting states against both the Macedonian and then later the Romans.

It's athens who was weak.

Dylan Reyes
Dylan Reyes

Your wife is definitely actively searching for side dick.
Realistically, you're not wrong. It's what women do.

Gabriel Rodriguez
Gabriel Rodriguez

Random historical tangent time!
So there was this one time in the twilight of Sparta's years, long after their glory days when they barely had 1000 citizen soldiers to speak of. At this time, Pyrrhus of Epirus was gallivanting around Greece making one enemy after another. He had just annihilated Macedon and now marched into Peloponnese to capture Sparta while their main army was in Crete for reasons.
He surprised the Spartans and besieged their capital which had no walls btw. All that was left in the city were about 2000 slaves, old men, youths, and the women. The Spartan government tried to evacuate the women and children but the women refused to abandon Sparta.
Moved by their courage, the men built a makeshift wall on the southern side of the city to repel the Epirot attack.
The women worked alongside the men in desperation, often pleading with the men to rest lest they become too tired from work to fight.
Finally, the Epirots attacked. Again and again the nearly 30 thousand army with dozens of elephants was repulsed by nothing but 2 thousand men and women. Each time the Epirots tore down the wall, it was rebuilt.
Eventually, Pyrrhus gave up and attacked Argos where he was killed.
Thus ended one of the most amazing careers of any king.

True. They were no pushovers. However, the reason Macedon left them alone was because Sparta was no longer a threat at that point. Alexander conquered all of Asia. He could have crushed Sparta like a bug.
I'd have rather been Athenian because Spartan society was seriously fucked up.

Attached: Siege-of-Sparta.jpg (201.46 KB, 784x615)

Christopher Ramirez
Christopher Ramirez

If only women didn't have VOTING rights…

This

Camden Adams
Camden Adams

Alexander conquered Sparta too, just that Sparta was one of the last states to be captured.

Julian Adams
Julian Adams

The only nigger whiteknight here is you!

Ethan Jackson
Ethan Jackson

Remember to filter globohomo faggots.
There goes the whole thread; with you in the lead.

Xavier Cooper
Xavier Cooper

Yeah, because it was the furthest place from Pella

Christopher Campbell
Christopher Campbell

Speak English?

Adam Myers
Adam Myers

They also head great economic power, no? They controlled property.

Brayden Gonzalez
Brayden Gonzalez

nigger

Landon Martinez
Landon Martinez

Daily Reminder
There are only two ways to an afterlife that is not shit.

1. Death in righteous and glorious battle.
2. Death in righteous and glorious child-birth.

All other causes of death result in summary deletion from existence and exile to the dark void of nonexistence.

Attached: ahhhhhh.JPG (48.72 KB, 599x456)

Ayden Collins
Ayden Collins

What if you're a civilian who is incinerated when your city is nuked? Does that count as a battle-death?

Jordan Harris
Jordan Harris

2. Death in righteous and glorious child-birth.
Killing your breeders is glorious anons…
Right after that, kill yourselves.

wtf user, I love kikes now.

Juan Young
Juan Young

gutenberg.org/files/7524/7524-h/7524-h.htm

Nathan Rodriguez
Nathan Rodriguez

archive.org/stream/tacitusagricolag00taciiala/tacitusagricolag00taciiala_djvu.txt

Luke Clark
Luke Clark

Spartan law codified under Lycurgus
BUT SPARTAN LAW WAS ORALLY TRANSMITTED!

Caleb Wood
Caleb Wood

Fookin' 'ell, I'm psyched!!!

Attached: ChompHonk.gif (783.7 KB, 500x500)

Michael Gonzalez
Michael Gonzalez

No.

Incentivize the behaviors you want. That's how women work. Its also what they want.
Imagine the cognitive data stream for a woman from an event as pictured here.

Its a good time to be alive if you hope to self-propagate beyond your current material platform. There are and will be many opportunities for those presently alive to meet qualifier 1, and qualifier 2 is basically always on the table.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1.44 MB, 960x960)

Ryan Butler
Ryan Butler

thanks mgtow bro, us SJWs need to stick together

Hudson Taylor
Hudson Taylor

Imagine thinking that you need to have the right opinions to get laid. In my experience, it's quite the opposite. Dumb cunts make you a project and cling tighter and try to fix you while you get to keep doing increasingly depraved shit to them in the sack and generally treating them like trash.

Chase Perry
Chase Perry

dark void of nonexistence
I don't know anything about Ginnungagap but its said to open here or there like an uncontrolled warp in the woom.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (274.82 KB, 600x286)

Jordan Perry
Jordan Perry

I can imagine her cognitive data stream because she is not dead though.

Gabriel Sanchez
Gabriel Sanchez

Spartan women were emancipated witches who infested the cities politics because the men were always out fighting. Sparta was gynocratic society and the women there were so bad the men eventually just started to fuck each other.
Fuck of with this shit kike

Kayden James
Kayden James

nothing wrong with beating your own farming equipment

Parker Sullivan
Parker Sullivan

Reminder for Anons wives to
Read Hypnobirthing
isbn: 978-0757302664

The name sounds hippiedippie but it talks about the history of how jews in the church and then in the hospital have vilainized childbirth. It really should be called 'Come Mome Celtic Woman: The History of Natural Child Birth'.

Owen Baker
Owen Baker

What proof do you have that they were a separate race? I've never seen any. Helots and Spartans were identical. Think of Rumanian Securitate police and Romanians under Ceaucescu. Same race, but those Securitate fuckers were murderous thugs raised to beat the shit out of Romanians and enslave them to the Communists.

Luke Miller
Luke Miller

What the fuck did the Spartans produce? Their architecture was boring and crude, I can't think of a single Spartan poet, philosopher, playwright, artist, or even mathematician. Seems to me like it was a dead end society incapable of creating an empire. It was just a brutal slave state oligarchy imposed with an armed force raised to be military slaves.

Jose Jackson
Jose Jackson

Bump

Attached: 1550929852525.jpg (83.57 KB, 480x448)

Oliver Gutierrez
Oliver Gutierrez

what is wrong with your spacing?
Fucking tourists man i swear.

Joshua Fisher
Joshua Fisher

their art was war
something a faggot like you can not understand

Jace Brooks
Jace Brooks

(((Those))) who run the media decide what a real woman is. Not you.

Cooper Garcia
Cooper Garcia

Okay, so what if you're on an army base and the base is nuked. Does being incinerated in a nuclear attack count as a battle death?

Also, what if you are shot in the head by a cop or an enemy soldier and you feel that you are a soldier too engaged in a violent political struggle against your government, however the UN has declared you a criminal-terrorist organization and no state recognizes you as a legitimate soldier.
Does this count as a battle-death or not?

William Powell
William Powell

There's more to life than war.
Also, they ultimately lost out to nations that were not only better at war but had actual culture as well.

Luke Jenkins
Luke Jenkins

War is not an "art" as art is a creative activity and war is a murderous destructive activity.

art = painting, sculpture, architecture, literature, music etc

war = rape, murder, pillage, arson, enslavement of the conquered.

If you didn't know this you don't know much.

Chase Mitchell
Chase Mitchell

But they didn't just not produce art. They didn't produce science either. No philosophers, no mathematicians, no physicists, no historians, nothing. They're just a bunch of Ceaucescu style Securitate vicious thugs, attack dogs on a tight leash, with minds scarred by their own brutal treatment ever since they were separated from their mothers at age 4 or 5 to be place in barracks with savage pitiless discipline. They had no autonomous identity, they were the murderous attack slaves for a narrow minded uncreative oligarchy.

Bentley Hernandez
Bentley Hernandez

Married women in Sparta could fuck men who were strong and with good genetics and have their husbands knowingly raise the children of those men. This was especially true if the husband was infertile, or somehow genetically marred/inferior.

In some cases it was the husband’s responsibility to find the man who would cuck him.

Christian Gonzalez
Christian Gonzalez

Husbands? They didn't really have families. They all lived in segregated barracks, by age and sex.

Barracks for

Warrior age men
Old men
Boys
Young women without children
women with small children
Old women

And so on.

They oligarchs would regularly provide women without children and men wine parties where they could copulate and produce more warriors.
Boys were separated from their mothers at 4 or 5 and put in barracks to begin their lives of harsh discipline.

Nicholas Morris
Nicholas Morris

The Vedas disagree. As well as all of pre-Christian Europe.

Attached: rune-yoga.jpg (14.27 KB, 255x237)

Nicholas Jones
Nicholas Jones

I can imagine her cognitive data stream because she is not dead though.
You can imagine her cognitive experience because that woman is not dead? What are you talking about? You sound like a retard.

I would never have a child in a hospital.

If you're a civilian, you didn't die in battle, by definition. So no.
Does being incinerated in a nuclear attack count as a battle death?
If you were fighting at the time.
you feel
What you feel is entirely irrelevant.
That said:
if you are shot in the head by a cop or an enemy soldier and you are a soldier too engaged in a violent political struggle against your government
Then there's a good chance you meet qualifier #1.

Adrian Lewis
Adrian Lewis

[Citation Needed]

Jackson Anderson
Jackson Anderson

You are incorrect, they did marry. Even Wikipedia talks about their marriage customs, I don’t even have to look much deeper than that to find some more appropriate sources.

Yes, children were trained harshly and with severity to instil amazing discipline. Yes they were taken from their mothers. But they still knew their mothers and their mothers knew them. They did, indeed, marry and produce families though in accordance with their custom and culture.

Ayden Bailey
Ayden Bailey

stoa.org/diotima/anthology/wlgr/wlgr-greeklegal98.shtml

Jaxon Sanders
Jaxon Sanders

It only counts as a battle-death if you were fighting at the time.
So if you're a paid soldier and you're nuked, it does not count simply because you were not fighting at that moment in time? That sounds a tad unfair.
What if you're a soldier in that same base eating an evening meal and instead of being nuked, an enemy sniper blows your head off. You were not fighting at that time but you were killed by a bullet.

If you feel you're a combatant there's a good chance it's a battle death if you're killed.
Okay, so where do the gods draw the line? If you blow yourself up in a terror attack, does that count as a battle-death? What if you're conducting a truck-of-peace attack and you're shot by a cop? In your mind you're engaging in a violent political struggle against an enemy regime. But in the mind of the regime, you're an unlawful combatant and a terrorist.

Also, what if you are wounded in battle and die years later?

Asher Hill
Asher Hill

Slam your fingers in a car door so you never post again, faggot.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (383.63 KB, 1280x720)

Matthew Collins
Matthew Collins

So if you're a paid soldier
Whether or not you're paid isn't relevant, but if you're a soldier engaging in battle? Then it counts.
and you're nuked, it does not count simply because you were not fighting at that moment in time? That sounds a tad unfair.
Deal with it nigger. Nobody said existence was 'fair'.

What if you're a soldier in that same base eating an evening meal and instead of being nuked, an enemy sniper blows your head off.
Then you didnt die in glorious battle, you got sniped by some faggot. No sale.

If you feel
I just said that wasn't relevant at all, so what are you talking about exactly?

If you blow yourself up in a terror attack, does that count as a battle-death?
Nope. You weren't in battle, you were just on the attack, which is not the same thing.

In your mind
Whats happening in your mind is irrelevant bud, what matters is the actual events that transpire. Did you die in battle or not?
You keep holding up people who die in tangential matters and, no, that doesn't suffice.
<but that's not fair!
Nobody cares, least of all the Fates or the Gods.

Also, what if you are wounded in battle and die years later?
Then you didn't die in battle.

Kevin Hernandez
Kevin Hernandez

art is a creative activity
Then if you create a lot of dead enemies you're a great artist in the art of war.

Attached: Lets-Make-Some-Grass-Grow.JPG (31.39 KB, 521x361)

Elijah Ward
Elijah Ward

First you have to undo 200 years of like feminist propaganda and make them want to be women in the first place, because right now they'd rather try to be man.

Xavier Myers
Xavier Myers

That's never ever ever going to happen.
Hard reality, but the truth.

The only way forward on the front of women is to destroy the extant society and rebuild. You will never get women in sufficient number willing to relegate themselves back into a state of subservience, no matter how much evidence of it making them happier you provide.

Thems the breaks.

Joseph Young
Joseph Young

You made up some arbitrary rules for reincarnation like a larp-nigger without any evidence of your own. You can't prove how reincarnation works, because you yourself have no idea what you are talking about.

death results in summary deletion from existence and exile to the dark void of nonexistence.
Word for word, what atheist jews preach to be the truth.
All causes of death have a relationship with reincarnation.

The law of cause and effect determine the health of a reincarnation, as well as the tribulation of bardo the in between, Whether the rebirth will be of merit, stagnancy or degeneration.

[Citation Needed]
Likewise.

There are thousands of years of Aryan thought, practice and contemplation on reincarnation written in the Vedas.

Attached: z1283791823713.png (743.57 KB, 589x637)

James Bennett
James Bennett

no citations
Discarded.

Grayson Scott
Grayson Scott

Whatever you say, spiritual jew. I hope you find the wisdom to develop yourself out of such an infantile perspective.

Attached: wotan2.jpg (514.6 KB, 1600x999)

Brayden Turner
Brayden Turner

Also, I never said anything about 'reincarnation' you stupid LARPnigger.

Isaac Howard
Isaac Howard

still not citations
You'd think a guy who makes a claim based on objective facts would be able to provide such. Weird that you're just talking out of your butthole instead.

Jace Powell
Jace Powell

Oh also
death results in summary deletion from existence and exile to the dark void of nonexistence.
<Word for word, what atheist jews preach to be the truth.
Yeah, but you left a whole part off of that, didn't you? The part that atheist jews would denounce viciously, right?
Why would you do that? Why would you create a strawman like that and then burn it and call it a victory?

You sure are fucking gay.

Leo Murphy
Leo Murphy

I just said that wasn't relevant at all, so what are you talking about exactly?
Because modern warfare makes a lot of what you say irrelevant. Most war-related or "battle-related" deaths no longer involve a man stabbing the man in front of him with a spear. Most deaths are the result of stepping on a landmine that was placed there years earlier or sitting in a mess hall and being bombed by a guy 3000 miles away operating a drone. Or by no one at all.
What if you're killed by a robot? Is that a "battle-death?"
Another point you might consider is the fact that the line between soldier and civilian has been blurred to non-existence by modern warfare.
Civilians are often targeted in modern warfare because they are considered just as dangerous as uniformed soldiers.

Also, wtf even is a "battle-death?"
If being incinerated by a missile is not a battle-death simply because you were not fighting at that moment, and being killed by a sniper is not a battle-death, then what if you're ambushed and killed before you even have a chance to fight back? If being killed via sniper is not a battle-death, then neither is that. And if being ambushed is not a battle-death, then what if you're stabbed in the back by an enemy on your flank whom you did not see? That's pretty similar to being killed by a sniper.

Being killed while engaged in unlawful warfare may be a battle death… (see ) … except when it's not…
How does this make any sense?
You said earlier that being shot by a cop if you feel that you're a soldier resisting an illegitimate government could qualify as a battle-death… but now you turn around and say that being shot by the same cop while truck-of-peacing your enemy's civilians is not a battle-death.
Make up your mind!
Is being killed while engaging in guerrilla warfare a battle-death or isn't it?

If you die of wounds years later, then you didn't die in battle
So what if you die two seconds later? Is that a battle-death?

Owen Russell
Owen Russell

In fact, is being killed in battle even a battle-death?
At face value it sounds obvious. But you've admitted that being killed by weapons in a war is not necessarily a battle-death if you didn't see it coming.
Thus, by that logic, any soldiers in ancient wars who were killed by arrows or javelins were not battle-deaths.

That means that pretty much everyone who died in the opening moments of a battle against the Romans didn't die a battle-death.
Nor did most of the French noblemen killed at Agincourt.
And what about slings?
Does being killed by a sling count as a battle-death if you didn't get a chance to fight back?

Hunter Jackson
Hunter Jackson

Also, I never said anything about 'reincarnation' you stupid LARPnigger.
Any and all forms of the afterlife fall under the category of reincarnation. What kind of afterlife do you even believe in? Valhalla? Allah land? Heaven? Come now spiritual jew, please elaborate.

Eli Edwards
Eli Edwards

atheist jews
implying this is not what religious Jews teach
p.s. put down your books and meditate or fast until you go light headed.
Nothing put me off reincarnation more than the pretentious discussions of Evola and the Vedas.

Carson Cooper
Carson Cooper

Clearly battle-death should be situations where you had a reasonable chance of killing the other guy. Otherwise it's not battle-death, it's just being slaughtered. This means that
getting droned
landmines
bombed (unless manning effective AA)
mowed down by machine gun in hopeless trench assault
is not a battle-death and there's no glory in it. Getting ambushed or sniped, depends: If the ambush or sniper was incompetent and couldn't kill you outright, so you had a chance to counter attack and get them, that counts. If your whole plan was to attack his position, and one guy gets sniped but then others see his position and kill him, that counts. But if instead of being a random guy, there was a designated redshirt, that's not battle-death because he had no possibility of not being targeted by the sniper and being the one who revenge killed. He's just a fag who allowed himself to be slaughtered with no resistance.

It would also imply that fighting a very one-sided battle in ancient times is not a battle -death. But this is to be distinguished from battles like Thermopylae that were defeats overall, but each individual man got to kill enemies. If you got ass destroyed with hardly any enemy losses, such as in Kircholm, that's an embarrassment not a battle-death - unless the enemy was so overwhelming that even a Pyrrhic victory would be an achievement.

Meanwhile civilians fighting in various situations can easily be battle-death. If you were getting mugged and tried fighting the guy, I'd count that, even if you lost and got killed, assuming you had some possibility of winning. If you had no chance and knew it that's called assisted suicide, not battle.

pretty much everyone who died in the opening moments of a battle against the Romans didn't die a battle-death.
Forlorn hope is not battle-death unless they have a chance of inflicting casualties. If you are in the cannon fodder unit that's marched in to distract the enemy's artillery, you're better off mutinying as that will at least give you a chance to go down fighting. Now if all units march forward together, and even though knowing most will die to artillery fire, there's no way to know which will die and which will reach the enemy and get to fight, I'd say that's reasonably a battle-death similar to my sniper example above.

Does being killed by a sling count as a battle-death if you didn't get a chance to fight back?
No, unless you were charging the slinger with a good chance of closing and killing him if he missed, assuming he was not very unlikely to miss in that situation. If you shoot fish in a barrel, the fish is obviously not getting a battle-death.

Andrew Hall
Andrew Hall

Some old chink says something something. wow you based

Hunter Myers
Hunter Myers

Read Shopenhauer’s easy On Women. Placeing great value on women is the surest way to get the empowered front holes of today.

ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter5.html

Christopher Sanchez
Christopher Sanchez

[dying whilst] fighting a very one-sided battle in ancient times is not a battle -death.

except when it is
Except that if you don't die instantly, it isn't a battle-death… which is pretty much never because most wounds are not instant-death.
It seems like it's impossible to ever die a battle death.
You can't even die a battle-death if you're killed by a bullet unless you have a "reasonable chance" of killing him if he misses. But who decides that? Maybe you could run up to a slinger and slay him but more likely he gets a second shot or he has a side-arm to fight you. Who decides if you could have killed him if you're dead?

And if being killed by a bullet doesn't count simply because you didn't have a chance to even fight back, then pretty much zero modern battle-deaths are actually battle-deaths.

Also,
If you were getting mugged and [died] fighting the guy, I'd count that
But earlier you said
[dying whilst] fighting a very one-sided battle in ancient times is not a battle -death.
Being killed by a mugger (with a gun) is probably about as one sided as it gets.
In fact, earlier you stated that being killed during an ambush does not earn you a battle-death. So why would being ambushed and killed by a mugger be any different?

Dominic Martin
Dominic Martin

Lacedaemonians (Spartans) were Israelites: israelite.info/research/sourcedocumentsfiles/spartan.html

Henry Ross
Henry Ross

very one-sided battle in ancient times is not a battle -death.
except when it is
I stated it very clearly: If you have a reasonable chance of killing the other guy, then it's a battle death. If your chance is so low that you're basically a free kill, it's not.

if you don't die instantly, it isn't a battle-death
Where did I say this?

Maybe you could run up to a slinger and slay him but more likely he gets a second shot or he has a side-arm to fight you. Who decides if you could have killed him if you're dead?
It's not such a confusing thing. In most situations you can easily decide if guy X could have gotten guy Y or if he had no chance. The exact odds may be hard to pin down, but extremely hopeless situations are not hard to discern. Given the distance and other conditions, how often does a charging swordsman of similar skill and ability manage to kill a slinger of similar skill and ability before the slinger kills him? You just get the best estimate as any man is biologically wired to do in fight-or-flight situations. If the odds are clearly like one in a million, you are just being stupid by attacking. If the odds are unclear for some reason, I'd call that a good enough situation, because the warrior spirit will challenge the unknown, rather than cower from it.

if being killed by a bullet doesn't count simply because you didn't have a chance to even fight back
Maybe you misunderstood me (well, you definitely misunderstood in that you think I said quickness of death matters; it doesn't). If you had a gun and he had a gun, and you got shot, that's not "not having a chance to fight back". You can't stop the bullet, true, but you could also shoot him. Even if he got the drop on you, he could have missed, allowing you a chance to counter attack. But there's a point where you are just walking into an ambush with no reasonable chance of killing anybody - the ambusher takes no risk. That's not battle-death, that's stupid.

But earlier you said
[dying whilst] fighting a very one-sided battle in ancient times is not a battle -death.
And I clarified that one-sided means not having any chance to kill any enemy soldiers. I gave the example of Thermopylae, which was very one-sided, but clearly the Spartans died battle-deaths because they managed to rack up a good KDR. I also gave the example of Kircholm, which appears to have been one sided, but the Swedes totally failed to kill any significant number of Poles, and they also lost despite outnumbering by 3:1.

Being killed by a mugger (with a gun)
If the mugger is at close range, and if you are in good shape and can fight well, you have a good chance. You might not have a good chance of coming out alive, but you do have a good chance of seriously injuring or killing him. Because of the latter I would consider your death glorious if you attempted to fight but failed and got killed, even if you couldn't kill the mugger.

If the mugger is a good distance away, or you are fat and/or can't fight, if you can see clearly that you have no chance of hurting him, then of course it's not a battle-death. Again, it's just target practice for the mugger.

earlier you stated that being killed during an ambush does not earn you a battle-death.
As I explained above, it depends on how much risk the ambusher is taking. If you are at least proving dangerous prey, your death would be worthy. If you are blindly walking into it, without having attempted to discover the ambush in any way - in other words if you are being safe prey that can be ambushed with no danger, then no you don't get a battle-death for the same reason rabbits don't go to Valhalla after being shot by a hunter: No admirable fighting spirit or warrior quality is being displayed in being killed at no risk to the killer.

Juan Flores
Juan Flores

If you have a reasonable chance of killing the other guy
And who decides that?
You're dead. He's not.

You said earlier that if you die of wounds years later then it's not a battle-death. So when is the cut off point between dying of wounds and being a battle death and dying of wounds and NOT being a battle-death?
Is it one year? a month? a day? an hour? a second?

In most situations you can easily decide if guy X could have gotten guy Y or if he had no chance.
Not true at all. Change one thing and you get an entirely different scenario. Maybe if he missed, you'd have killed him. Or maybe you'd slip and fall and die anyway. Maybe he'd stab your horse and you'd go tumbling to your death or maybe he's just shoot you with his sidearm. Or maybe you'd charge towards him, he'd miss a second time, and you'd stab him. Or maybe you'd miss and he'd stab you with his spear.

how often does a charging swordsman of similar skill and ability manage to kill a slinger of similar skill and ability before the slinger kills him?
I don't know.

If the odds are clearly like one in a million, you are just being stupid by attacking.
Or brave. Maybe the man charging the slinger is defending his homeland from Turkish invaders. Maybe he misses and the Turk spears him. Or maybe he gets a second shot and kills the Turk.
How would you know who would win in such a fight?
The Turk is dead from being hit by a bullet. By what would you judge him capable of killing the slinger had he missed?

If the odds are unclear for some reason, I'd call that a good enough situation, because the warrior spirit will challenge the unknown, rather than cower from it.
Literally everything in war is unclear.

You can't stop the bullet, true, but you could also shoot him.
Not if you didn't see him. Maybe you're in the midst of a battle, you're carrying state of the art military gear, then you turn around a corner and BAM! the terrorist you were trying to kill blows your fucking head off with a lowly shotgun. You never even got the chance to fight back.
This is the same scenario as the sniper except with the enemy closer to you.

Even if he got the drop on you, he could have missed, allowing you a chance to counter attack.
So? If a sniper missed, then you'd have the ability to counter attack. And if you hadn't been killed in a drone strike, you could have strangled the scrawny armed dweeb that killed you with your bare hands.

the ambusher takes no risk. That's not battle-death, that's stupid.
We're not talking about the ambusher, we're talking about the ambushed. It is not stupid to walk into an ambush if you do not know that there is one.

Okay, so if you fight back against a mugger and are physically fit but still die, you get reincarnated or whatever. Fair enough.

it depends on how much risk the ambusher is taking.
It's the ambushed that I'm concerned with here. The Romans of Trasimene had no idea that their commanders were leading them into an ambush that they had no hope of winning. Most were slaughtered like dogs but most at least tried to fight back.
Why should a master swordsman who has killed hundreds of people in a fair fight and is a genius and more physically fit than
200 IQ genius be deleted from existence because his idiot commander led him into an ambush or he stepped on a landmine?
Why should a scrawny, low IQ retard go to war-heaven because he got lucky and fired off a few shots at that same guy earlier before being killed?

Brayden Roberts
Brayden Roberts

And who decides that?
Your brain does. After you actually die, it's irrelevant, unless you believe in an afterlife. But just as you make your attack, you gauge your odds and act so as to ensure you will either be the victor, or if the opponent is worthy, that you will die a battle-death. In order to be capable of this, you must of course live your whole life venerating the warrior spirit and cultivate this mindset of seeking a battle-death and avoiding a foolish death. Thus you become a manly and honorable person, which is why the concept of battle-death is held in such importance across many cultures - it is a vital mechanism of promoting healthy male gender roles.

You said earlier that if you die of wounds years later then it's not a battle-death.
I didn't say that, must be someone else. All torpedos share ID, you know. If you want my take, then if you didn't die, there's no problem. If you killed the guy, great. If you ran away or were incapacitated, that's cowardly and/or shameful, but no matter - you're still alive, you can fight another day. If say you were crippled, spend next several months in bed, and then died in your sleep - that's a shit situation, and such deaths from injury or disease were traditionally feared by warriors, which is why they were eager for battle and would rather charge into melee and risk death, than be rescued by healers and risk becoming cripples with no chance of a good death.

Or maybe you'd slip and fall and die anyway.
Probability is not changed because an improbable event happened. Winning the lottery doesn't become likely because you just won. Of course, history is how we estimate probabilities, but it is important to understand that probabilities exist a posteriori, and changing our estimate of the probability is not the same as the true probability changing. In relation to the warrior spirit, a warrior shouldn't be entirely clueless, but accurate statistical estimation is IMO not vital for a warrior. It is however vital that whetever he feels the odds to be, he respond to them in a manly way, so as to ensure that if he does die, the death will be a battle-death. And on the topic of feelings, I think the brain is actually really good at these estimations, it takes all that stuff you said into account. Of course, if you are raised right and have discipline, it is of course a lot more accurate. But ultimately a man need not second guess his instincts on what precisely the odds are - the important thing is to strive to act such that if possible, he is the victor, but if he is to die, the opponent must pay dearly, or at least risk his own hide.

Or brave.
Actually, ancient people did not consider it brave to charge into a hopeless situation, but stupid. Note, when I say "hopeless", I don't mean not having hope of survival. To a warrior, his own death is of relatively minor significance. I mean hope of doing your enemy harm. Which is why the Spartans at Thermopylae are revered as heros, even though they went into a battle with no hope of survival: They did have hope of killing many Persians.

Not if you didn't see him.
It's not about if you saw him, but if you could have. If it's night and he's got the best NV gear but you have night blindness, you're fucked, you need to GTFO there because if you get shot it will be a pathetic, shameful death. You need to use your brains to avoid such situations, and resist commanders that put you in them. One of the commander's duties is to provide a battle-death for his casualties. If he fails in this, he doesn't deserve to command.

Ryan Russell
Ryan Russell

(cont)
We're not talking about the ambusher, we're talking about the ambushed.
If you are actively searching for the ambush, or also laying your own ambushes during the campaign, then the ambusher is taking a risk. You could discover the ambuscade and, as the saying goes, make him pay the intended mischief with interest. Moreover, today you fell for his ambush, yesterday he could have fallen for yours.

This is different from a naive soldier who doesn't bother to collect intelligence or learn how to spot ambushes when he had the opportunity (if he never had the opportunity, of course he can't be faulted for it). Or even worse, a soldier who knows there's an ambush but walks into it anyway with no clear plan. Sometimes soldiers are compelled to walk into ambushes by commanders, I think this robs them of a chance for battle-death. They're better off mutinying and dying to the commander's guard, or military police, or whoever it would be.

you get reincarnated or whatever.
I think it's immaterial whether you get reincarnated. Obviously our ancestors were more spiritual and thought in those terms. But the essence of it is that you understand the difference between a battle-death and an inglorious one, which then makes you realize that you have to live your whole life in a certain way so as to maximize your chances of dying a battle-death. This way so happens to be a manly one that is conducive to a healthy society.

had no idea that their commanders were leading them into an ambush
So they have lost some honor in that they could not judge their commander better. But remember that battle-death is individual, not collective. Even if the army was obliterated, some individual men in it killed a Carthaginian before they died - those for sure had battle-deaths. The others, it's hard to say without knowing the circumstances in detail.

Why should a master swordsman (…) be deleted (…) because his idiot commander (…)
Excellent question. I'm just reasoning from first principle here, but I think the answer is that part of the attaining the warrior spirit is knowing that not everyone is worth following. Idiot commanders should be removed or at least resisted, not obeyed. Based on this, I would say that enlisting and getting sent to Iraq is actually bad idea, because you risk dying a dishonorably and have little opportunity for a battle-death. It would behoove you to seek worthier death elsewhere.

If the swordsman was so foolish as to get killed by a scrawny kid, maybe he's not such a great warrior after all. Remember, it's about spirit and how you choose to act, not physical fitness. And if the kid managed to come up with some stratagem that allowed him to kill a great warrior, I'd say that's respectable. However not relevant to the idea of a battle-death if he doesn't risk death.

Logan Moore
Logan Moore

Sparta was extremely hostile to outsiders. Their entire society was built around the notion that they were occupiers of the southern part of Greece. They believed that Heracles himself had conquered the land and then gave it to his two sons, which is why they had two kings that ruled side by side. Their entire society functioned under the assumption that a revolt by the natives was a certainty, and so they did everything they could to limit the amount of outside influence in their culture. An Athenian philosopher named Xenophon is just about the only person they allowed in to document their society in any real way.

Sparta valued their women above all else, and when Spartan men died {almost always in battle) all of their land, money, and slaves went to their wife. Women held immense economic and political power in their society and essentially bank rolled all wars and civil projects. Despite being so small they were feared and considered the dominant military power in Greece, and no one tried to fuck with them until their society was already collapsing because everyone who did was fucked into the dirt in short order.

You can tell what a powerful idea elevating motherhood in your society is because of the amount of (((shills))) and black pilled lazy faggots that pop up whenever you bring it up.

You can't stop what is coming, and no amount of semitic wailing is going to stop it. Slide threads all you want rabbi, it only serves to elucidate your horse shit to new comers.

Attached: get-it-comped.png (145.25 KB, 325x315)

David Ross
David Ross

Women are like children, in motivations and agency.
Careful with such compassion. Because you know consequences. Consent.

Jaxson Baker
Jaxson Baker

For helots not much different from feudalism. Actually Sparta was protofeudalism with single castle.

Jacob Reyes
Jacob Reyes

Now I am starting to understand why the nsdap had high regards for women.
HOLY FUCKING SHIT IT ALL MAKES SENSE.

Attached: best-hitler-quote.jpg (111.27 KB, 1000x667)

Adrian White
Adrian White

If women are a part of society, they are often its most loyal adherents.

If women are apart from society, they cause its destruction.

Adrian Lopez
Adrian Lopez

However, they can never EVER gain power. They don't know what to do with it. They have to be in their natural roles or else they are divorced from the culture they reside in. Even women don't take female dominated cultures seriously.

Finding synchronicity is about finding our places in the natural order.

Leo Thompson
Leo Thompson

It's always either matriarchal cucks like OP or MGTOW that are promoted in this site's narrative.
SAGE.

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit