The irony is that a *foreign* enemy would never force barbershops to close.
But an internal one sure would.
Another irony: the decline of violence in the modern world has been cited as a reason to doubt the necessity of an armed populace.
But what if the very fact of pacification leaves us vulnerable to a society of #Karens flipping out over a bad flu?
To put it concretely: is someone destroying your livelihood through bureaucratic fiat any less an act of aggression than destroying it with arms, fire, etc.?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Israel "waiting for the green light from the Americans" before the 1967 war..."combing word by word through a column in Newsweek'
Apparently Israel was content not to broadcast the fact that it had destroyed Egypt's air force, because it thought the UN would not intervene as long as Israel was believed to be losing
"In almost all the great peasant nations, marriage for women is soon after puberty, in the late teens. This congrats strongly with the late age at marriage, twenty-five or later, found in parts of northwestern Europe from at least the 16th century"
The 1976 Soweto student uprising is mythologized as an early noble skirmish in the fight against Apartheid. But the commencing act of violence was a student stabbing a female teacher with a screwdriver because he didn't want to learn Afrikaans.
Much stoning of police and police vehicles. Much revolutionary not doing of homework.
The riots soon became an excuse for gangsters ("tsotsis") to loot businesses
Was the French Revolution a race war, a slaughter of Nordics by Alpines?
Madison Grant thought that stereoscopic vision evolved to allow accurate brachiation. Similar to @MarkChangizi's theory that it evolved to see through leaf clutter
The Yankee establishes the frontier, the Germanic develops it.