Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 15, 2025, 08:05:03 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fmnQZID3L8

Similar to what I was saying here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/how-old-is-chinese-civilization/msg20274/#msg20274

although I wouldn't say "changed his brain". The original tendency of our brains is to pictorialize. Young children, even pre-speech infants, spontaneously draw pictures to communicate. It is phonetic writing systems which corrupted our brains from the childhood default. What the subhuman above is experiencing is his brain regressing to how brains are supposed to be.

Logographic writing systems can with certainty be considered more neotenous than (and hence superior to) phonetic writing systems.
Posted by: rp
« on: May 02, 2024, 02:26:24 am »

Civil Engineering is the original engineering field. All other fields (mechanical, chemical, metallurgical, electrical, electronics, and computer) should have and would have never existed without western civilization. Even mechanical is fine so long as it is making automatons and not machinery (industrial revolution), but all the other fields are superfluous.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 02, 2024, 02:01:00 am »

Engineering =/= machinism. Ancient Chinese were good at engineering in the sense of infrastructure:

https://news.wef.org/discovering-an-ancient-hydraulic-system-rewrites-chinese-engineering-history/

(See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/aryan-hydraulic-empire/ )

but this has nothing to do with machines which is what the illiterate enemy tweeter is incorrectly using the term "engineering" to refer to. Ancient Turanians, in contrast, did not bother with long-term infrastructure due to their nomadism. Engineering helped defend against Turanian raiders since prehistory:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/aryan-fortifications/msg3132/#msg3132

and of course later:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China

Quote
The Great Wall of China (traditional Chinese: 萬里長城; simplified Chinese: 万里长城; pinyin: Wànlǐ Chángchéng, literally "ten thousand li long wall") is a series of fortifications that were built across the historical northern borders of ancient Chinese states and Imperial China as protection against various nomadic groups from the Eurasian Steppe. Several walls were built from as early as the 7th century BC,[4] with selective stretches later joined by Qin Shi Huang (220–206 BC), the first emperor of China.

Engineering:

Quote
Before the use of bricks, the Great Wall was mainly built from rammed earth



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rammed_earth#Characteristics

Quote
Edifices of rammed earth are more sustainable and environmentally friendly than other building techniques that use more cement and other chemicals. Because rammed-earth edifices use locally available materials, they usually have low embodied energy and generate very little waste.[citation needed] The soils used are typically subsoil which conserve the topsoil for agriculture. When the soil excavated in preparation for a foundation can be used, the cost and energy consumption of transportation are minimal.[8] Rammed earth is probably the least environmentally detrimental construction material and technique that is readily and commercially available today to construct solid edifices. [citation needed] Rammed earth has potentially low manufacturing impact, contingent on the amount of cement and the amount that is locally sourced; it is often quarried aggregates rather than "earth".

Rammed earth can contribute to the overall energy efficiency of edifices: the density, thickness, and thermal conductivity of rammed earth render it an especially suitable material for passive solar heating. Warmth requires almost 12 hours to be conducted through a wall 35 cm (14 in) thick.[6]

Mixing cement with the soil can counteract sustainable benefits such as low embodied energy because manufacture of the cement itself creates 1.25 tonnes of carbon dioxide per tonne of cement produced.[9] Although it has low greenhouse gas emissions in theory, transportation and the production of cement can add significantly[quantify] to the overall emissions of modern rammed earth construction.

Superior Aryan alternative to cement:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_rice_mortar

Quote
Around 500 CE, sticky rice soup was mixed with slaked lime to make an inorganic−organic composite mortar that had more strength and water resistance than lime mortar.[1][2] Sticky rice played a major role in maintaining the durability of the Great Wall, as well as tombs, pagodas, and city walls.[3] Sticky rice mortar had high adhesive strength, sturdiness, waterproofing capability, and prevented weeds from growing as crude mortar made of sticky rice and burnt lime created a seal between bricks that would rival modern cement in strength.
...
Great Wall sections were widely built with bricks, with lime mortar and sticky rice used to reinforce the bricks strongly enough to resist earthquakes and modern bulldozers while keeping the building intact.

Regressive engineering FTW!

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/dress-decolonization/msg13140/#msg13140 (part about buttons)

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/dress-decolonization/msg13158/#msg13158
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: May 02, 2024, 12:17:14 am »

Evolution of Northern Turanism, Adopting Western Civilization

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: April 10, 2024, 03:21:00 pm »

Imperialism =/= colonialism. Chinese imperialism was consistently integrationist throughout history:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/yandi-vs-huangdi-myth-confirmed/msg17310/#msg17310

in contrast to Western colonial empires. The mainstream "academics" criticized by Duchesne for praising the non-Western ancient empires (as well as Roman) understand this. Duchesne does not, nor does the tweeter he is quoting. You yourself seem confused about this.

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-folkish-imperialism/
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: April 10, 2024, 09:30:53 am »

Fellow "Turanians" proud on their Cruelty

Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: June 11, 2023, 05:57:49 pm »

Quote
You know now that you mention how inferior oral languages are, that brings me an idea. Should we make emojis and emoticons the true international language (as opposed to English) since they are, always were and should always be, a non-oral language/writing system?


I hope so, like this good man Khaby :

https://www.instagram.com/p/CtMzocLAchX/

https://www.instagram.com/p/CsjhRIbA0qR/

He always promoting activities which resulting simplicity
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: June 11, 2023, 12:41:29 pm »

You know now that you mention how inferior oral languages are, that brings me an idea. Should we make emojis and emoticons the true international language (as opposed to English) since they are, always were and should always be, a non-oral language/writing system?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: June 10, 2023, 08:58:16 pm »

"What’s your opinion on China’s logographic writing system in general (both simplified and traditional)?"

I can't stand simplified form. Traditional form is the form standardized during the Qin dynasty, thus should be recognized as a defining characteristic of China. The Sinosphere should be given special credit for being the last civilization to keep using the system that that was once (back in Neolithic times) widely considered the most sensible system:



We should view the switch to pronounciation-dependent systems as a form of post-Neolithic degeneracy.

"I don’t think that they should go with Pinyin"

I agree. The practical advantage of the logographic system is that the character is independent of how it is pronounced. Even someone born deaf can read logographic text without diminished communicative quality. Whereas with pronounciation-dependent systems:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201507/can-you-read-language-you-can-t-hear

Quote
Educators and psychologists alike have long debated the reasons why the vast majority of deaf children struggle with reading.
...
When hearing individuals read, they decode written symbols into speech sounds to recreate a spoken text. Learners read out loud, but even proficient readers create a “voice in their heads.” Accessing the meaning of a written word, then, is a two-step process: first convert the written item into spoken format, and then access the meaning of that spoken word.

This is not the case with logographic writing which does not require conversion of the written item into a spoken format in the first place, which is why logographic systems are superior: meaning is accessed in a single step.

"Maybe they could use a modified version of the Manichaean script."
"Or a modified version of one of the Indic scripts"

This would have the same problem as Pinyin in tying the character to one particular pronounciation, which is what we are trying to avoid.

"to create more positive relations with India"

The superior Indus Valley civilization also used a logographic system:



It was the inferior Vedics who put an end to it.

"I think it’s kind of inefficient to use a writing system that students in China are still learning as they basically go through the entire schooling system, instead of having it be a one and done affair."

The problem is with Westernized "New China" trying to force everyone learn it all, and at a fixed pace, which was never the original intention. In ancient China (where compulsory schooling never existed, of course), different sectors of society would learn as much or as little of it as they variously needed for practical purposes in their respective walks of life, and do so at their own pace. This is what we need to get back to.
Posted by: SirGalahad
« on: June 10, 2023, 06:44:22 pm »

@90sRetroFan What’s your opinion on China’s logographic writing system in general (both simplified and traditional)? Personally, I don’t like simplified Chinese, not because of its intended goal, but because it doesn’t go far enough. Simplified Chinese still takes a long time to learn, just like traditional Chinese. And some of the characters are simplified in ways that are completely arbitrary, and actually make the character harder to remember than the traditional version in some cases, even if the simplified character takes less time to write (And that’s another thing. We barely write things on paper anymore anyways).

I don’t think that they should go with Pinyin, which I’m almost 100% sure that they would do if they ever decided to drop characters entirely. We already have enough languages adopting the Roman alphabet as is, and I’d prefer that they stick it to the man and choose something that isn’t influenced by western culture.

Maybe they could use a modified version of the Manichaean script. That would be really cool, and make historical and cultural sense if it wants to connect with its Gnostic past:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaean_script

Or a modified version of one of the Indic scripts, to create more positive relations with India and drum up the Buddhist connection between the two:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts

I think it’s kind of inefficient to use a writing system that students in China are still learning as they basically go through the entire schooling system, instead of having it be a one and done affair. It would also make it easier for potential immigrants to assimilate. I think that Chinese characters look cool and I have a soft spot for them since I’ve always found Chinese culture interesting, but considering we aren’t preservationists, I’m trying to approach it more logistically
Posted by: guest78
« on: July 01, 2022, 12:39:56 am »

How Old Is Chinese Civilization? - Ancient Civilizations DOCUMENTARY
Quote
The Kings and Generals animated historical documentary series on the ancient civilizations continues with a video on the Shang and Zhou dynasties, as we try to deduce ho old Chinese civilization is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BXpsbSQFKg