its been normalized into their society. you lose a sense of familiarity you have with your life. if your religious imagine losing your absolute faith in something. or if your not imagine suddenly losing all morals. you cant even fathom something like that simply because its so built into who you are and who you think you are.

this is the trolly problem on a larger scale. who do you really value more? your son who you might still save or a bunch of people who you have minor connections with. also humans are irrational when it comes to love

never loved anyone looking ahh

me when terrible magic system

IS THAT A JOJO TF2 REFERENCE?

you really didn't even read the chapter T-T

me when my attention span is less than one side story (which is literally still the same scene as the main story) like bro...

noted

your the best :3

well now it looks like I haven't experienced poverty. I'm an idiot lmao

^OP: Me when I have money (never)

you call that trial and error I call it science XD

yes he did. he's got a reputation and he did NOT dissapoint

it needs no comments to represent the chaos and glory

I love how the first thought in America is killing people and not a gun range even when they specifically mentioned range lmaoooo

I know I cant comment on the 5 year old post about feudalism but my god you are stupid.
1. Historical Oversimplification
The essay portrays feudalism as an inherently doomed system, but historians argue it was a viable form of decentralized governance in societies with poor communication/transportation. The king couldn’t realistically control every village or soldier directly.
Louis XIV is cited as an example of abolishing feudalism, but France was not fully centralized under him—regional elites and parlements still retained local authority.
2. Authoritarian Bias
The author repeatedly recommends extreme measures (executing nobles, centralizing all military authority, spreading surveillance networks, threatening collective punishment). Critics could argue this mirrors totalitarian or despotic strategies, which often generate fear, resistance, and instability rather than true loyalty.
A counterpoint: states that rely too heavily on fear-based rule often collapse violently after the ruler’s death (e.g., Stalin’s USSR, Qin Dynasty China).
3. Misuse of Modern Concepts
Applying the term terrorism to a feudal/fantasy setting could be considered anachronistic. In medieval or early-modern contexts, rebellion was often seen as treason or civil war, not “terrorism.” Expecting Kazuya to create an intelligence agency or secret police presupposes a level of bureaucracy and surveillance capacity that medieval states rarely had.
4. Underestimation of Political Legitimacy
The essay treats ruling as a matter of absolute control over force, ignoring the importance of legitimacy and consent. If Kazuya started mass executions or micromanaged nobles, he might lose support from the population or foreign allies. Historically, balancing elite cooperation was often more effective than purges (e.g., the Tokugawa shogunate co-opting daimyō rather than executing them en masse).
5. Economic Naïveté
While suggesting silos, rooftop farming, and livestock domestication sounds practical, medieval-style kingdoms lacked infrastructure, science, and surplus resources for large-scale food innovation in the short term.
Rooftop farming and vertical agriculture are modern solutions requiring technology not realistically available in Kazuya’s setting.
6. Contradiction in Rewarding Military
The author insists militaries shouldn’t be over-rewarded, yet suggests giving land to veterans — which historically was one of the main drivers of militarized aristocracies (Roman veterans receiving land grants led to power blocs that destabilized the Republic).
7. Overconfidence in Centralization: The critique assumes absolute centralization = stability. In practice, too much centralization can cause bureaucratic overload and local resentment, while limited decentralization allows flexibility and resilience. the Ottoman Empire’s timar system and the Holy Roman Empire’s decentralized model persisted for centuries.

"magic is just science we don't understand yet" -- Arthur C. Clarke

"magic is science we don't understand yet" -- Arthur C. Clarke

"magic is science we don't understand yet" (The phrase "magic is just science we don't understand yet" is a famous quote by science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke. It suggests that what appears as magic, particularly in fictional contexts or with sufficiently advanced technology, is fundamentally rooted in principles that are not yet known or comprehensible to humanity. The core idea is that the boundary between magic and science is fluid, with new scientific discoveries potentially revealing the "scientific" underpinnings of phenomena once deemed supernatural. )

yep! and its fucking awesome :3