blah the Prussian

That's actually quite interesting. But the point is, race doesn't matter, as long as you're an immigrant you'll be looked down upon, right?

Well, look at it like this: in the UK, Polish immigrants are often treated just as poorly as Syrian immigrants, or blacks. "White" in Europe doesn't mean "White" in America, because in Europe, ethnicity matters. I was thinking specifically about that incident where the Feminist Critic of Fundamentalist Islam was barred from speaking, things like that. I do suppose I agree with having some say in how the money is spent, so long as they don't have too much power. I do support managed democracy.

No, but it has had a huge amount of impact in East Asia.

But the situations of Europe and the United States are completely different. For one thing, Europe is natively white, while America is not. The nations of Europe are defined by their people, by their ethnicity, while the US is not. Further, white people in the US are far easier to group into one homogenous group. Do you think that Poles in the Russian Empire had white privilege? That Bosnians murdered by the Serbs had white privilege? Hell, that Poles in the United Kingdom today have white privilege? Of course not. I'm also going to close the subject of student democracy because it stems from my beliefs on democracy in general and I have already made those opinions clear in the monarchist thread, and I know what it will devolve into.

I don't have a problem when it's used in the US, but more often than not I do see it applied to Europe. That's when I have a problem with it. Also, can you say perhaps why my position is dumb?

Chinese culture has arguably had more of an impact than any individual European culture, because Europe is a diverse place, and to,say all Europeans are the same is kind of like saying all Africans are the same. But yeah, I would say that it was a geopolitical fact that the happenings of the world revolved around Europe roughly from 1841-1945.

You don't just need to learn things relevant to Brazil, you know. All history is important.

So, why the concept of white privilege is moronic: it lumps in all white people into one group, which is absolutely asinine. It also identifies white people as this mythical group that has never experienced oppression, which, seriously, we all know is false, guys. Ask the Europeans taken as slaves by the Barbary pirates, or the Greeks murdered by the Ottoman Empire, or even whites oppressed by other Whites, like the Poles and the Irish. What really bugs me is that the concept is ridiculously centered on the US, and essentially ignores European history entirely. As I'm sure you all know by now, I HATE Amerocentrism.

How is America in danger? America hasn't been in danger since 1864.

In some eras of history, it makes sense to focus on Europe, for example the 1800s. However, I absolutely agree that Europe gets too much attention, especially during the Middle Ages. It is worth noting, however, that European nations tend to have more surviving records than nations in Africa, India, and Southeast Asia, so European history is often easier to get.

I honestly don't care that much about this issue, but I will say that students having a say in the running of universities should stop, because they obviously aren't mature enough to make reasonable decisions. Also, the notion of white privilege is dumb for reasons I will talk about later because class is about to start.

Wait, wait, correction, it's a wolf. Also, I'm pretty sure my life would be over if my mom found out I was showing my sister bestiality porn.

So basically I've already screwed up by telling all of you? She's definitely type 1, incidentally; she told all her friends at school today.

No spoilers! Just so you are aware, not everything here will mirror what happened in our world. I have different plans for Britain. Suffice it to say, though, it will have fallen far by the time the war is over. Both of those ideas sound quite interesting. A suggestion for the second one: in 1933 FDR was almost shot by an Italian Communist. That would be a good way to get him out of the picture for Hoover.

She's thirteen. At this point I might try to recruit some of her friends to help her. Also, why is there no way to like "sexually identify as an attack helicopter"?XD

Well, the time has come when I must turn to you wonderful people for help. Basically, my sister this morning is insisting she is, in fact, actually a dragon or some idiotic shit like that. Now, I shouldn't have to say that this is 1. false and 2. incredibly insulting to actual transgenders. So basically, does anyone here have any experience with this, and any tips for snapping her out of it? I really, really don't want her to embarrass herself.

Nah, noblemen are actually fine by me. What if one made the villain someone who rose to the top and thus the hero has an inferiority complex with them.

So Communists were essentially socialists who thought you needed to be violent, as well as favoring a one party state. Another main difference is that Socialism is generally individualistic, while Communism is not.

Yeah, pretty much, that's what I was saying.

Uh... except for all those times in 1941 and 1942 when it got badly, badly, defeated?

Now if in Fates you could choose between the Neue Reich and join the Imperial Fleet or the FPA and join the Yang Fleet that would be interesting. Much better than what we got anyway. You're absolutely right. The problem is all previous FEs have had clear good guys and clear bad guys. They are midieval in setting, but not in spirit.

Germany needs one thing to both send 3 million men to North Africa and invade Britain: a navy. Obviously they need to beat the RN to invade Britain, but how do you think 3 million German troops are getting to Africa, by walking on water? The Brits had complete control of the Mediterranean, and even if the Germans get those soldiers to Africa they're having a hell of a time supplying them. Further, even if Germany defeats the Royal Navy they're not invading Britain. Their plan for invasion was basically "land troops on the isles and pray to god the British surrender". The British, meanwhile, had constructed huge amounts of fortifications and were ready to push the Germans into the sea. The German's idea of landing craft were barges, for gods sake! Their best hope is to win the Battle of Britain and offer the British a status quo peace, where Britain gets to keep its independence if they accept Nazi domination of Europe. Problem is, that would be out of character for Churchill, because he knew that if the Germans invaded it would be a disaster for them. Regarding Australia, pretty much yep. Japan wasn't invading Australia for pretty much the same reasons Germany wasn't invading the UK, but still, they deserve far more credit than they get in this Murica fuck yeah,world.

The war,doesn't have to be about liberation to still be just. It can be about unification for example, in the vein of Oda Nobunaga or Bismarck. Also, the conqueror gets to be leader in the end because he earned it, gosh darn it. Obviously he wouldn't pull a Stalin and lie about conquering everything, because no one likes a liar, but I honestly don't see how someone in it for territory is automatically bad.

I have to disagree. Not invading Russia would have prolonged the war in Europe, but there is no way whatsoever Germany is invading Britain, with a POD of 1941 at least. By that point the RAF had already attained air superiority over the Luftwaffe and the RN had complete control of the channel. It's only a matter of time until the Americans join and when they do, Hitler is fucked. The only chance for the Nazis was to bring the Soviets into the Axis; that gives them the manpower to beat the USA in Europe. That decision, however, would be out of character for Hitler. Also, even with the Soviets they wouldn't have been able to successfully invade America. Hitler himself didn't consider that feasible until 1980, and that's with industrial development from European Russia. There's also a little thing called the Atomic Bomb; the Anglo-American nuclear program was leagues ahead of either the Nazi or Soviet one. Hitler frankly didn't care about America. His goal was German domination of Europe and the reduction of all non Aryans in Europe, particularly the Slavs, to slaves of the Aryans. If the Americans stayed isolationist Hitler would have been happy to coexist, so it's good for the world that we didn't.

How does my proposal not fit these requirements?