Transcript
A threads post saying “There has never been another nation ever that has existed much beyond 250 years. Not a single one. America’s 250th year is 2025. The next 4 years are gonna be pretty interesting considering everything that’s already been said.” It has a reply saying “My local pub is older than your country”.
You must log in or register to comment.
It is wild to me how Americans forget that they built their “nation” upon the genocide of earlier (first) nations, which were there for thousands of years.
Genocide has been a frequent practice for thousands of years, ever since the standard social unit was the tribe and one tribe would massacre another. Whole populations have been “put to the sword”. The Americas are probably the largest single area, but if you really knew your history it would seem just as wild that Europeans and others around the world have forgotten about this.
deleted by creator
Interesting - I said “frequently” without any specific numbers, but apparently your non-numbers are lower. My bad.
Americans were straight up humane in their genocide vs. historical examples. Hell, I’d say Israel is doing worse today, not even pretending to make treaties, move people about, nothing.
“Straight up humane?” Dude in the 1800s there were times when people shot natives from passing trains for amusement. It’s not a contest about who did it more nicely.
All I’m saying is that human history is full of far worse genocides than the Americans pulled on Native Americans.
Sure… Gaza is worse off that Hiroshima and Nagasaki!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties
A 1975 U.S. Senate subcommittee estimated around 1.4 million civilian casualties in South Vietnam because of the war, including 415,000 deaths. An estimate by the Department of Defense after the war gave a figure of 1.2 million civilian casualties, including 195,000 deaths
The Israel-Hamas war has less than 0.003% of the casualties the US inflicted on Vietnam. That’s not to say the Israel-Hamas War isn’t a bad thing (all wars are) but just trying to snap you back from historical revisionism.
I wouldn’t say casualties really matter when it comes to genocide, what matters is the intent. The US were quite happy to wipe out the Native Americans and didn’t exactly cry any tears as they did it, to the point where wiping out the Native Americans was such a sticking point to them that Britain demanding they not expand into Native American territory was actually a contributing factor to the Revolutionary War.
The Israelis pretend they aren’t interested in wiping out the Palestinians, but they aren’t exactly stopping the settlements driving out the remaining Palestinians and they’re certainly pretty keen on ensuring no Palestinian returns to Gaza when they inevitably annex the place. The intent is there, it’s just obfuscated.
I’d say they’re pretty similar, at least in terms of intent. Both nations want to expand because they believe it’s their god-given right to have that land, and the natives to that land need to either accept it or be ‘removed’.
Vietnam had 16 times the population of Gaza at the time. So your 1.4 million ends up being 87,500 if you keep the ratio and that’s over 20 years. Israel has passed 50,000 in less then 2 years.
Also, the fact that you can compare the current situation to what happened in Vietnam and Japan should give you a hint that you are defending the wrong party. This is far from the win you think it is. Defending those things would be unimaginable, you should think about what that means.
It’s not the Israel-Hamas War, it’s the genocide of the Palestinian people by a vile warmongering apartheid state.
I’m on your side, 95% of the way but I don’t think it’s fair to the victims in Japan, Vietnam, Palestine etc to be part of a ranking. Just like there are bigger and smaller infinities, there are larger and smaller amounts of casualties. But in comparison to large and small infinities, those numbers do not show the hurt these people went true. In Japan for example, some died in an instant where others went through decades of physical decay because of the damage radiation did. How can that be put in numbers and compared to what happened to people in Vietnam for example.
You can leave out a comparison with a ‘sure…you must have forgotten Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the 1.4 million civilian casualties in South Vietnam because of the war, including 415,000 deaths’ for example.
He is arguing in bad faith. His only goal is to make the actions of the state of Israel seem less extreme. That’s why he fails to mention the population differences and keeps using the term “Israel-Hamas war”.
If you check the modlog you find gems like:
The use of the word genocide is political.
Until that happens, Gaza should be treated like any fascist state that throws rockets at its neighbor.
Thanks for checking that out
Thanks, noted.
Gaza should be treated like any fascist state that throws rockets at its neighbor.
0 fucks given for actual people living there indeed. Wow.
Not really. The logic is attempting to draw a distinction between nations, kingdoms, and tribes, among other things, with emphasis on continuity in governance. So France isn’t the same nation between the Revolution and the Napoleonic Empire, or after a dynasty change.
The interjection is pointless towards their argument because it doesn’t understand the “logic” and is wrong in its own way.
His problem is that, as a truly stupid person, he isn’t aware that the point he is trying to make is one reserved specifically for democracies, not nations, and is still wrong. The Roman Republic lasted for 482 years, just to start with the most famous “democratic” example, and Japan’s government could be argued to have lasted 2,600 years depending on how much credit you want to give the mythological founding of their imperial family.
Further, the modern form of the United Kingdom government was founded in 1707. There have been changes, obviously, especially in the power balance between Lords and Commons, but the Acts of Union created what is indisputably a modern concept of nation and government.
Confederations of indigenous tribes qualify as nations by any reasonable definition. Most were democracies. Some still exist as sovereign democratic nations today.
Yeah I considered bringing that up but it’s also not accurate to paint all the regional groups in that way. In hindsight I probably should have mentioned the Five/Six Nations at least.
Just takes one to disprove the original point that no nation is older than 250 years.
The UK was founded in 1707. The British crown family is even older than that.
“british” crown family.
Yeah, I just added that funnily enough.
Wait till these people find out about Japan.
I mean sure they’ve still got a royal line, but the royal family wasn’t always in power. Like is it fair to say that the Tokugawa government is the same as the meiji restoration government, is the same as the modern government?
Like is it fair to say that the Tokugawa government is the same as the meiji restoration government, is the same as the modern government?
The Edo Period alone spanned 268 years. The Heian Period nearly made it to 400.
Even if you evaluate these as distinct, they individually outstip the US.
That’s absolutely true! I just didn’t want it to seem like Japan was some sort monolith of unbroken rule.
You’re conflicting state and nation I think. Both are also pretty loose terms. Nations didn’t really exist before nationalism in the 1800s and states are just big ships of thesiii
I was thinking more along the lines of governmental continuity, which has just as arbitrary lines. But less arbitrary in some cases like conquest or dynastic change. Like there was something that happened between Julius Caesar and Agustus. The line isn’t super clear, but the Republican government and the empire definitely have some key differences even if the Senate was never really disolved.
But I remember Louis XIV saying something like “I die, but the state remains”. So I think in some proto form “the state” or something larger than just the ruler has existed on and off throughout history.
And fucking China.
China gets a bit fuzzier in between dynasties and revolutions. But there are definitely multiple post-Unification dynasties that lasted longer than 250 years.
What about San Marino?
Absolutely.
I used to be in the record business, and worked for a time for a Chinese record company who was releasing indigenous folk and classical music.
Western music traces back about 1000-1200 years, while Chinese music has an unbroken written musical tradition going back several thousands of years.
Bro he could’ve done a single online search and disproved himself in literal seconds.
Freedom of expression has morphed into freedom of stupidity.
freedom to flaunt stupidity even.
i think the first poster misunderstood a quote and I can’t reproduce it anymore either. it was something about no empire lasted more then 250 years? or no government form or something among these lines? it was not about the country disapearing in name or anything, but that it damatically changes in one way or another like completly changing the form of government
I remember it as most empires collapse before or around 250 years. If I remember the quote correctly it mentioned most not all, and empire not nation or country.
deleted by creator
Even that’s a very obvious fallacy though
China: lol, lmao
The nation which hasn’t existed as it currently is for even 100 years yet (and is already falling apart)?
China didn’t just lose who they used to be, they deliberately murdered their old nation.
The People’s Republic of China will be 76 years old this October.
The OP is wrong because there are a few existing nations older than 250 years, but there aren’t many of them. As far as countries go, the United States is over the hill.
Its nonsense. China as a national and cultural entity is not 76 years old. Changing constitutions does not make it a different country, it is only americans who adhere to that belief system because their country didnt exist prior to their constitution.
Its nonsense. China as a national and cultural entity is not 76 years old. Changing constitutions does not make it a different country,
Yes, it does. Country and Nation are not synonyms. Country refers to Government while Nation is about culture.
China as a Nation, that is a people with a shared culture and languages, is thousands of years old. China as a Country is less than 100 years old.
…it is only americans who adhere to that belief system because their country didnt exist prior to their constitution.
Since you are presumably not American how would you answer this question: How old is Panama?
Multiple chinese dynasties lasted longer than 250 years
China, also: your dynasty is closing in on 300 years, huh? Good luck!
“lol” —Mao
Laughing out loud my ass off
“rofl” - Mao
Lmao - Mao
Even if this were true, this would be anthropic reasoning, which is always suspect. The belief that the present, the here and now, cannot be exceptional will always overlook examples where it is exceptional.
We live in interesting times.
You guys think it’s bad reading all this online?
Try living here…
I bet outside of the US they have a very different perspective of what it’s like living here right now.
Specifically, the fact that things like some of our largest protests ever aren’t even being covered inside the states. There are huge public displays thousands and thousands of people being completely ignored by media. I wonder what else we’re not being allowed to see here.
I’ve been saying this right from the beginning, but this is a war on information.
Felon 45 and the right are going to do everything they possibly can to make sure word doesn’t get out
Even ignoring how obviously wrong this is about how old other countries are, America turns 250 in 2026 not 2025 lol
I know this not because I paid attention in history class, but because I played Fallout 76 where the vault dwellers celebrate America’s Tricentennial before leaving the vault and find it a wasteland.
Bicentennial Quarters anyone? 1776-1976.
Be right back, those kids are on my lawn again.
There’s a difference between turning 250 and the 250th year, the latter being what was referenced. One year after a baby is born, they “turn one” for their first birthday; but the moment they’re born, it’s their first year since we don’t start counts on zero (yes, I know, unless you’re a computer—insert canned laughter).
You’re right that America would turn 250 in 2026, but OP’s meme is correct in that they started the count on one, inclusively.
They’re not being precise with their language, but their point is largely true. What they really mean is that the US has the oldest still active Constitution in the world. The UK has existed in a continuous government for far longer, but they don’t have a written Constitution like the US does.
Yeah, it’s easy to shit on Americans about being ignorant of history. But this person’s point is largely true. The US has had the same constitution in effect for nearly 250 years. It is the oldest written constitution on Earth still in effect. Most nations have revolutions or complete rewrites of their foundational legal documents long before they reach this point.
And this is also why the US has such political instability right now. We have a Constitution that was written for the needs of 250 years ago. It was formed from a series of compromises that made sense in the politics of 250 years ago. At this point, we really should scrap it entirely and start from scratch. Having the world’s oldest Constitution really isn’t something worth bragging over; it just means you’re running obsolete software.
Does a constitution define what a nation is?
In the case of the US, yes. The US started out as 13 independent countries. It was only the Articles of Confederation and later the Constitution that defined the US as a country. Disband the US constitution tomorrow, and the US becomes 50 independent countries.
In the case of the US, yes.
Even then, not really.
We celebrate July 4, 1776, the creation of our national identity independent from England, not June 21, 1788, when our constitution took effect.
But July 4th is called “Independence Day”, because it’s the day we got our independence from England. The articles of confederation weren’t signed until November 15, 1777, July 4th, 1776 was just the declaration of Independence
The US didn’t get widely accepted as a country until a good few years later (within 5-10 years though depending on who you ask)
Yes, that’s already what I’m saying. The United States celebrates its Independence Day, not any day that has anything to do with the creation of the Constitution that forms our basis of government.
I’m all for giving people the benefit of doubt, but no. They don’t “really mean” that, otherwise they would have written “constitution” somewhere, and not wrote “has had” when they mean “currently active”.
It’s possible they misremembered someone who had a point, true, but they do not.
The problem is they’re mixing up concepts of constitutional government, continuity in government, nationalism vs dynastic control, and the idea of the “natural lifespan” of democracies.
And this is not even true as there have been change. Black people where a quarter of a person at one point. Women couldn’t vote. So to say the US has had the same law for 250 years is also bullshit.
Black people where a quarter of a person at one point.
It’s worse than that. The fraction you’re referring to is 1/5 and they weren’t considered people at all, they were slaves. Slaves were not considered people in terms of rights, but the number of congressmen (and also EC electors) a state had added the slave population divided by five.
So slave states had more power in congress and more voting power to determine who would be president proportional to how many slaves they had. More slaves = more “democratic” power for the slave owners.
Slaves had no rights, but slave owners had more power from that evil 1/5 rule.
I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right on this… 1/5? Where is that number coming from?
It’s 3/5. It was literally called the 3/5 compromise. Please history
What they really mean is that the US has the oldest still active Constitution in the world. The UK has existed in a continuous government for far longer, but they don’t have a written Constitution like the US does.
Even if that is what they meant, and even if the UK doesn’t count for whatever reason, this would still be incorrect. The constitution of San Marino dates from 1600.
Yeah, but does San Marino have a population of more than seven?
More importantly, is your IQ more than seven?
Yes. 9 is good, right?
Don’t put your finger near your mouth, you may bite it.
Yes, and irrelevant.
It’s the weirdest to get pushback on little joke comments, but of course it’s relevant. The US Constitution needs some serious updates but there is no denying it is the oldest for a country with significant population and diversity. San Marino is the fifth smallest country in the world, has a population ~10,000 times less than the US, and is almost entirely monocultural.
The point is that under no measure is it true. If you go for nation as people’s identity, Japan, Egypt or China are millenia old. If by the current form of constitution then us constitution was amended in 1992 (IIRC). If we go by geographical borders, Hawaii and Alaska are 1960s additions. If we go by form of government, the UK is about a hundred years older. If we go by the base form of the constitution, ammendments be damned, either UK or San Marino are older.
The UK dates back to 1801, when the parliaments of Scotland and Ireland were abolished and the UK Parliament established.
Idiot
I dunno, I’m pretty sure Japan is older.
Depends what you define as nation. Modern day Japan is only 157 years old since the Meiji Restoration started in 1868.
Like the US will still exist after the American empire collapses but sure as hell not in it’s current form.
I don’t consider different eras as different nations though. I think that’s splitting too many hairs. I see a nation as a country that is generally united and governed by a leading entity.
Going back to the Japan example, I would consider them a nation when all the clans were united under one rule. Same with UK, India, Thailand etc.
Then the US can only count since the civil war 🤷♂️ Or maybe since Hawaii’s invasion (1959).
You could argue that modern Japan only exists since WWII. The major changes required after losing in WWII majorly changed the country.
You could also argue that the US is a new nation since the Civil War, so it’s 160ish years old. If you ignore the civil war, what about when various states were added? Does the fact they were added gradually rather than all at once mean it’s the same country? It’s hard to argue that a country that was founded on the idea that all land-owning white males should get to vote is really the same as one that in 2022 believed that any citizen of any race or sex over the age of 18 should get a vote. Though, I suppose in some ways 2025 USA is showing it’s still the same country as 1776 USA.
It’s all pretty arbitrary though. What defines the start and end of a country? Does changing names count? Does changing borders? How radically does a government have to change to mean it’s a new country? How radically do founding documents need to be changed? I guess it’s the Country of Theseus. When is it no longer the same one?
The US civil war didn’t overhaul the entire system of government though, like what happened to Japan after WWII
I would say the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, the various enforcement acts in the early 1870s, etc. did overhaul the system of government, by changing what it meant to be a citizen, defining people’s rights more explicitly, and outlawing slavery. Given that black people made up about 20% of the population, suddenly (theoretically) allowing them to vote and giving them the rights that non-slaves had was a pretty major change.
It’s going to be turned into a Dave and busters.
And, later, just one enormous Spirit Halloween.
Who did the US get independence from, buddy?
Well there’s that… but these people are free from the restraints of logic.
They think of countries as dynasties or times of uninterrupted, peaceful transitions of power. Britain has changed dynasties and government types over the years. It’s semantics.
The Kingdom of Great Britain, which ceased to exist in 1800 and lasted less than a century.
Use the same definition (unchanged political institutions) and tell me how long the Roman Empire lasted.
Best I can find is about 500 years.
The was also a kingdom period in Rome’s earlier times. But that’s ancient history, am i rite?
(I’ll let myself out)
You have to add all these together to include coups and hostile takeovers or divide it to hilariously short periods.
I think that was the point of the original poster. I mean, they were wrong, but I find a lot of the comments in this thread hilariously more wrong in their self-righteous response.
To be fair, it’s easier to manage a pub than a whole country.
deleted by creator
England would like a word. It formed in 927 AD. That means it is 1,098 years old.
.
