Not a teenager I think, germans actually are like this. There is never a reason for them to challenge the first thought that pops into ther head so that’s how they coast through life.
I would agree with you but genuinely thinking rubber (first discovered by indigenous cultures in Mesoamerica, with archaeological evidence dating back to around 1600 BC when the Olmec civilization used it to make balls for games. And European awareness of rubber beginning in the late 15th century, notably when Christopher Columbus encountered it during his voyages in 1493.) and shipping insurance (The first formal marine insurance policies, which can be considered a precursor to shopping insurance, emerged in the mid-fourteenth century, around the 1300s, particularly in Italian merchant city-states.) didn’t exist in 1880 makes me think it’s a teenager who hasn’t finished history class.
You’re expecting these history classes to actually teach these things. I can tell you I hadn’t heard of this before your comments.
ⓘ This user is suspected of being a cat. Please report any suspicious behavior.
I guess maybe I was overestimating history classes, in part possibly thinking that due to the fact that it was a team headed by Fritz Hofmann, working at the Bayer laboratory in Germany that first created synthetic rubber I thought they might mention natural rubber.
Either way searching the internet for 30 seconds could have cleared this up for them before they decided to state something so ridiculous and clearly wrong.
If you manage to pass through primary education you are going to get a purely cursory run down of history. Even still, in primary school with AP courses considered you’re still going to get the Pearson Approved version of history (or your national equivalent) unless you have a truly based teacher, in which case at most you’re getting the Howard Zinn version of history, at last in America.
In collage unless you’re majoring in history or some form of humanities, you’re getting the required 101 history courses which I’m sure are not much more advanced then your 12the grade history with simply more writing and reading to do.
Underestimation is I think a bit of an understatement when most bourgeois education is going to ignore material history as a baseline, let alone discuss history and economics in any systemic way, which would absolutely require the level of knowledge you have. At most you’re bridging into the CRT class of history, which is often a kind of material analysis that is lacking a class analysis that comes to any conclusions on those class lines.
Unfortunately, much of your knowledge is relegated to the all-you-can-eat-trivia-night-wing-basket of history (no offense). The kind of display you put on is like a parlor trick to most average individuals. To be met with a “you must like trivia” when making a point using historical materialist facts. For those who have never had their worldview challenged, its like bringing a revolver to a fist fight, except you don’t know its a fist fight, and your interlocutor has never even heard of a revolver. One shot out of the barrel puts them on guard, they complain that you’ve broken the rules of the fist fight, and that what your doing is clearly disingenuous. No honest person would do such a thing, they imagine, and therefore you can only exist as a dastardly do bad. Meanwhile you are just trying to discuss History, on some objective bases.
Why is it almost always feddit?
If only it was just feddit
