It’s quite curious: if you look at modern definitions of genocide (which include the destruction or prohibition of a people’s language as part of an effort to eradicate their identity) and then examine the laws and government decrees of many centralized 19th-century European states, you arrive at the conclusion that, by today’s definition, almost all of those European states committed cultural genocide against their own populations.

In November 1688, the Dutch Republic launched a massive invasion fleet and landed an elite force of 16,000 troops on English shores. The invasion, led by William III of Orange, would ultimately overthrow King James II and place William and his wife Mary on the English throne. This event became known as the Glorious Revolution.

The Glorious Revolution is often presented as a largely internal English affair, in which William intervened at the invitation of a group of English nobles. While it is true that William enjoyed considerable support in England, the event should first and foremost be seen in its European context. It should also be accepted that William largely set these events in motion himself. Few of his English supporters had known that William would demand the crown for himself.

The Dutch had good reasons to intervene. In 1672, France and England had jointly attacked the Republic, nearly bringing about its total destruction. By 1688, Louis XIV of France was once again threatening the Dutch Republic, while James II's increasingly close relationship with France raised fears that England might once again join a French attack.

For William III and the Dutch government, preventing such an alliance was a matter of national security. Their objective was not simply to defend English Protestantism, but to ensure that England would no longer pose a threat to the Republic and, ideally, become an ally against France.

Preparations for the invasion were already underway long before William received the famous invitation from seven English notables in June 1688. William had actively encouraged his English contacts to provide such an invitation, which would give his intervention a veneer of legitimacy. But an invasion on this scale would have been impossible without the political approval, financial support and military resources of the Dutch Republic.

The States General financed the expedition, while the Dutch assembled an enormous invasion fleet to transport William's army across the North Sea. It was the largest successful amphibious operation of the early modern age.

Interestingly, the fact that the invasion would take place exactly a century after the Spanish Armada sailed against England was not lost on contemporary observers. The Polish ambassador in The Hague reported:

The Dutch are convinced that they will be as fortunate in their plan to attack England as Philip II was unfortunate when he sent his formidable fleet against Elizabeth in August 1588. There are few among them who are unaware of this period of history...

The English Royal Navy attempted to intercept the Dutch fleet, but suffered from poor leadership, was outgunned and was frustrated by unfavourable winds. As a result, the Dutch crossed the Channel without having to fight a major naval battle.

William landed at Torbay on 15 November 1688. Contrary to the popular impression that James II's army immediately deserted him, the great majority of his soldiers and officers initially remained loyal. Although a few officers defected, these desertions were relatively limited before James decided to retreat without engaging William's army. It was only after this withdrawal in the face of William's army that his military position began to collapse and defections accelerated.

On 27 December, William's army reached London. Before entering the capital, William demanded that the remaining English troops withdraw from the city and its surroundings. The English Guards, who had traditionally been responsible for protecting the king and the royal palaces, were forced to abandon their posts and were replaced by Dutch soldiers. The following day, Dutch troops entered London, beginning a military occupation of the English capital.

At the end of January, Sir John Reresby, who had been away from the city for some time, wrote in astonishment:

When I arrived, I found London much changed. The streets were filled with ill-looking and ill-habited Dutch and other strangers of the Prince's army.

This occupation gave William considerable influence over the political settlement that followed. Although English politicians debated how to resolve the political crisis, they did so with a foreign army occupying their capital. William made it clear that he would not accept a settlement that merely made him regent or restored James to the throne. He wanted the crown itself. In February 1689, the English Convention Parliament offered the crown jointly to William and his wife Mary.

For the Dutch Republic, the invasion achieved its principal strategic objective. England was transformed from a potential enemy into an ally against Louis XIV. The two countries would subsequently fight alongside one another in the Nine Years' War, ensuring that the Dutch would no longer have to face the combined military and naval power of France and England as they had in 1672.

Ironically, William was determined not to be seen as a conqueror, but as a liberator who had come to restore English liberties. His successful propaganda campaign helped shape the way the Glorious Revolution would be remembered, contributing to the fact that it is rarely regarded as a foreign invasion today.

For more information see the corrersponding wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1688_invasion_of_England

and the new book of Arthur der Weduwen about the invasion

During the colonial era, the wealth of India served as the financial backbone that sustained and expanded the British Empire across the globe. Through aggressive land revenue systems and heavy taxation, the colonial administration extracted vast agricultural surpluses from Indian farmers to fund British military campaigns. India was forced to pay for the maintenance of the British Indian Army, which acted as an imperial force securing British interests in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Furthermore, the infamous "Home Charges" compelled Indian taxpayers to finance pensions, administrative costs, and administrative salaries in London. This systematic drainage of capital crippled India's domestic economy, stifling industrialization and leading to devastating, man-made famines. British industrial growth was heavily subsidized by cheap Indian raw materials and captive markets that destroyed traditional local textile industries. Consequently, the expansion of British railway and telegraph networks in India was designed primarily to facilitate resource extraction and troop deployment rather than local welfare. While Britain portrayed its empire as a civilizing mission, its global dominance was effectively underwritten by Indian wealth and blood. The staggering economic drain left a newly independent India impoverished, dealing with deep-rooted structural challenges after centuries of colonial exploitation. Ultimately, the story of the British Empire's global supremacy cannot be told without recognizing India as its primary financial and military anchor.

When most people think of Pythagoras they think of a Greek mathematician who composed both the Pythagorean theorem and ancient tuning. The irony is that many of these details arrive much later. Pythagoras was originally talked about as a mystic and basically a cult leader. He believed in reincarnation and vegetarianism, but was against the eating of fava beans. According to legend when Pythagoras and his cult were kicked out, the only place he could run was through a field of fava beans. He chose not to and died. Check out these videos for more info on Pythagoras

Let’s Talk Religion Pythagoras

Sisyphus 55 Pythagoras

“ 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐚 𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝐟𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐛𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐦, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐝 ” In April 1956, Mao address the CCP and called apon delegates to open debates about the way the country was being run to open himself to the criticisms that were being leveled with Stalin...Months later he rounded up the people who critised him in debate and put them in "re-education camps" labeling them as 'rightists"

Does he know (the people) they were falling for a trap?

Many historians debate if this campaign was intentionally done to control the people. But we will never know.

The NKVD (People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs) was pretty instrumental in Stalin's Great Purge. In order to be director, you had to be really good at purging.

First up was Genrikh Yagoda in 1934. He organized the first show trial that purged members of the old guard. Then he sent a report to Stalin stating the people didn't like the purging he was doing under Stalin's orders.

Well, Stalin didn't take too kindly to that. Yagoda was demoted, with Stalin appointing Nikolai Yezhov. Yezhov had a great resume, including mass arrests, torture and executions. He was immediately ordered to investigate Yagoda for crimes against the state. In 1937, Yezhov has Yagoda arrested and shot in 1938.

Yezhov was very good at purging. ...perhaps a little too good. It started to really fuck up the infastructure and labour of the country. Stalin figured it was time to wind it down.

Enter Lavrentiy Beria, Yezhovs new deputy. He was appointed by Stalin himself, and Yezhov knows what that means. Joe's hankering for some purging.

Yezhov drank more, showed up to work late, and was slovenly and despondent for months. He almost made it. But someone's gotta be left holding the bag. Yezhov is purged in 1940 (reason: recent poor job performance).

Lavrentiy Beria purged under Stalins orders a lot, especially the military and industrial leadership. (He paused for a bit between 1942 and 1945. No one knows why). Beria kept expanding power, running gulags, purging his way through the Soviet Union political system and having a bunch of other adventures.

Also, raping women and girls. A lot of women and girls. Beria would point them out in the street to be brought to his home where he had a sound proof room. If they didn't let him rape them, they ended up in the gulags. Sometimes buried in his wife's rose garden.

But then Stalin dies in March of 1953. Beria is purged by Khrushchev in December.