Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
I genuinely don't know how you interpret "I'm sure you understand the difference" as "you actually believe this". But sure, I'm manipulating your mind.
The evidence - well, an argument, because this isn't a paper - is exactly what you so helpfully brought up the Papal States for. Apart from literally his own domain, the pope did not turn any other nations into a Catholic theocracy because their monarch was Catholic.
It should be the other way around really - this idea of Catholic blind obedience to the pope is advanced as an assumption hy British historians despite having no example or evidence that it would be the case other than "that's what Catholics are like" despite the Anglican church literally arising from a Catholic English monarch disobeying the pope.
You saying things is not evidence that the Gunpowder Plotters did not want a Catholic theocracy.
And I already said that Catholics do not have blind obedience to the Pope so stop putting words in my mouth. Apparently you think lying about me is a way to the truth. It is not.
Yes, that's the whole fucking point. The Anglicans were oppressing the Catholics and the Gunpowder Plotters tried to commit mass murder in order to not just end that oppression, but bring back Catholicism by force. They were literally forming an army. Both sides were in the wrong here, which was also Moore's reason for using the Guy Fawkes mask. To show that people fighting oppression can also be oppressors.
And if you think any of that is untrue, present some evidence. Don't insult, don't be rude, don't just tell me I'm wrong, don't tell me the British are liars, present some evidence.
I didn't put any words in your mouth... I really don't understand how you're not getting that. I said you understand that it's not true. Literally just read the part you quoted.
Actually none of what you said just now was untrue. The leap that is unexplained is that bringing back a Catholic monarch would turn the UK into a papal theocracy where no other Catholic kingdom was (except the Papal States!).
And that specifically is the part that I'm arguing has no basis in fact - you're asking me to provide evidence that something wasn't going to happen. Usually we ask for evidence of speculation, not against speculation. It doesn't help that the people that could have said so were hung drawn and quartered, and the history written by people who immediately brought in further anti-Catholic legislation.
Yes, I am. Because you made a claim and that's how the burden of proof works. It is not my fault if you made a claim you can't prove.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
Actually, you have made multiple claims and have backed none of them up. Like how the British are lying.
Of course, if you actually know what Guy Fawkes wanted, then you know he wanted a theocracy. Why you think it matters if he would have achieved it, I don't know.
https://insertphilosophyhere.com/guy-fawkes-terrorist/
Do you really think they wanted a nine-year-old in charge?
You are welcome to dismiss that, but it's your claim that it isn't true, so it's up to you to back that claim up. It is no one else's job to prove you are telling the truth, just yours.