u/papacvs

I have seen claims along the lines of this: that all languages spoken outside sub-Saharan Africa are closer to each other than to sub-Saharan African languages, in a way that would resemble an "Out of Africa" pattern in linguistics.

Is there any serious evidence for this idea in historical linguistics or language phylogenetics, or is it generally considered too speculative? If it is not accepted, what are the main problems with it?

So here’s a weird little thing I’ve thought about A Hard Day’s Night for a while, and I’m honestly surprised I’ve never seen anyone make this connection before.

The movie is usually treated like a light Beatles romp about fame, fans, and a TV performance. But when you actually look at what’s happening scene by scene, it plays much more like a compressed allegory for a civil war: people on the move, constant pursuit, controlled spaces, public performance under pressure, paper legitimacy, agitation, and a final airborne extraction. That lines up uncomfortably well with the Greek Civil War, which broke open in 1944–45, restarted as a full guerrilla war in 1946, and ended in 1949 after British and then American support helped the government push the rebels back into the mountains.

Point 1: the opening of the film already feels like a city under pressure. The Beatles are being chased by crowds, held back by police at Paddington, and immediately funneled into a tightly controlled transit-and-hotel routine. That is not just "Beatlemania". That is what a state looks like when it is trying to keep movement under control in a politically unstable environment. And the Greek Civil War really did begin with political breakdown in the cities, especially Athens, before the fighting became a wider guerrilla conflict.

Point 2: the hotel and fan-mail material is doing more than just making a joke about fame. Norm brings each Beatle a pile of fan letters and tells them to answer them, which is basically turning them into official public symbols on demand. Then Paul’s grandfather immediately starts messing with the idea of authenticity by asking for autographs, forging them, and trying to sell them. That is exactly the kind of paper-trail / legitimacy / propaganda logic you get in a civil conflict, especially one that goes through ceasefires, disarmament, underground regrouping, and political splits like Greece did after Varkiza in 1945.

Point 3: the grandfather is the clearest "political" figure in the movie, and I do not think that is accidental. He is an agent of chaos, constantly disrupting the boys, creating trouble, and trying to turn everything into a public incident. That fits the Greek Civil War pattern too: after the Varkiza Agreement, the left did not simply disappear peacefully, the communists went underground, guerrillas retreated to the mountains, and the fighting reopened in 1946 as a much harsher insurgency. In the film, the grandfather is basically the one who keeps dragging the Beatles out of safe, managed spaces and into exposed public space.

Point 4: Ringo’s whole walkabout is the strongest piece of evidence for me. He gets separated from the group, goes out to "experience life" and moves through the pub, the street, the riverbank, the schoolboy encounter, the bicycle ride, the construction site, and finally the police. That is not just a cute side plot. That is a man drifting through uncontrolled territory until the state finally catches him. The Greek communists did something structurally similar after 1945: they went underground, retreated to the mountains, and resumed a guerrilla war from outside normal civic life. Ringo’s little journey is basically the film’s version of that movement from containment to insurgency and then back to capture.

Point 5: the ending is where it gets almost ridiculous how well it fits. By the late 1940s Britain had formally withdrawn, the Truman Doctrine had stepped in with American political, military, and economic aid, and government forces were pushing the rebels deeper into the mountains until the final 1949 assault on Mount Grammos, backed by aircraft, broke the insurgency. The film ends with a frantic scramble to the studio, a last-minute public performance, and then a helicopter whisking the Beatles away. That is not just a fun ending. That is air-supported extraction after a destabilized ground operation. The movie literally ends by lifting its characters out of the conflict zone.

So yeah, I do not think A Hard Day’s Night is just about four musicians dealing with fame. I think it is a weird little coded film about political containment, irregular movement, public legitimacy, and the tension of a society under conflict - with the Greek Civil War sitting underneath the whole thing like the actual hidden text. The Beatles are the bright surface. The war is the engine underneath. There is a lot more that could be said, but I think the movie basically tells on itself once you stop treating it like a normal comedy.

No bom português: a seleção brasileira é o patrimônio cultural mais importante do Brasil perante o mundo. É o que colocou o Brasil no mapa mundial - e por mérito nosso. O técnico, sendo o cérebro do time e talvez a função mais importante, tem uma posição hierárquica superior aos jogadores. Que imagem passa brasileiros sendo comandados por estrangeiros? Orgulho? Um hipotético hexa sob um estrangeiro seria muito mais vergonhoso que mil 7 a 1s - pelo menos lá foi uma derrota, inegavelmente, do Brasil (um hexa com o Ancelotti seria uma vitória inegavelmente dos brasileiros?!). Não é apenas a "seleção da CBF" ou algo do tipo, pois, a partir do ponto que se fala "torcer pelo Brasil", aquele combinado de esportistas representam o país (atualmente um país orgulhosamente submisso). Sei que esse post pode parecer aleatório. Mas é que a esquerda, diferente da direita, não se entregou totalmente para o servilismo. Mas não lembro de ver ninguém enchergando problema nenhuma em ter um gringo comandando um dos grandes símbolos nacionais. Gostaria de saber o que acham disso tudo e se enchergam alguma contradição nisso. Acho bizarro isso nem entrar em discussão. Sei que os técnicos brasileiros tão muito atrás das outras nacionalidades. Mas paciência, esperassemos pela próxima geração: perder faz parte. Imagina convocar um gringo pra alguma posição só porque os brasileiros disponíveis são uns merdas? É a "seleção brasileira de Teseu", só que trocando as nacionalidades.

Alguém saberia dizer alguma? Nunca vi alguém falando desse assunto.