YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
ManchuTopaz said:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YQ7cMwKwCYAThoughts on this channel for ancient history? I haven't seen it mentioned here, so I thought it would be good to share. The topics for the videos are a solid choice for me, but the editing really makes me feel like I'm watching a generic video essay like how SunnyV2 edits his videos tbh.
Click to expand...
I watched their The Ahhiyawa Problem video, which was interesting enough. Does get into a part of history that I find interesting: what the hell to interpret from the information given.
 
Breadbassket said:
Here is a video on why Kaiser Wilhelm II got rid of Bismarck as Chancellor.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=r2YouAuNGJs
Click to expand...
It's surprising that when you compare how historiography treated the two following WW2, Bismarck got off clean compared to Frederick II. Sure, none of the wars Bismarck instigated involved anywhere near as naked aggression as Frederick's invasion of Silesia or partition of Poland, but he was willing to commit what any capable sovereign would have termed treason for the sake of instigating wars of expansion and viewed his own subjects with the same corrective lenses as the NSDAP.

Nevermind that despite being a literal homosexual, Frederick II was nowhere near as prone to performative histrionics as Bismarck.
 
Computer God Autism said:
It's surprising that when you compare how historiography treated the two following WW2, Bismarck got off clean compared to Frederick II. Sure, none of the wars Bismarck instigated involved anywhere near as naked aggression as Frederick's invasion of Silesia or partition of Poland, but he was willing to commit what any capable sovereign would have termed treason for the sake of instigating wars of expansion and viewed his own subjects with the same corrective lenses as the NSDAP.

Nevermind that despite being a literal homosexual, Frederick II was nowhere near as prone to performative histrionics as Bismarck.
Click to expand...
Bismarck simply had the luck of serving Wilhelm I, probably the most inept and feckless Hohenzollern of the entire dynasty (At least Wilhelm II TRIED to rule). I recall one incident where Wilhelm said he would abdicate if Bismarck resigned during some dispute between the two, that is how dependent Wilhelm was on his chief minister.

It's amazing to think how differently German Unification could have gone if Bismarck had serious political operators opposed to him within Germany, instead of effectively seizing the entire system of Prussian patronage for himself and being the power behind the throne. Even Count Cavour had to tolerate the Savoyards butting in with his Risorgiomento schemes.
 
Breadbassket said:
Someone made a video criticizing Shadiversity.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ul_52kYbGiA
Click to expand...
IMG_20250202_200604.jpg
I thought I will give it watch, but nah maybe tomorow.
 
Hypohistericalhistory has remastered his Iraq war episode. Re recorded the whole thing with new audio, with new maps and less low res video. Part 2 coming soon

 
Rome's rightful successor said:
One of the most evil men to ever be involved with the US Government.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=yn_hB5dOYp0
Click to expand...

Every day we learn more and more information that proves the "Satanic Panic" of the 80s wasn't just blind mass hysteria from religious zealots, but a legitimate concern that may have held a lot more weight than we were let on to believe.



Old Video Tax about Whaling (Screw Youtube Age-Restrictions):

 
Corpun said:
Bismarck simply had the luck of serving Wilhelm I, probably the most inept and feckless Hohenzollern of the entire dynasty (At least Wilhelm II TRIED to rule). I recall one incident where Wilhelm said he would abdicate if Bismarck resigned during some dispute between the two, that is how dependent Wilhelm was on his chief minister.
Click to expand...
Bismarck was known to throw a childish tantrum whenever Wilhelm did something he disliked (like when he destroyed a hotel room during the peace negotiations with Austria) and it actually worked because everyone knew they couldn't find anyone better. Interestingly Wilhelm I. himself never wanted to be Emperor and got gaslighted into the position by Bismarck.
So it's no surprise that Bismarck no longer got his way as soon as the new Emperor said "no".
Breadbassket said:
Someone made a video criticizing Shadiversity.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ul_52kYbGiA
Click to expand...
I love this kind of pfp, it serves as a perfect filter for gay content.
 
ShittlerNiggler said:
Bismarck was known to throw a childish tantrum whenever Wilhelm did something he disliked (like when he destroyed a hotel room during the peace negotiations with Austria) and it actually worked because everyone knew they couldn't find anyone better. Interestingly Wilhelm I. himself never wanted to be Emperor and got gaslighted into the position by Bismarck.
So it's no surprise that Bismarck no longer got his way as soon as the new Emperor said "no".
Click to expand...
Kind of makes WIlhelm II a little based if you look at it form the angle of Bismarck being a subversive little worm who was effecitvely the true Kaiser of Germany. People like to fantasize about how different Germany would have been if Friedrich III hadn't gotten mega cancer and died a few months into his actual reign, but can you just imagine the shit Bismarck would try to pull if Friedrich III held on for a couple of years.

No disrespect towards Bismarck, he was a master of geopolitics and is one figure everyone should study, but the guy was an absolute snake from time to time focused on his sole vision of Prussian cultural and political hegemony.
 
Corpun said:
No disrespect towards Bismarck, he was a master of geopolitics and is one figure everyone should study, but the guy was an absolute snake from time to time
Click to expand...
Those two things are almost always directly related to one another.
 
>IMPLYING said:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=-Giecx6P7hoNo!
If you don't want to watch he pretty much concludes that, yes, yes it is.
Click to expand...

LovisXVI said:
No, but I wish. Also reminds of how absolutely shit most definitions of fascism really are. If your definition of fascist doesn't include: revolutionary, republican, right-wing, anti-communist, authoritarian, nationalist, meritocratic and progressive, then it is invariably inaccurate. When people try to lump Christian (or other religious) dictatorialism, nationalism and monarchism in it, I just roll my eyes, because they are clearly just using it as a broad brush for "thing I don't like".
Click to expand...


The funny thing is the commies were so successful in relabeling the term fascist to almost near the opposite of what it actually was, even a few of the trailer park actual far right groups have adapted the term. Just like how the term Nazi was derogatory to actual Nazis but enthusiastically embraced by their modern larper descendants. It would be as if the next generation of Dems called themselves the Republitard or Repukelikkkan party. Its sort of one of those hilariously stupid historic ironies if you think about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom