- Joined
- Apr 28, 2021
Is Kraut now a Breadtuber? Outside of "Communism was bad because it was authoritarian" he seems to fit right in with the crowd.
YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory
- Thread starter Corpun
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
Kraut is specifically banned from associating with most Historytube and Breadtube.
They cite the archived Shaun video calling him a Nazi.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2021
So he's in the awkward centrist position where he has stepped on everyone's toes and now everyone hates him.
Also didn't The Japanese Government tried to reconcile with the mainland Chinese government in the 1960s?
Fentanyl Floyd
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2020
Don't quote me on this, but I think that photo with the Jap soldier skewering a baby is from a movie.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2021
I would recomend reading Kraut thread it is pretty entertaining.
Short version.
1) he started as more right Sargoy wannabe.
2)He made video denouncing cancel culture.
3) Week after he publicly wrote to some company about one YouTube Chick that made bad video about races.
She lost her job and Kraut and friends bullied her out of the internet.
4) When he got backlash instead doing literally anything else. He decided to go on autistic crusade against alt right.
5) It ended like 4th crusade.
He lost most of subs he was denounced by right, laughing stock for altright And Leftists dont want him for his past. Even if he tries So much to be part of breadtube.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
You can presume that any mention of kids being bayoneted is pure fiction. Accusing your enemy of ayonetting kids has countless times been used in propaganda, every time having been made up. Even if you got soldiers to go along with killing children even though it's both abhorrent and a waste of resources, bayonetting them is an incredibly impractical way of going about it.
Here's the other thing, all footage of soldiers on all sides of the war were filmed for propaganda purposes and strictly curated. Why would a japanese film crew document atrocities committed by their own men? Or are we presuming the photo was taken by a chinese man walking around with a camera hidden in a giant novelty cowboy hat?
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
Kraut is not really a centrist because he is extreme views on most topics. Take any position and he'll go to the extreme.
Nuclear bombs? They were probably necessary. Kraut thinks we should have a nuke day where everybody dances in the streets wearing nuke shaped clothing. Fascism? Fascism is bad and should be opposed. Kraut thinks we should dehumanize them and put them in concentration camps.
Japan is kinda the exception to this to be honest.
Japans whole society and military was just people treating everybody below them as shit and the rank+file/peasants only had "lesser races" to look down on. This basically means that the average rank and file Japanese soldier has incel-level rage.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2021
What the fuck happened to Kraut? I know he was always an autistic spazz who tried to drift into breadtube's sphere some years back but now he just seems to be an autist trying to clout chase anything he can. Is his content basdically a copy paste of some generic shit Shaun or other big breadtubers do?
Also can anyone elaborate on the ties between breadtube and historytube a little more, I feel like I should udate the OP and while I'm aware of the connections between some of them I'm not big into it, outside of the usual breadtuber taking out of context clips to call someone a Nazi.
Also can anyone elaborate on the ties between breadtube and historytube a little more, I feel like I should udate the OP and while I'm aware of the connections between some of them I'm not big into it, outside of the usual breadtuber taking out of context clips to call someone a Nazi.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
🦌Alternate Jingle-Jangle Hub 🦌 on Twitter: "@Der_Parrot There's a d…
archived 29 Nov 2021 07:42:24 UTC
Kraut tries his old trick of changing his batshit insane argument into something more agreeable. Gets slapped down.
Very nostalgic
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
When Brain4Breakfast died Kraut basically copied his style and extended the length of the videos by an hour. I'm not sure if this is the case but the death of that YouTuber likely created unemployed artists who needed a new boss.
His videos address "fellow leftists" and I've been told (by top men who would definitely know) that he was specifically excluded from the historytube Slack. Breadtube definitely hates him as those people have videos shitting on him (Shaun, Jenna marbles, all the dime a dozen small Breadtubers, etc). His interview with Vaush also didn't really leave people looking at him kindly....
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2021
By Krauts logic, a crazy person could go to Japan and murder a hundred year old grandpa to avenge some warcrimes or whatever and he would see them as a hero.🦌Alternate Jingle-Jangle Hub 🦌 on Twitter: "@Der_Parrot There's a d…
archived 29 Nov 2021 07:42:24 UTCarchive.md
Kraut tries his old trick of changing his batshit insane argument into something more agreeable. Gets slapped down.
Very nostalgic
This is also not the first time Kraut had a stupid take on Imperial Japan in ww2.
It seems Kraut has become even more derange and radical since his first take on Imperial Japan.
Re watching that again after all these years really takes me back. Metekur is the best.
I'm always fascinated by the contradiction of the mindset of Imperial Japanese military. On one hand they did absolutly believe in the brutality in the war they waged and saw themselves as the new rulers to rule over Asia but at the same time they seem to absolutely believed in the message of the East Asian co-prosperity Sphere and saw themselves as liberators against European colonialism and "asia for asians".
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
The Japanese army had some "medieval" conduct dyring the war compared to the western armies. But claims of bayonetting children needs solid proof because of how common the accusation has been falsely used throughout history.
A lot of the worst myths about the imperial japanese army comes from accounts of the Nanjing campaign. Some which reaches holocaust bear pits and holocoaster levels of cartoonish villainy.
Based on witness accounts and stories from the second sino japanese war, it would be far more likely that children captured with no adults protecting then would be taken by the troops to perform menial labor for them, and sex with the girls in many cases. Children were often viewed as a resource to be exploited, not a outlet for senseless killing.
Interestingly enough japanese ww2 propaganda also detailed how the US military killed women and children. And it's been documented that japanese civilians would rather kill themselves and their children than be captured during the battles for Okinawa and Iwo Jima from fear of cruelty by the American invaders
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
Jesus Im a 'atomic bombing were completely justified saved countless lives likely prevented a third world war from breaking out and the revisionists are either diliberately misreading available evidence or are so fucking brain dead they cant be trusted' sort of person and even i dont go this far.🦌Alternate Jingle-Jangle Hub 🦌 on Twitter: "@Der_Parrot There's a d…
archived 29 Nov 2021 07:42:24 UTC
Kraut tries his old trick of changing his batshit insane argument into something more agreeable. Gets slapped down.
Very nostalgic
Also re kerauts political leanings i believe he is among the last liberals(euro sense) without qualifiers left in europe or any where really
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2017
You should read about the Rape of Nanking at some time. Officers had literal beheading competitions and this was openly reported in Japanese papers.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
The Japanese commander in charge was known for his friendly relationship with Chinese military leaders and support for deescalating the war. The Massacre was him losing control of his men and those soldiers acting out degeneracy.
Most Japanese generals viewed the Chinese as subhuman slaves, but the one that actually liked China ended up overseeing the most infamous atrocity. The same issue happened with Manilla. A general loses control of his men and 100,000 people get murdered and raped.
The Japanese were brutal to civilians because their society instilled those values into most people. It wasn't like the Germans who had a small core of fanatics and a bunch of people just following orders because of German culture.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
A lot of what was detailed in the book Rape of Nanking should be met with some skepticism, I'm not denying that the troops went out of control and started executing prisoners and civilians, but a lot of the sources used in the book Rape of Nanking are of such dubious nature that the author Iris Chang was even warned by even Chinese historians that the book would become a easy target for Japanese apologists. Take the beheading competition, a lot of people will often mention it in the same sentence where they detail the execution of civilians, but the officers were likely beheading prisoners of war, the lack of distinction even had the family of the officers file a lawsuit for defamation against the japanese reporter who brought up the incidence.
Also executing prisoners of war goes against western norms for treatment of prisoners, but what treatment do you think Japanese prisoners of war usually expected when captured by the Chinese? Truth is that in east asia during WW2 the rules of engagement were far more brutal than in the west. Both sides expected soldiers to be killed when captured.
It's definitely a cultural difference between the western and asian powers. Treatment of civilians, prisoners, and just general rules of engagement were usually up to each individual Japanese commander, even down to lower officer rank. Whereas the British, German, and even Soviet commanders were following strict orders from high command, Japanese commanders were often given more personal authority on how they best saw fit to lead.
I think it's important to keep in mind that Japan did not have the same history of diplomacy and negotiations with their neighbors during war as the European powers had. Just a 100 years earlier the country had a almost feudal like system, and the Japanese commanders had been raised and educated in a world where there were no such thing as international rules of war. Same attitude can also be seen in other east asian nations involved in WW2.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2017
There were numerous eyewitness accounts to the shear level of atrocities the Japanese committed in the Rape of Nanking, particularly by westerners who remained in the city, including the lead diplomat of Nazi Germany, who was utterly horrified at the level of atrocities he witnessed, alongside many pictures of the literal piles of corpses. Many of these same westerners banded together and created a safe zone to protect as many people as they could, since the Japanese military generally left them alone (Japan wasn't at war with any western nations at the time). Their descriptions of what the Japanese military did, including raping entire families and forcing families to rape each other, would make your skin crawl.
The only people who contest the brutality or even the existence of the Rape of Nanking are Japanese nationalists. Japanese veterans who took part have OPENLY admitted to the massacre and rapes taking place. The Japanese Army Veterans Association (Kaikosha) actually interviewed Japanese soldiers who had served in the Area, hoping the discredit the idea that the massacre had taken place, only for the veterans to openly admit that, yes, the massacre did in fact take place, and even admit to the atrocities that they themselves had taken part in, forcing the association to not only publish the truth, but apologize. A Japanese woman by the name of Tamaki Masaoka produced her own documentary film Torn Memories of Nanjing, where she directly interviewed, alongside actual victims of the massacre, numerous Japanese war veterans (250 in fact) and got them to admit, on camera, that they had participated in massacres and mass war rape, with only 3 of the men interviewed expressing any remorse for their actions.
A distinction without a difference. The soldiers were competing about how many heads they could cut off. Considering the sheer scale of the massacre, whether they were beheading POWs or civilians makes little difference. Its just one horror story in a situation filled with millions of them.
Are you saying that makes it okay? Are we forgetting that Japan were the initial aggressors who had been violating Chinese sovereignty for years, and had most of their officer corps literally chomping at the bit to invade China? The reason the massacre the happened wasn't because they were expecting the same to happen to Tokyo (China never directly threatened the Japanese Islands) but because they were pissed the Chinese actually put up a fight when they expected them to roll over and take it. Keep in mind, the Chinese government and military had already abandoned Nanjing and the token force that remained completely capitulated. This wasn't the result of a pitched battle or long drawn out siege, which is usually what predates such atrocities. The Japanese carried out this massacre with pure malice. And most of the deaths weren't soldiers, but civilians. And it wasn't like the Japanese were not aware of the agreed international rules of engagement nor incapable of following them. It was Emperor Hirohito himself that agreed with the Japanese military command to remove all restraints regarding the treatment of Chinese prisoners according to international law, so he bears ultimate responsibility for the massacre.
Prince Yasuhiko Asaka's (the Japanese commanding officer) culpability is hotly contested. What isn't contested is that his command post sent out a command to "kill all captives", basically starting the massacre in earnest. The only question is whether he issued the order himself or whether it was issued by his aide-de-camp without his knowledge. At the end of the day, whether Asaka issued the order himself, he was still the commander in charge, and thus he bears responsibility for the massacre that happened under his watch, especially since he issued no orders trying to stop the massacre.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
Eyewitness reports can report a lot of things. During the Nuremberg trial you had eyewitnesses claiming the nazis were making lamps from skin of dead jews and sticking people in torture cabinets.
Piles of corpses isn't that rare when a capitol city becomes a invasion target. The civilian casualties at Nanking are in the same ballpark as the civilian casualties in the Battle for Berlin, Battle for Leningrad, etc.
And this is where I think the source of disagreement lies. While I can personally agree that neither civilians nor prisoners of war should be executed, there is a big difference, and one can not ignore the context of the conflict considering it was a time and place were neither side had a policy for taking prisoners after battles.
I'm not. But in a historical context it makes just as much sense as winging about civilians massacred during the Dungan and Taiping rebellions.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2017
I mean, that's not far off from the actions of many actual Nazi commanders, like Oskar Dirlewanger. But it is also neither here nor there. The relative truthfulness of those claims doesn't speak to the truthfulness of these. All claims must stand on their own merits.
What you are ignoring is that those were battles; Leningrad was a full on slugfest between the Soviets and Nazis, with the civilians caught in the middle, while in Berlin, the Nazis fought to the bitter end (not that the Soviets didn't commit atrocities besides that), while Nanjing had already been evacuated by the Chinese government and military, and the city fell without more than a token defense, with most Chinese troops immediately surrendering or fleeing for their lives. This level of bloodletting didn't happen when Paris fell.
Are you actually even aware of the historical context? Even within the context of the ongoing conflict, the Rape of Nanking was considered horrific by everyone who WASN'T Japanese, including their own allies. It was a level of brutality that even the Nazis never reached. The only thing that is comparable is the Soviet's mass rape of Eastern Europe, another horrific war atrocity that, unlike the Rape of Nanking, continues to be ignored or unheard of by most, though denied by a few, which is a crying shame.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
And it becomes dangerous then to put the statements like "I saw japanese soldiers executing civilians" togheter with "I saw japanese soldiers bayonetting children" without requiring more than eyewitness testimonies from a time where a lot of outright falsehoods were created for propaganda purposes.
Why would the Battle of Nanking not count? The excuse was that the thirteen Chinese divisions were undermanned and poorly trained, not that they didn't exist at all. It would be false to claim that the military had already evacuated the city along with the government. The battle for Nanking lasted just as long as the Battle for Berlin.
Considered horrific by westerners. In actuality the massacre was forgotten for most of the cold war. Iris Chang going as far as to claim that the massacre was covered up by Mao and the communist leadership to maintain relations with Japan. In truth the massacre just wasn't notable. 300 000 dead civilians, while a tragedy, was but a drop in the bucket throughout the entirety of the war. Operation Ichi-Go just 7 years later would see far higher civilian casualties. And the ensuing civil war after WW2 would have civilian casualties that makes Nanking seems insignificant in comparison.
In truth Nanking is but one of many examples of what happens when an area with half a trillion people who grew up in non westernized societies are armed with modern weaponry and clash it out. Conflicts before and after have had disastrous civilian casualty counts from a western perspective.