YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory

[Beautiful Border]

Is there really a difference between neoliberals and neoconservatives? They seem like different names for the same shit.

Neoliberalism is about economic policy, neoconservatism is about foreign policy. Neoliberals are opposed to the welfare state and favour capitalism over socialism or social democracy. Neoconservatives support the use of military intervention. The commonality with both groups is that they hold what are generally regarded as right-wing or reactionary views in one area, but are generally progressive in regard to social issues. You can be one without being the other, but they do tend to go together.

If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, you're a neoliberal. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to invade Iran, you're a neoconservative. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags, want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, and want to invade Iran, then you're both a neoliberal and a neoconservative.

 

[Amerikaner Teddybär]

Neoliberalism is about economic policy, neoconservatism is about foreign policy. Neoliberals are opposed to the welfare state and favour capitalism over socialism or social democracy. Neoconservatives support the use of military intervention. The commonality with both groups is that they hold what are generally regarded as right-wing or reactionary views in one area, but are generally progressive in regard to social issues. You can be one without being the other, but they do tend to go together.

If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, you're a neoliberal. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to invade Iran, you're a neoconservative. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags, want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, and want to invade Iran, then you're both a neoliberal and a neoconservative.

So basically two different policy viewpoints that while different in name and what they specialize in, tend to overlap quite often.

 

[DirtyHegel]

Would it be considered betrayal if many a European nation had no strong bonds with the Confederacy? The European powers of France and the United Kingdom did not care for y'all aside from ol' King Cotton. When others filled that void, the CSA lost that bargaining chip.

As for Imperial Tyrants, I think what the Knights of the Golden Circle had planned for the CSA definitely constitute as imperialism. View attachment 3374409

I agree golden circle was wrong, I am saying they were biased to the US and helped fund them and ultimately win the war

 

[Coptakhenaten]

Neoliberalism is about economic policy, neoconservatism is about foreign policy. Neoliberals are opposed to the welfare state and favour capitalism over socialism or social democracy. Neoconservatives support the use of military intervention. The commonality with both groups is that they hold what are generally regarded as right-wing or reactionary views in one area, but are generally progressive in regard to social issues. You can be one without being the other, but they do tend to go together.

If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, you're a neoliberal. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags but you also want to invade Iran, you're a neoconservative. If you like flying rainbow and BLM flags, want to privatise publicly-owned industries while diminishing the power of trade unions, and want to invade Iran, then you're both a neoliberal and a neoconservative.

More specifically neoliberals tend to be from the Chicago School which is still fine with (As I am aware) fiat currencies, modifying interest rates, spending over investing, etc which differentiates them from the economics of libertarians like Ron Paul who are more Austrian inclined. Also seen with the likes of current Dems, they are perfectly willing to add more interventionist aspects of Keynesianism in it. So lack of conviction, artificial currency, consoomer culture. Perfect breeding ground for the wanting rainbow and BLM flags.

I was against adding him to the OP personally until I saw this democracy video he put out where he whines about small states having electoral power over California. It's all sperging against the EC and those poor city people who get their votes cancelled. This is even with the Rittenhouse stuff.

1. America never was a pure democracy the founding fathers never intended for all the people to have power, but rather for a government which cared for the common interests of the people overall as opposed to the English Crown. Pure democracy sucks. Wanna know the closest example of a democracy? Democratic Kampuchea. Pol Pot mostly just pushed his batshit agenda to be law but the government was operated directly by the cadres of agrarian peasants who enacted the mass genocide, famine, and torture. It was an agrarian democracy.

2. Even without this supposed voter suppression. If the Democrats' dream came true voters would still be voting in Republicans like McConnel and Democrats like Pelosi in who are 90 year old millionaires with ties to China and a gazillion NGOs. Even "Anti-Establishment" Justice Democrats had backing and funding from wealthy NGOs and thinktanks ran by ivory tower elites who are trying to appear hip. Throwing more votes in doesn't change who is being voted for in the end. The closest we had to "true democracy" was Marianne Williamson and Ben Carson's bids for president, or that Republican trucker who became senate president of New Jersey.

 

[Flexo]

I was against adding him to the OP personally until I saw this democracy video he put out where he whines about small states having electoral power over California. It's all sperging against the EC and those poor city people who get their votes cancelled. This is even with the Rittenhouse stuff.

Does he even LIST the actual electoral votes? Because I've noticed any idiot spouting this talking point usually has to go on and on about ratios and other shenanigans.

Here's the truth: California has 55 - FIFTY FUCKING FIVE - electoral votes (the single greatest amount of any state). The MINIMUM that any state can have is 3 (1 rep, 2 senators). That means it literally takes 18 - EIGHTEEEN - of the smallest states to equal 1 California. New York is tied for #3 with 29 votes and always goes blue - meaning just those 2 states alone puts blue team up 74 votes. Literally the only way the red team remains in the game is that Texas, at #2 has 38 votes.

At least that was the case. After last census, CA is dropping to 54. New York to 28 and Texas and Florida are going up to 40 and 30.

The electoral college is brilliant in its ability to give even small states a voice and anybody that wants to get rid of it can go get shipped right the fuck to the great gulag of Canada.

 

[Coptakhenaten]

Does he even LIST the actual electoral votes? Because I've noticed any idiot spouting this talking point usually has to go on and on about ratios and other shenanigans.

Here's the truth: California has 55 - FIFTY FUCKING FIVE - electoral votes (the single greatest amount of any state). The MINIMUM that any state can have is 3 (1 rep, 2 senators). That means it literally takes 18 - EIGHTEEEN - of the smallest states to equal 1 California. New York is tied for #3 with 29 votes and always goes blue - meaning just those 2 states alone puts blue team up 74 votes. Literally the only way the red team remains in the game is that Texas, at #2 has 38 votes.

At least that was the case. After last census, CA is dropping to 54. New York to 28 and Texas and Florida are going up to 40 and 30.

The electoral college is brilliant in its ability to give even small states a voice and anybody that wants to get rid of it can go get shipped right the fuck to the great gulag of Canada.

I'm pretty sure he wants the US to bend to california's aspirations, fields of hyperdermic-needles and gang crimes galore

 

[Flexo]

I'm pretty sure he wants the US to bend to california's aspirations, fields of hyperdermic-needles and gang crimes galore

Yeah and if that happened the rest of US (pun intended) would literally burn that state to the ground.

Which would be easy since God's always trying to do it anyway.

 

[Flaming Insignias]

Does he even LIST the actual electoral votes? Because I've noticed any idiot spouting this talking point usually has to go on and on about ratios and other shenanigans.

Here's the truth: California has 55 - FIFTY FUCKING FIVE - electoral votes (the single greatest amount of any state). The MINIMUM that any state can have is 3 (1 rep, 2 senators). That means it literally takes 18 - EIGHTEEEN - of the smallest states to equal 1 California. New York is tied for #3 with 29 votes and always goes blue - meaning just those 2 states alone puts blue team up 74 votes. Literally the only way the red team remains in the game is that Texas, at #2 has 38 votes.

At least that was the case. After last census, CA is dropping to 54. New York to 28 and Texas and Florida are going up to 40 and 30.

The electoral college is brilliant in its ability to give even small states a voice and anybody that wants to get rid of it can go get shipped right the fuck to the great gulag of Canada.

It gets worse when they bitch that all states only have 2 senators. They see this as an injustice that Wyoming has the same amount of power in the upper legislature that California does, because the individual states don't matter and prevent a few big states from controlling all of the nation's politics.

 

[Coptakhenaten]

It gets worse when they bitch that all states only have 2 senators. They see this as an injustice that Wyoming has the same amount of power in the upper legislature that California does, because the individual states don't matter and prevent a few big states from controlling all of the nation's politics.

The Federalist Papers addressed that for that very reason. It didn't want a big state influencing a small state.

In fact it matters more than before. In the past it was a majority English people with a small number of French and Dutch with far less political cleavages. It was only agrarian vs urban, anglican vs catholic vs reformed at the time. No real other divisions. Nowadays we have a large black population, a hispanic population, a native american population, many religions, urban and rural and suburban, all competing with their own interests. The idea of a Senate works best for that. America isn't homogenous or small enough to just have no proportional system like a Senate or EC.

 

[ShittlerNiggler]

its pretty crazy how such a small country can have so much infighting going on for hundred of years, it basically becomes part of daily life. the samurai were fucking hardcore .

The Ashigaru deserve more attention. While the Samurai were badass, they quite often had the luxury of enough time to train and prepare for the next conflict. Ashigaru were just Average Joes who had to leave their home and family behind to be send to one of countless battlefields. Then you had people who went from being some unimportant conscripted peasent to renowned warriors, with the best example being Toyotomi Hideyoshi.

Also EmperorFurry crying about what looks like a flase flag

 

[Gravityqueen4life]

The Ashigaru deserve more attention. While the Samurai were badass, they quite often had the luxury of enough time to train and prepare for the next conflict. Ashigaru were just Average Joes who had to leave their home and family behind to be send to one of countless battlefields. Then you had people who went from being some unimportant conscripted peasent to renowned warriors, with the best example being Toyotomi Hideyoshi.

Also EmperorFurry crying about what looks like a flase flag
View attachment 3379424

being a peasant or a farmer must have sucked hard. imagine being forced into war machine, watching the friends from your village get torn apart . worse if you were on the losing side or you either be killed or forced to serve the lord that had your friends killed.

Toyotomi Hideyoshi was smart trying to outlaw peasants from carrying weapons and trying to make it so no name farmer could become a lord out of fear of riots and glory hunting (even if he came off looking like a hypocrite).

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

The Ashigaru deserve more attention. While the Samurai were badass, they quite often had the luxury of enough time to train and prepare for the next conflict. Ashigaru were just Average Joes who had to leave their home and family behind to be send to one of countless battlefields. Then you had people who went from being some unimportant conscripted peasent to renowned warriors, with the best example being Toyotomi Hideyoshi.

Also EmperorFurry crying about what looks like a flase flag
View attachment 3379424

I hate to break it to the furry but you're going to see more "hate crimes" the more a tiny minority is given power over a majority.

 

[Corpun]

Does he even LIST the actual electoral votes? Because I've noticed any idiot spouting this talking point usually has to go on and on about ratios and other shenanigans.

Here's the truth: California has 55 - FIFTY FUCKING FIVE - electoral votes (the single greatest amount of any state). The MINIMUM that any state can have is 3 (1 rep, 2 senators). That means it literally takes 18 - EIGHTEEEN - of the smallest states to equal 1 California. New York is tied for #3 with 29 votes and always goes blue - meaning just those 2 states alone puts blue team up 74 votes. Literally the only way the red team remains in the game is that Texas, at #2 has 38 votes.

At least that was the case. After last census, CA is dropping to 54. New York to 28 and Texas and Florida are going up to 40 and 30.

The electoral college is brilliant in its ability to give even small states a voice and anybody that wants to get rid of it can go get shipped right the fuck to the great gulag of Canada.

That doesn't matter to these tards. They want anything they think is unfair gone and erased from all legal documents. They will bitch about the 3/5ths compromise and use it to justify changing electoral laws or disregarding the Constitution entirely even though that hasn't been in effect for five generations. The more egregious of these loonies who whine about the American Federal System do the below

It gets worse when they bitch that all states only have 2 senators. They see this as an injustice that Wyoming has the same amount of power in the upper legislature that California does, because the individual states don't matter and prevent a few big states from controlling all of the nation's politics.

because they just want power. If it were up to them they would abolish the Senate and replace it with the House because their preferred politicians will have all the power usually, or at least a slim majority. Remember how many spergouts there were when Trump's impeachments failed because Senate voted on party lines and there wasn't a 2/3rds majority, even though House voted on party lines and got it by simple majority?

It's gotten so bad they hate the Supreme Court now as if they wouldn't be drooling all over it if it was full of RBGs and Sotomayers ruling whatever they want regardless of it's constitutionality.

EDIT: That retard actually explains Jim Crow or some shit with sock puppets. The first one he picks is a fucking elephant. Surely that is just a coincidence and this muppet doesn't want to pretend it was the Republicans who did Jim Crow.

 

[Flaming Insignias]

That doesn't matter to these tards. They want anything they think is unfair gone and erased from all legal documents. They will bitch about the 3/5ths compromise and use it to justify changing electoral laws or disregarding the Constitution entirely even though that hasn't been in effect for five generations. The more egregious of these loonies who whine about the American Federal System do the below

because they just want power. If it were up to them they would abolish the Senate and replace it with the House because their preferred politicians will have all the power usually, or at least a slim majority. Remember how many spergouts there were when Trump's impeachments failed because Senate voted on party lines and there wasn't a 2/3rds majority, even though House voted on party lines and got it by simple majority?

It's gotten so bad they hate the Supreme Court now as if they wouldn't be drooling all over it if it was full of RBGs and Sotomayers ruling whatever they want regardless of it's constitutionality.

Oh how I hate people bringing up 3/5ths compromise as some indictment on the Electoral College. The compromise was explicitly done to reduce the political influence of slave states, who wanted to count every slave as a constituent for demographic purposes without granting them a proper franchise. It was the free states that didn't want to acknowledge slaves as people for census purposes, and the compromise was about preventing slave states from being overrepresented due to non-voters without them being dissatisfied with becoming underrepresented due to not having as many nominally-free citizens as the north.

 

[Kyria the Great]

Most of these historytubers that get into the classic trope of "Its democracy when my side wins and tyranny when my side loses," that its all so tiresome.

 

[HeyYou]

lmao, should have fought harder dixie boy

This but for the Bar Kokhba revolt.

I was against adding him to the OP personally until I saw this democracy video he put out where he whines about small states having electoral power over California. It's all sperging against the EC and those poor city people who get their votes cancelled. This is even with the Rittenhouse stuff.

I get the average politician and political social media shill peddling the muh democracy shit, but a dude proclaiming to be a history YouTuber shouldn't have to clickbait about what is self-evident: that no, America is a republic and not a democracy. It really is PopHistory at its peak.

 

[Kyria the Great]

I get the average politician and political social media shill peddling the muh democracy shit, but a dude proclaiming to be a history YouTuber shouldn't have to clickbait about what is self-evident: that no, America is a republic and not a democracy. It really is PopHistory at its peak.

He isn't a history youtuber though, he's a political youtube channel masquerading as a history channel. It's all too common as sadly history is often to comfirm your own bias whatever they be. Most of this rage against EC is also quite short-sighted especially given it can't be guaranteed that California or any high population state for that matter will stay that way. Major cities can collapse with the rust belt being a prime example with Detroit the poster child.

I'm imagining a reversal if for some reason that Illinois suffered from population collapse due to turmoil in Chicago he would champion the EC.

 

[Corpun]

He isn't a history youtuber though, he's a political youtube channel masquerading as a history channel. It's all too common as sadly history is often to comfirm your own bias whatever they be. Most of this rage against EC is also quite short-sighted especially given it can't be guaranteed that California or any high population state for that matter will stay that way. Major cities can collapse with the rust belt being a prime example with Detroit the poster child.

I'm imagining a reversal if for some reason that Illinois suffered from population collapse due to turmoil in Chicago he would champion the EC.

He actually whines about those poor unrepresented city folk getting less representation in the future because of the growing rural urban divide. Oh boy, poor city folk, not like they've had electoral dominance in several states across the Union for generations.

 

[Amerikaner Teddybär]

I agree golden circle was wrong, I am saying they were biased to the US and helped fund them and ultimately win the war

By that reasoning, the United States of America was biased toward the Entente due to the amount of trade done with and loans given to United Kingdom, France, and Italy.

Yeah and if that happened the rest of US (pun intended) would literally burn that state to the ground.

Which would be easy since God's always trying to do it anyway.

If there is ever a 2nd Civil War in the near future, California would get Sherman'ed by both God and Man.

That doesn't matter to these tards. They want anything they think is unfair gone and erased from all legal documents. They will bitch about the 3/5ths compromise and use it to justify changing electoral laws or disregarding the Constitution entirely even though that hasn't been in effect for five generations. The more egregious of these loonies who whine about the American Federal System do the below

because they just want power. If it were up to them they would abolish the Senate and replace it with the House because their preferred politicians will have all the power usually, or at least a slim majority. Remember how many spergouts there were when Trump's impeachments failed because Senate voted on party lines and there wasn't a 2/3rds majority, even though House voted on party lines and got it by simple majority?

It's gotten so bad they hate the Supreme Court now as if they wouldn't be drooling all over it if it was full of RBGs and Sotomayers ruling whatever they want regardless of it's constitutionality.

EDIT: That retard actually explains Jim Crow or some shit with sock puppets. The first one he picks is a fucking elephant. Surely that is just a coincidence and this muppet doesn't want to pretend it was the Republicans who did Jim Crow.

The Founding Fathers warned us about how a tyranny of majority would be no different than a tyranny of a crown. Now we're seeing this firsthand via the old and corrupt bureaucrats on Capitol Hill with their legions of useful idiots in order to destroy this nation. Eventually it must come to a head and it won't be very pretty.

 

[DirtyHegel]

By that reasoning, the United States of America was biased toward the Entente due to the amount of trade done with and loans given to United Kingdom, France, and Italy.

yeah