YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory

Breadbassket said:
It's interesting to think about what happened to Paine. At one point he was a revolutionary intellectual motivating colonial Patriots to rebel from Great Britain and then by the end of the life he was ostracized because he felt he was betrayed, ridiculed Christianity and attacked the leaders of the United States. Apparently only six people attended his funeral. Too radical for his own good I guess.
Click to expand...
This is funnily the same thing that happens to many online political influencers now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King George III, Hoplixe, Gaius Cumulus and 3 others
Smashed & Slamed said:
No you couldn't. The spark of the revolution was a famine. The middle class attempted to convert a bread riot into some grand event and gunned down anyone who stood in the way. Royalist peasant were pursued with genocidal intent. In fact in many areas the Royalists broached across class lines. While good luck finding that in the revolutionary council.
There was no planning and no cooperation. If you read into first hand period accounts you can tell the goal was never to get to a revolution but get to the point where the king would trade powers for help with the peasants. It was a game of chicken with a hungry mob.
Click to expand...

The French Revolution was an urban affair and most peasants were apathetic to its start and later many hostile to it. It started in Paris and was forced on the countryside and provinces.

There was no famine I'm 1780s or 90s France. The issue was higher bread prices and taxes.

Sleazy Car Salesman said:
Because he's a retard.
Click to expand...

I remember Historians Craft uploaded a video on bread or something. I looked it up and it was just verbatim wikipedia. The video was deleted.

I'm kinda suspicious of the account. It does not help that he actually considers himself a historian because he has an undergrad in history.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: poggies123_, millais, Exterminatus and 9 others
Slap47 said:
I'm kinda suspicious of the account. It does not help that he actually considers himself a historian because he has an undergrad in history.
Click to expand...
I think he tries to do History Matter's schtick of answering questions you didn't think you needed answering until you saw it being asked, but with less effort. I think his deleted video on whether Trump is a fascist was probably the biggest insight into how he probably does things. He might read a single book, then try to make a video or two from a few pages within said book. Then again, I might be giving him too much credit if what you said he did is true. The Trump video certainly made me doubt the conclusions he reached in prior videos, mostly pertaining to whether the conclusions he reaches are even his to begin with. He might not even read a book, his creative process might rely entirely on thinking of the question and regurgitating what he reads on google, wikipedia, or ChatGPT. His thought process isn't his own, he just takes the thought process of the source he's citing and then passes that off as his. The source he utilised for his Trump video for example was basically just Umberto Eco but critical of Vichy France instead of Italy and is still alive, alive enough at least to go on tv and give an interview which answers the question HC asked in the title of the now deleted video: Is Maga fascist?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: byuuWasTaken
>IMPLYING said:
I think he tries to do History Matter's schtick of answering questions you didn't think you needed answering until you saw it being asked, but with less effort. I think his deleted video on whether Trump is a fascist was probably the biggest insight into how he probably does things. He might read a single book, then try to make a video or two from a few pages within said book. Then again, I might be giving him too much credit if what you said he did is true. The Trump video certainly made me doubt the conclusions he reached in prior videos, mostly pertaining to whether the conclusions he reaches are even his to begin with. He might not even read a book, his creative process might rely entirely on thinking of the question and regurgitating what he reads on google, wikipedia, or ChatGPT. His thought process isn't his own, he just takes the thought process of the source he's citing and then passes that off as his. The source he utilised for his Trump video for example was basically just Umberto Eco but critical of Vichy France instead of Italy and is still alive, alive enough at least to go on tv and give an interview which answers the question HC asked in the title of the now deleted video: Is Maga fascist?
Click to expand...
Which sucks cus honestly his videos are entertaining noise to put on when your sleeping
 
Yours Truly 2095 said:
Something I've noticed is there seems to be a lack in general of good in depth revolutionary war documentary format material. A lot of it is history channel tier stuff. Are there any good YouTube series that go in depth about it?
Click to expand...

Kings and Generals gets stuff wrong sometimes in a lot of their videos but they're pretty fun to watch.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Feels
  • Dumb
Reactions: Justsomecicada, Lobster Cult High Priest, Flaming Insignias and 1 other person
Computer God Autism said:
No, it's because Youtube began pushing him the algorithm when the Floyd iconoclasm was kicking off. People who had no interest in history tubers were being recommended him.
Click to expand...
Yeah I felt that because most of the history tubers I liked were quite dry and that's the way I think it should be. Theatrics is what I believe helped to destroy the History channel (among other things of course).
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: poggies123_, Cnidarian, Flaming Insignias and 2 others
Breadbassket said:
There is the whole concept of a "right to rebellion" and "right to revolution" that was used to justify to the American Revolution but attaching to it any kind of anarchist goal is absurd. The only way the idea can work is if the word "rebellion" is taken to its most extreme definition. To make that claim seems like gross misinterpretation of history. The United States the Patriots fought for and founded had a weaker federal government, more empowered states and a lack of standing army sure but they still wanted a national President, Congress and Supreme Court. If they were at all anarchistic would they have set up the country in such a way?
Click to expand...
Not at all the founding fathers fully believed in the concept of a government one of the first things we did was starting to build an actual Navy and standing Military we just never got around to it which is actually one of the main reasons to war of 1812 went as badly as it did in the early stages.
Then again the American Republic at that point had only actually existed coherently for about one entire generation.
People who call the Founding Fathers libertarian's or a Secular liberals or retorted they both rejected the concept of liberalism and the concept that everyone is capable of making rational decisions they were very much basing the United States' political system of the Roman Republic and the idea of every soldier and citizen being the same thing.
There's a reason they detest popular democracy and view it as nothing but the tyranny of the irrational.
You should be banned from being a historian in the United States of America we even suggesting the founding fathers were anything besides Christian republicanists it was actually a good portion of them though actually under the belief that monarchy is better than democracy
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: poggies123_, Jaw, Da Capo and 2 others
Sargon's wife's son said:
Not at all the founding fathers fully believed in the concept of a government one of the first things we did was starting to build an actual Navy and standing Military we just never got around to it which is actually one of the main reasons to war of 1812 went as badly as it did in the early stages.
Then again the American Republic at that point had only actually existed coherently for about one entire generation.
People who call the Founding Fathers libertarian's or a Secular liberals or retorted they both rejected the concept of liberalism and the concept that everyone is capable of making rational decisions they were very much basing the United States' political system of the Roman Republic and the idea of every soldier and citizen being the same thing.
There's a reason they detest popular democracy and view it as nothing but the tyranny of the irrational.
You should be banned from being a historian in the United States of America we even suggesting the founding fathers were anything besides Christian republicanists it was actually a good portion of them though actually under the belief that monarchy is better than democracy
Click to expand...
I just want to say I'm very proud of you for trying to use punctuation and paragraphs.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Jaw, Chadikus Maximus, Hoplixe and 9 others
Professor Donger said:
I have no idea, i don't understand why he's started doing these clickbait titles
Click to expand...
That's an instant don't recommend channel option on YouTube when I see that. You know it'll continue indefinitely and make it impossible to determine what the videos are actually about, and I don't want my feed to suddenly be "The weird thing about X" "The disturbing reasons why X" and "Were X civilizations racist (Yes)" and before you know it you have 3 hour video essays bombarding it. After unsubbing from Kings and Generals, been enjoying the similar content from https://www.youtube.com/@HistoryMarche/videos
 
  • Like
Reactions: poggies123_, Pedophobe, Chadikus Maximus and 6 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back