YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory

1775012939913.png
 
>IMPLYING said:
Culture might be shaped by faith, but then whether you identify more with your faith over your culture becomes a source of contention, especially on the right-wing.
It might be a disagreeable to some, but it becomes abstraction (higher concept identity with "rules") vs concrete (simple identity you're simply born into).
Concrete usually wins out over abstract sooner or later.
"European" vs French, Dutch, Flemish, Swiss, etc
"Christian" vs Czech, Austrian, German, etc
"Catholic" vs Spanish, Mexican, Columbian, etc
"Proletariat"/"Worker" vs Polish, Hungarian, Russian, etc
Click to expand...
>IMPLYING said:
When an Irish person puts "Irish-" before "American", they haven't integrated, they've excluded themselves from it. They now exist as a micro-culture estranged from both full-blooded Americans and the Irish they left behind. It's basically defiance of integration. And though people don't think about it much nowadays, the Irish centuries ago showed the same level of indignation and sequestering and criminality as any other major immigrant group. Same for the Italians and Jews. They adopted the abstract "American" identity in lieu of the concrete American identity, but they pretty much created their own micro-cultures within the United States, usually having some terrestrial location that serves as the "homeland". These aren't integrated people, these are a foreign culture in essence that cooperate with other cultures based on the abstract "American" identity.
Click to expand...

These two posts, in conjunction with each other, have me thinking about whether integration in the broad, CivNat sense that many seem to strive for is even possible to maintain for more than a few generations, even in a nation that is completely and totally homogeneous, that never took on immigrants in any way, shape, or form. At least from the outside. Since, as you have stated, the local 'concrete' identities that one is born with will always, eventually, win out against the centralised 'international' identities just due to simple practicality. How that 'tug-of-war' battle between the two elements within a civilization will eventually cause friction and strife between the local populations against the wider 'idea' of that civilization, as it was created during its founding.

Let's take, for instance, the United States of America, since that's what we're talking about now in regards to integration. For a very long time, people would identify or have their loyalties tied to their home state. As in they would consider themselves 'Virginians', 'Pennsylvanians', 'New Englanders', etc and for much of our history, they would operate under the assumption that their local governments, culture, and economies were of more importance than the broader federal government itself. Core issues that eventually led to the Civil War, since that 'tug-of-war' had the Northern States keeping with the goals or identity of the broader 'Union', while the Southern states chose to keep with the local 'concrete' identity of their own home states. A mass 'defiance of integration' which resulted in separatism and war.

Now, of course, the Union would eventually win; however, was the South ever fully integrated back into the Union? Functionally, yes, but considering how reconstruction went and how the Southern States still consider themselves 'different' from the Yankees in the North to this day. Calling themselves 'Southerns' as much or more than they call themselves 'Americans'. Could we make a case that they're still trying to defy integration to the broader 'identity' of America, as chosen by the federal government, or does the practical integration make that a negligible statement? Even if they, like the Irish-American, Italian-Americans, and what have you, also created their own micro-cultures. Just ones that are now considered unequivocally 'American', despite the fact that North Eastern Americans, not even two centuries ago, would view them as 'foreign' in one way or another. Much like how they viewed Catholicism as a foreign threat that threatened the sanctity of the broader 'American' identity. Are all the Catholics in this nation part of that 'defiance of integration' as well? Were they ever actually integrated into the original WASP culture that dominated since the founding?

Is anyone who doesn't 100% adhere to the whims of the broader American identity, as chosen by the Union itself, the federal government itself, and popular culture as dictated by the centralised, international identity that is being an 'American', in leu of those local allegiances also guilty of this sin of 'defance of integration', just in a much milder one than say the immigrant from another nation entirely? Would me waving my States flag alongside the Stars and Stripes technically make me count as a hyphenated American if we play semantics? Or is my State's and local cultures' current fidelity to the Union as a whole enough to offset that labelling, much like it had for the Southerners post Civil War? Should we even care about all this, or is there a threshold, and if so, who decides it? Me, the American from a specific part of the country, or the American in the capital? It's a real 'can of worms' once we go down a certain line of thinking.
 
Last edited:
grump said:
His Patreon is still getting a substantial amount of money. 2K a month but its fading fast from 5k just a few months before. If he's in prison he should take a few minutes to relay a message through his lawyer even if just to keep the money spigot on. Or if he has passed and someone is collecting the money and its not just piling up that person should give a headsup for decency and could probably get buff in donations for sympathy.

There is some rumors that he got popped for something very embarrassing which might be one of things that would explain the radio silence if he wasn't physically incapacitated but there is no evidence of it so far. Still even in this case if he wanted to walk the walk he should let people have some closure. Sponging off donations is the opposite of the Objectivism he got so googoo about in his final months.
Click to expand...
I mean explanation could be as simple as he is done with YouTube and moved on with his life. I think If he died/ was locked up that would cause enough waves for news to spread. I don't remember if he ever shared his name, but he is not exactly tiny no name YouTuber and he was not afraid to show himself on camera.
Despite his autism and sperging I enjoyed his videos
 
Willie B. Hardigan said:
et's take, for instance, the United States of America, since that's what we're talking about now in regards to integration. For a very long time, people would identify or have their loyalties tied to their home state. As in they would consider themselves 'Virginians', 'Pennsylvanians', 'New Englanders', etc and for much of our history, they would operate under the assumption that their local governments, culture, and economies were of more importance than the broader federal government itself. Core issues that eventually led to the Civil War, since that 'tug-of-war' had the Northern States keeping with the goals or identity of the broader 'Union', while the Southern states chose to keep with the local 'concrete' identity of their own home states. A mass 'defiance of integration' which resulted in separatism and war.

Now, of course, the Union would eventually win; however, was the South ever fully integrated back into the Union? Functionally, yes, but considering how reconstruction went and how the Southern States still consider themselves 'different' from the Yankees in the North to this day. Calling themselves 'Southerns' as much or more than they call themselves 'Americans'. Could we make a case that they're still trying to defy integration to the broader 'identity' of America, as chosen by the federal government, or does the practical integration make that a negligible statement? Even if they, like the Irish-American, Italian-Americans, and what have you, also created their own micro-cultures. Just ones that are now considered unequivocally 'American', despite the fact that North Eastern Americans, not even two centuries ago, would view them as 'foreign' in one way or another. Much like how they viewed Catholicism as a foreign threat that threatened the sanctity of the broader 'American' identity. Are all the Catholics in this nation part of that 'defiance of integration' as well? Were they ever actually integrated into the original WASP culture that dominated since the founding?

Is anyone who doesn't 100% adhere to the whims of the broader American identity, as chosen by the Union itself, the federal government itself, and popular culture as dictated by the centralised, international identity that is being an 'American', in leu of those local allegiances also guilty of this sin of 'defance of integration', just in a much milder one than say the immigrant from another nation entirely? Would me waving my States flag alongside the Stars and Stripes technically make me count as a hyphenated American if we play semantics? Or is my State's and local cultures' current fidelity to the Union as a whole enough to offset that labelling, much like it had for the Southerners post Civil War? Should we even care about all this, or is there a threshold, and if so, who decides it? Me, the American from a specific part of the country, or the American in the capital? It's a real 'can of worms' once we go down a certain line of thinking.
Click to expand...
If you wanted to make matters more complicated, as far as the South goes during the time of the American Civil War they identified with their state, being Southerners and Americans.

Comparisons to the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution (mainly the seceding from a tyrannical government) were made:
0.png

They weren't the side that had 25 percent of the men who served in their military be foreign born either.
 
Prester John said:
Nazis everywhere!

View attachment 8790181
Click to expand...

I hate they'll never call them Fascists by the tenets of Fascism. I wholeheartedly believe you can be racist as hell and still believe Representative Systems are superior to a Totalitarian Regime. In fact I believe that a Fascist government would be impossible alongside a Communist government given how much Individualism is engrained into American Culture as Collectivism is an aneathma to us.
 
Kyria the Great said:
I hate they'll never call them Fascists by the tenets of Fascism. I wholeheartedly believe you can be racist as hell and still believe Representative Systems are superior to a Totalitarian Regime. In fact I believe that a Fascist government would be impossible alongside a Communist government given how much Individualism is engrained into American Culture as Collectivism is an aneathma to us.
Click to expand...
I mean they believe Confederacy was literally Nazi Germany.
Thing is neither Mussolini or Hitler wanted to create world ideology like Marx did with communism. They were trying to appeal to Germans/Italians in interwar period.
So even back in the day those inspired by Hitler/Mussolini were forced to adapt ideology to fit their current enviroment.
Racism and democracy are perfectly compatibile until recently certain groups didn't get the right to vote.Women, poor, blacks, peasants ...
This could be result of either direct ban or by indirect measures. You can vote only if you own land /pay X amount of taxes/ reached certain level of education...
 
Path Wanderer said:
Though using the word fascist makes me cringe, I have been waiting for someone to review whatever MAGAt nonsense Walsh and co. cobbled together as basically a PragerU movie. Atun Shei will have to do I suppose.
Click to expand...
You're in luck.


I refuse to click it, but feel free to give us a summary after you watch it.
 
Prester John said:
You're in luck.


I refuse to click it, but feel free to give us a summary after you watch it.
Click to expand...
Ok I’m watching it and oml I don’t remember him being this bad. I skipped the Nostalgia Critic aaa intro but winded back just because his sticking point is that the culture war is a psyop because conservative organizations take oil money (shocker there) and so Walsh should enjoy prison (literally). Bring so angry takes away from what would be a really easy takedown.

IMG_1143.webp
 
Path Wanderer said:
Ok I’m watching it and oml I don’t remember him being this bad. I skipped the Nostalgia Critic aaa intro but winded back just because his sticking point is that the culture war is a psyop because conservative organizations take oil money (shocker there) and so Walsh should enjoy prison (literally). Bring so angry takes away from what would be a really easy takedown.

View attachment 8796293
Click to expand...
I was going to call you a libtard, but with Atun-Shei as the best you're going to get, I can't in good conscience kick you while you're down. Any time some pinko moron repeats the idea that the culture war is some elaborate distraction, I lose a little more sanity, because it is pure deflection from the fact that the people are, in some sense, rejecting them and it can't be THEIR fault, no, it is some conspiracy. No different than RW conspiritards, but given it is less grandiose, I hold them in greater contempt, because it isn't even entertaining!
 
Super Hans v2 said:
Unironically yes.




How he missed his own fucking point that badly is only possible by a communist.
Click to expand...
can’t help but not that he didn’t mention that Walsh is famous for being under the heels of another powerful lobby

A real historian would be able to step up with the actual citations to counter Walsh’s obvious cherry picked tales to put the trite in its place (Ancient Americas, or hell even Peach Cobbler would be good, anyone with colonial American for knowledge) . Spazzing as if live with your stunning and brave hair and libby stickers sends the opposite message that history academics can’t take “real history”.
 
Path Wanderer said:
Ancient Americas
Click to expand...
Oh, is he talking about Walsh's nauseating hatred for reds? Of all his odious takes, that is one I have found to be the most insane, because it isn't exactly like the fucking Comanche or Sioux are the biggest concerns for the American whites. It would be like a European complaining about those damn Danes raiding our coastlines!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom