Extra Credits - leftie gaming channel that had two of its members accused of "misconduct" in only 2 months

[Zaryiu]

Rise of a Legend
I never even heard of this "legend''.

I think she is in Age of Empires II We Wuz Kangz expansion

 

[Slap47]

i have always hated EC, i have always hated their white nasally voices, i have always hated the stupid ass little groups & charities they promote every other video, i hate all these little cartoons they draw in order to talk about serious issues, such as harassment, or racism, or misogyny, which they don't understand bc they dont actually give a shit. that screenshot of all the sad little cartoons about the christchurch attack is exactly what im fucking talking about lmao. i absolutely fucking hate these performative liberal worms who constantly insinuate their voices into any tragedy like they're not just putting on a sob show for clicks or have anything useful to fucking say about it. i cant find the autism emoji so im just going to post this one

Dan stopped using that voice and is a very knowledgeable professional with a good channel.

Now EC is basically full on intro level history with a random videos that list Indie games.

 

[soy_king]

I think she is in Age of Empires II We Wuz Kangz expansion

If only that was as exaggeration...
They legit have a campaign of a semi-legendary Ethiopian Jewish Kween who fought against her more powerful Christian neighbors. With such diversity bingo how has EC not made a series on her?

 

[KanaPostsonKiwi]

If only that was as exaggeration...
They legit have a campaign of a semi-legendary Ethiopian Jewish Kween who fought against her more powerful Christian neighbors. With such diversity bingo how has EC not made a series on her?

I think i found out why. They're off-the-deep-end left, and oh boy do the far end of the left side of politics have a raging hardon for hating jews.
I guess this adds more proof to the horseshoe theory of politics with how much in common the far lefty side has with the far right side.

 

[Shaka Brah]

I think i found out why. They're off-the-deep-end left, and oh boy do the far end of the left side of politics have a raging hardon for hating jews.
I guess this adds more proof to the horseshoe theory of politics with how much in common the far lefty side has with the far right side.

It would be nice if we could get them to stop sucking the cock of their Jewish thought-leaders.

 

[Cool kitties club]

Not just that, I remember them being pretty butt kissing with Genghis Khan despite him leading a force that killed like a tenth of the people on the planet. At least when Overly Sarcastic Productions looked at Genghis, they were willing to acknowledge the sheer unrelenting brutality of the guy.

But Genghis Khan was tolerant so that means everything he did was okay.

 

[von Hapasbourg]

Shadiversity is a better historian than this group reeking of estrogen and other HRT chemicals

 

[Zaryiu]

Shadiversity is a better historian than this group reeking of estrogen and other HRT chemicals

Any subjects they both did that you could post to contrast because I think there are people that really need to see how bad the soyshits are when it come to history

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Didn't have a clue Extra Credits were lolcows. I used to love their game design videos, then Extra History. Just got bored of it after a while.

Plus, it pissed me off when they did a history video where the Greeks were browner than most Arabs.

So what makes them lolcows? I don't feel like reading all 11 pages.

Ahh, i love the "virtuous muslim slavetrader" myth. It's akin to the "noble savage". I did study quite a bit of history, and the hilarious part is the persistent belief that slavery is a "white" thing (i hate generalizations. Give british their due. They were good at it.). General populus is just absolutely clueless, especially in 'murica about this.

Literally all notable races, ethnic groups and nationalities before the global project to abolish slavery started by The British and Soon after followed by the French and then the rest of continental Europe had had a system for slavery. From ancient mesopotamia to 1800's. Slavs were so good at it they were named after the whole slave moniker, but none had the infastructure and the resources to create what could only be called the golden age of slave trading but Arabs, particularly Ottomans. However the latter did concentrate the expansion of their slave trading empire with other muslims, because Qu'ran not only permits, but encourages kaffir to be enslaved, particularly those that do not have the capacity to pay jizyah... especially children.

But hey, we can all ignore that. We all know that crusade man bad.

The slave trade began with the Portuguese and Spanish, particularly but by no means exclusively Sephardic Jews. It was pioneered in the Canary Islands and then spread to the Caribbean, and then beyond. Christopher Columbus was running around enslaving many an indio.

I don't get why you're focusing on the British aspect of it. I'm not sure if the Royal African Company ever took a leading role in the trade, but they certainly did not start the plantation concept and they were not the primary purchasers of slaves. The Brits also deserve credit for pretty much single-handedly shutting down the Atlantic slave trade and being the core of global abolitionism.

I’ve noticed that condemnation of imperialism only goes so far, as the Ottoman Empire seems to have a lot of apologists. During my brief stint in college I was told that “convert to Islam or pay a tax” was more forgiving in comparison to other empires, nevermind that the tax was apparently not much of an option as most couldn’t pay it

It's a completely r.etarded argument, too. So the Muslims would allow Christians to be second-class citizens instead of annihilating them... who gives a shit? If the Christians were ruled by their Christian government, like they were before Islam, they wouldn't be persecuted at all. It's so fucking stupid.

But Genghis Khan was tolerant so that means everything he did was okay.

I have a full-on TDS-suffering Democrat history professor, and even he admits that the Mongols were (paraphrasing a bit) a people who invented nothing, had no cultural achievements, and who purely made the world worse for their presence, such that the world would have been better off if they were destroyed.

It's really, really stupid that there are people who shill for them on the basis of a fucking postal service and religious tolerance for people who already had religious tolerance (if you invade a people and then tolerate them, that's NOT better than just leaving them alone to start with). That's no comfort to the masses of people they slaughtered and the masses that loved those they slaughtered. Evil bastards who should have been genocided.

 

[SuperSheep]

Player Piano - Dystopias and Apocalypses - Extra Sci Fi

Kurt Vonnegut's first novel "Player Piano" explores the long-term consequences of mandatory mechanization and automation, without necessarily arguing against...

www.youtube.com

I watched this video and the first thing that sprang to mind was that the only thing that would have made the dystopia described in it MovieBob's idea of utopia would be if they rounded up the now-obsolete people and put them into death camps or left them to starve.

 

[KanaPostsonKiwi]

The slave trade began with the Portuguese and Spanish, particularly but by no means exclusively Sephardic Jews. It was pioneered in the Canary Islands and then spread to the Caribbean, and then beyond. Christopher Columbus was running around enslaving many an indio.

I don't get why you're focusing on the British aspect of it. I'm not sure if the Royal African Company ever took a leading role in the trade, but they certainly did not start the plantation concept and they were not the primary purchasers of slaves. The Brits also deserve credit for pretty much single-handedly shutting down the Atlantic slave trade and being the core of global abolitionism.

Not to derail the entire convo, but the slave trade began well before Hammurabi's Code of Laws, which refers to people who market slaves. The slave markets you're referring to are 3000 years after this. Canary Islands weren't even colonized by this point in time. Even the old testament refers to rules on slave ownership as if it were a common, everyday thing. If you want a slave trading empire, Sumerians very often dabbled in that enterprise, with what little writing survives of that time. This is more than 4000 years before any notion you're pointing at.

The British quickly rose as a global powerhouse of slave trade, and this is why i bring them up. They weren't there for long, considering they were the ones to push for a global end to it as you well point out, but by the numbers they were absolutely the most effective at it. There's even period pieces hailing at as a second coming for the prosperity that east india trading brought them.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Not to derail the entire convo, but the slave trade began well before Hammurabi's Code of Laws, which refers to people who market slaves. The slave markets you're referring to are 3000 years after this. Canary Islands weren't even colonized by this point in time. Even the old testament refers to rules on slave ownership as if it were a common, everyday thing. If you want a slave trading empire, Sumerians very often dabbled in that enterprise, with what little writing survives of that time. This is more than 4000 years before any notion you're pointing at.

The British quickly rose as a global powerhouse of slave trade, and this is why i bring them up. They weren't there for long, considering they were the ones to push for a global end to it as you well point out, but by the numbers they were absolutely the most effective at it. There's even period pieces hailing at as a second coming for the prosperity that east india trading brought them.

I think it’s pretty obvious we were talking about the Atlantic slave trade, specifically.

 

[Sanshain]

It's a completely r.etarded argument, too. So the Muslims would allow Christians to be second-class citizens instead of annihilating them... who gives a shit? If the Christians were ruled by their Christian government, like they were before Islam, they wouldn't be persecuted at all. It's so fucking stupid.

Uh, yeah, they could. The Church was founded on the basis of a schism between factions in the early Christian communities. There were literally hundreds of splinter societies over the centuries, all of which were persecuted mercilessly to extinction. Orthodox Christians were persecuted by Catholics, Orthodox Christians purged Iconoclastic Christians, wars between Protestant and Christian nations killed millions, etc etc. I'm not trying to say Muslims were any better, but saying Christianity was objectively the more stable and accepting religion is just objectively wrong.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Uh, yeah, they could. The Church was founded on the basis of a schism between factions in the early Christian communities. There were literally hundreds of splinter societies over the centuries, all of which were persecuted mercilessly to extinction. Orthodox Christians were persecuted by Catholics, Orthodox Christians purged Iconoclastic Christians, wars between Protestant and Christian nations killed millions, etc etc. I'm not trying to say Muslims were any better, but saying Christianity was objectively the more stable and accepting religion is just objectively wrong.

You're not understanding my argument in the first place. I mean, Jesus Christ, your last sentence isn't even slightly what I was arguing.

If Nation A already has Religion A as the state religion and the public religion, if Nation A pursues a policy of religious discrimination, that affects very few people.

If Nation B comes in and imposes Religion B, but is more tolerant, that IS NOT an improvement because now all of the Religion A adherents are being subjected to a persecution that they weren't previously.

In your example of Christian-on-Christian perseuction, it's a lot more intense (since it tends to be convert-or-die instead of dhimmitude), but it's also way smaller in scale because most of the population of Christian states were already adherents of the state religion.

In the Islamic states, most of the population was shut out.

Put again, the Orthodox Levantines and Greeks were not persecuted by their Orthodox Roman government, even if the Iconoclasts were persecuted heavily.

When the Muslim Arabs/Turks come in, EVERYBODY is persecuted in the territory, with the only people who aren't persecuted being the Christians who defect to join the invaders and their descendants.



P.S. I'm sorry for snapping at you, I was in a pissy mood today.

 

[KanaPostsonKiwi]

I think it’s pretty obvious we were talking about the Atlantic slave trade, specifically.

This is the first time anyone even implies that remotely. I think "obvious" doesn't quite mean what you think it means.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

This is the first time anyone even implies that remotely. I think "obvious" doesn't quite mean what you think it means.

I can see where the misunderstanding would come from.

I was referring specifically to the Atlantic slave trade because you mentioned the British and French. It's also what most people mean when they say "the slave trade," as opposed to specifying a specific one (as in, the Mediterranean slave trade, the East African slave trade, etc.), since it's the one that's most frequently mentioned and most significant historically. As opposed to referring to "the slave trade" in the more abstract sense of "the slave market."

 

[KanaPostsonKiwi]

I can see where the misunderstanding would come from.

I was referring specifically to the Atlantic slave trade because you mentioned the British and French. It's also what most people mean when they say "the slave trade," as opposed to specifying a specific one (as in, the Mediterranean slave trade, the East African slave trade, etc.), since it's the one that's most frequently mentioned and most significant historically. As opposed to referring to "the slave trade" in the more abstract sense of "the slave market."

That might specifically be an american thing. It's definitely not the case over here, perhaps in part because we have history of being taken and sold off as slaves up to relatively recent history.

 

[UQ 770]

I have a full-on TDS-suffering Democrat history professor, and even he admits that the Mongols were (paraphrasing a bit) a people who invented nothing, had no cultural achievements, and who purely made the world worse for their presence, such that the world would have been better off if they were destroyed.

It's really, really stupid that there are people who shill for them on the basis of a fucking postal service and religious tolerance for people who already had religious tolerance (if you invade a people and then tolerate them, that's NOT better than just leaving them alone to start with). That's no comfort to the masses of people they slaughtered and the masses that loved those they slaughtered. Evil bastards who should have been genocided.

Spoiler: History Sperging and Alogging

The Mongols were mean motherfuckers who showed up out of nowhere, obliterated a fraction of the world's population and somehow built a functioning empire that ended only when it split into several smaller empires of questionable success. They brought even Europe to its knees by spreading the Black Plague and completely rewrote the history of Eastern Europe when they did the unthinkable and united Russia for the first time. How many races and empires were so batshit insane and coked out that they defeated just about every single opponent they came up against, even including juggernauts like China and single-handedly stomping the Middle East so hard that their culture was essentially destroyed forever.

I don't care how many people got killed, they were doing something right.

I'm pissed at EC's interpretation of them though. All of those progressive things they did were tools of war. Letting women run things at home and including some of them in their army was a practical descision, not a moral one. Their postal system was a powerful innovation that enabled communication between officers over incredible distances. The way they ruthlessly dismantled and reassembled cultures had nothing to do with diversity, it was reorganizing entire populations to further their pursuit of war and salvaging what they liked while disposing of the crap they didn't. Their willingness to incorporate conquered enemies into their armies made them dynamic on the battlefield and gave the conquered populations a reason to cooperate. If some assholes on horseback rolled up, destroyed everything you cared about, then asked you "Hey, you want in on this action?" I bet you a lot of primitive fucks would take that right away.

Ironically in their pursuit of war, loot and pussy, the Mongols created the most diverse culture ever observed on this planet, and most of the original conquerors died richer than anyone else will ever be. Nothing they did directly was innovative, but they completely rewired the flow of history by bringing all of this disparate stuff together. Violence solves everything kids. They are the total fucking antithesis to anything to do with left-wing politics today and I cannot fucking believe they would ever be held up as an example of progressive politics. They'd behead or deathmarch these idiots if they ever encountered them. Look at what they did to China! Its almost the same, as China had one of its nasty periods where things had become totally overrun with needless bureaucracy and corruption. People cared way more about their social and moral standing and not enough about actually staying alive in the face of danger. I'm not surprised at all that the Mongols butchered them, they had absolutely no patience for such pointless bullshit and made it very clear by doing what they did best.

God damnit I like the format of Extra History but its interpretations suck. There's a place in the study of history for subjective interpretation as that's how people get into it most of the time, but the videos afterwards where they explain all of the errors are often longer than the fucking serial itself! What's even the point of bothering if you need to spend more time explaining your fuckups than the thing itself? Hire a fucking editor!

 

[Archeopthryx]

I found their format digestible and easily consumable. But if they would come out with a video on how much they fucked up the information a week later then that would be some cause to not watch their content ever again. It's like they didn't plan this shit out. So yeah after a week watching the last video for a series and the corrections come out I would be pissed as hell as if the learning I did for a month has been for nothing and I have to go back to the ancient tomes in the library to undo the shit job they did.

 

[Man vs persistent rat]

Agreed, at least channels like Kurzgesagt make an effort to have their scripts proof-read by experts (and credit them). Extra Credits have delusions of being education tools for children at school but don't want to put the work in to make them even YT-credible, let alone real life-credible.