>>611048 It would be difficult to argue that John Green's history lessons argue for the genocide of anyone though. Unless I missed a few things while skimming through them to judge their accuracy, which is entirely possible.
>Dude the Jews had NOTHING to do with with killing Jesus it was LITERALLY just the Romans fault >Even the gospels (written by Jews) says it was the Jews fault Not only this but he says thats the Romans weren't religiously tolerant, which is true for Jews and Christians, but for literally every other religion they either ignored it or just threw its Gods into their own Pantheon, and even thinks that Jews created Monotheism
In an earlier thread an anon complained that Green allows his own politics to guide the course of his presentations far too often. This is called putting the cart before the horse. Its one thing to have a thorough political take on events it is another thing to have the facts be determined by the politics.
The Mongols utterly rekt China. Every dynasty after was a shadow of the ones before, including the Ming. Don't let the treasure fleets fool you the injection of Mongol genes into the Han ethnicity was a mistake.
>>611123 Well the mongols did rule fairly if you surrendered and the caliphates did have a golden age while europe was being shitty after the collapse of the western empire. Also ottomans did introduce several things into europe which makes our lifes mucj easier coffee being one example .
We had this thread a few days ago but I'll rehash what I stated there: John green is hack pop history for idiots who want to simply take the most basic, common "knowledge", use it, and flush it. It's designed to keep your attention for the exact length of the ad at the beginning and ends of the video and so that you dint turn it off but watch more.
As such his historiography is pop liberal ideas. I don't mean classical liberal or Whigs who produced some decent historians. I mean just pseudo historical diatribe designed to appeal to the ignorant viewer without actually trying to elevate them
The reason for this is it's trying to make money and make the maker famous much harder than it is trying to educate or cover an issue. As such there are politically correct topics such as forced disproportionate coverage of issues like feminism which 10 minute videos don't have time to cover when you have to learn a sweeping subject in little time.
In addition he repeats many historical myths. I am personally a hardline tankie but I have much deeper respect for realist or conservative thinkers who are honest and try to portray their views based evidence they conducted themselves, such as the Tory Byzantine historian John Julius Norwich.
On the other hand, Green parrots, amongst other issues >haha the Mongols were grrat >X, Y and Z were never rral countries >bias is bad but I'm biased anyways :^) >them DARK ages >haha forced humour at deeply inappropriate times >hey guys not shilling but pls subscribe
In short he is everything wrong with his medium and his audience of generally redditcore ignorant plebs reflects this. I quite honestly, as a tankie, have more fun listening to Evolaites as at least they are more articulate and, oftentimes, better read than >lol 800 AD sucks because Catholicism man! >The south American revolutions were about like freedom nit the collapse of the weak Spanish system and a revolt of local oligarchs
History books Serious historical documentaries Recorded lectures
Im a tankie but I like Byzantine history a lot
There's great lectures on iconoclasm on YouTube John Romers "Byzantium the Forgotten Empire" is great The BBCs In Search of the Trojan War (about the historicity of the Trojan War) Victor Harris from the metmuseum gives lectures on Japanese swords and pottery
On a largely comical level but still better than Green are Terry Jone's Medieval Lives (dispelling many medieval myths) and Tony Robinson's archaeology series
For historical fiction: I, Claudius is superb On a very pop historical level teaching false ideas (but still better than that faggot Green) is Ken Burns but he's pretty bad
Then of course there's actual books
Byzantium: JJ Norwich US Civil War: James McPherson Stalin era: J Arch Getty Italy 1860-1950: MacGregor Knox (he is however shamelessly bourgeois, but still worth a read) Modern Canada: Benjamin Issitt (he's biased more than these others though and focuses too heavily on "rebel history" and I say that as a dyed in the wool Stalinist) Soviet strategy 1918-1985: Condolleeza Rice (yes, I am recommending her, yes she is a damn fine historian and political scientist, yes she is an enemy but she is a knowledgeable one who is smarter than many of us can ever hope to be and so deserves recognition)
>>611231 If you are talking about youtube channels, I can think of The Great War as an example of how to make history accessible an entertaining but at the same time well put together. The guy even shows his sources and recommends books, and if the book is too biased, he will warn about it too. https://www.youtube.com/user/TheGreatWar
He advertises a crashcourse, and many times comments on how he only has ten minutes to work with, but he wastes so much goddamn time on shitty jokes, gets off topic and starts on shitty diatribes way too often, then has the audacity to waste a solid 2 minutes on "the open letter" or whatever it was called so that he can get his little soapbox and insert his bias in. Completely shit on all levels.
This is a big one. Forced insertion of modern day beliefs and sensibilities and ancient times, and trying to force le ebin politically correct everything Western is bad meme
It doesn't even make sense; ancient Hellenistic society wasnt even made up of whites and certainly didn't give many fucks about skin colour. Nor did the Romans for that matter, hence situations like the Emperor Phillip the Arab or Zeno and Leo III being Isaurian (it: brown Hill b as barbarians)
And of course the fact that instead of making informed criticisms of eurocentrism and giving real context for why Europe got where it did, he simply reduces himself to petty contrarianism and "nuh uh we wuz bad and sheeeit"
If he toned down his bias a lot it would be pretty good at what it aims to do (introductory videos for yungin's)
The skipping battles and military history part fucking pisses me off though. "Let's focus on the more important plight of marginalized Sudanese lesbians, Pickett's Charge is boring lol xD". Fucking liberals, man.
>>611335 >Greeks were the only people in the world who owned slaves at the time >Herodotus had a pro-Greek bias because he was Greek >Everything he praises Persia for never gets mentioned when he talks about Rome
>>611201 It makes more sense considering the fact that the British royal family is descended from Vlad Dracula. This is a fact that they don't talk about that much, but it can be researched. I have followed the names, and taken it all the way back to Vlad. Of course, that means that if they are descended from Vlad Dracula, then they are also descended from Genghis Khan, and that line can be traced back from Dracula to Genghis himself.
So yeah, the British royal family are Mongols of the seed of Genghis Khan.
>>611046 A lot of what he says is just plain wrong, for example the assertion that the sarissa was the reason why Alexander conquered Persia even though the Persians could easily manufacture spears and pikes of all kinds.
I can understand if he wanted to skim over the Macedonian Phalanx, various other innovations and how it enabled them to defeat Greek hoplite formations and Persia's chariots, cavalry and infantry, some people find that kind of thing boring, but why did he need to replace it all with something totally false?
It is almost as if it was intentional.
I don't really care about his politics or his motives. I can forgive a few inaccuracies or errors. There are limits though, when he says something like that I don't care about him anymore.
>>611046 I watched his video on WW2 the other day. He just simplified it way too much, he was never going to fit ww2 into a 10 minute video and should never have tried. He races over every topic with ridiculous speed and at the end you feel like you've learnt something but really the average watcher wouldn't be able to provide any insights into anything that happened. It wouldn't even be good for a first time viewer with no history knowledge because he randomly drops names in; near the end of the video he says "And at this point Mussolini was killed" when he literally had not mentioned Mussolini the entire video and was not to mention him again. It just doesn't really make sense
>>611979 Those 40 mil was his total kill count besides the reason te middle east is so shit now is because the ottoman decline just set in when western europe was becoming economically militarily socially stronger. Which meant that the ottomans couldn't really partake in the industrial revolution etc and when they tried it was already too late.
>>611046 Look, we have the same kind of clown in France! The french one said that PhD students correcting his mistakes should wait they have defended their thesis before trying to discuss facts with him.
>>611160 I think that was me or Maybe a combination of a few like minded anons. Anyway what I said was that everyone has an inherent bias with which they view his some people are aware of it and try to lessen it or are unaware of it. John green openly admits his his bias and does little to nothing to stop it and continues on.
>>612769 Nah. Iran had been the cultural and intellectual center of the middle east for thousands of years before the Mongols came through and genocided the population. The population of the Iranian plateau didn't recover to pre-Mongolian times until the 20th century. And this of course has nothing to do with the complete wipe out of the Iranian population of Central Asia, now Mongolized in totality.
>>613946 This is /his/ not /pol/ or /reddit/. The Arab invasion of Iran wasn't a genocidal campaign, genetically it had little impact on the Iranian population (in huge contrast to the Mongol invasion). Actually without an Islamic Iran the "Islamic Golden Age" would never have happened.
>Most of the hadith scholars who preserved traditions for the Muslims also were Persian, or Persian in language and upbringing, because the discipline was widely cultivated in the ‘Iraq and the regions beyond. Furthermore all the scholars who worked in the science of the principles of jurisprudence were Persian, as is well known. The same applies to speculative theologians and to most Quran commentators. Only the Persian has engaged in the task of preserving knowledge and writing systematic scholarly works. Thus, the truth of the following statement by the Prophet becomes apparent: “If scholarship hung suspended at the highest parts of heaven, the Persian would (reach it and) take it.” t. Ibn Khaldun
>>611046 Nothing. But in trying to undo widely held preconceptions he pisses off the people who are either beyond such preconceptions or diehard advocates of those conceptions.
For example, most people think the Greeks were the good guys during the the Greek Persian wars, so he argues that it wasn't a simple case of good vs bad and that the Greeks were bad in some regards. He thinks most of his viewers have a disproportionately high knowledge of European history so he tries to stress non-European history. People understand the Greeks weren't saints and already know plenty of non-European history make take this as going too far whereas others who jack off to ancient Greece and European history perceive Green's videos as an attack on their glorious heritage.
>>612491 I disagree. It's called Crash Course for a reason. They are to do a very quick overview of their topic and I find such videos useful. Because of the brevity of Crash Course videos they can cover all human history in a reasonable amount of time. That grander context of history makes it easier to learn further about regions and periods.
I have a particularly short attention span so I understand if the core concept of crash courses is less useful to your style of learning.
I doubt anyone could make a better 10 minute video explaining complex stuff like history half as good as he does. Then again, his videos are aimed to be generalizations and nos specific, detailed reccounts.
Seeing how cuckolded and unironically, not even /pol/ postingly revisionist the hank brothers are I only ever used their content for STEM sciences like chemistry where they have no way to inject too much of their biases.
Even than however lmao at everyone who is trying to learn about the world and sees authority in the words of an YA fiction writer.
>>614679 >t. Neoconfederate southern apologist Haha no fuck you I'm only sad Sherman didn't burn more, you and your sick fuck Allies are responsible for the muh lost cause muh states rights arguments despite tje fact the south itself admitted "muh states rights" pertained specifically and exceptionally to slavery
Get bent BRB marching to the sea, Karl Marx did nothing wrong supporting The Union
John Green is secretly a member of the Illuminati, this thread was put up by /x/ to weed out people with negative aura. If you didn't fall for it, that means you have anunnaki DNA, thus making you a superior life form.
lol I knew I'd trigger you, I think the confederates were a bunch of white supremacist assholes so go take your bizarre accusations somewhere else (hurr anybody who says anything bad about muh blessed union must be a slavery apologist). The fragile ego syndrome Sherman fetishists have is hilarious. Sherman was a white supremacist who burned down cities and wanted to genocide the Indians. Your ancestors were white supremacist fuckbois who got tricked into dying in droves for "muh patriotism" so the northern capitalists wouldn't lose their access to the Mississippi river and easy affordable cotton, meanwhile they avoided the draft by paying dumb mick immigrants to take their place. 800,000 dead white bois killing eachother while I plow their great great granddaughters, greatest day of my life.
>>614088 >The video gives literally 2 sentences about Africa >Another 2 about the pacific theater >This is the battle where Montgomery outfoxed 'The Desert Fox' Rommel. Who are they and what importance did they have? It doesn't matter, does it >Fascism not mentioned once in the entire video >As he said, he mentioned Mussolini but gave no explanation to who he his, making it just pointless >Britain won the Battle of the Bulge. I'm not going to tell you what that was though >No mention of Allied bombing campaigns cause you know they weren't important What point does it serve? The tiny base of knowledge he provides would help who was interested in the topic. I might as well just give you a list of names and events with no information and let you randomly connect some dots
>>614922 >le ebin /pol/ cuck meme >I'm not /pol/ I swear
The capitalist mode of production is still more progressive regardless of its essential barbarism as well. Too bad you didn't read McPherson as he outlines this as well, as well as Southern men who decried the war as a rich man's against the interests of the poor ones. Pls go and read the best living Civil War historian before you baselessly shit on his ideas
Also >Sherman was an angry white supremacist This is also true. I just like how he triggers le slave owners by BTFOing their property so in that sense he dindu nuffin
>>614970 I agree with Mcpherson on the capitalist angle, that's why I said it dumbass. I disagree with McPherson on his blantant white washing and apologetics towards the north as if anything they did will ever make up for the shit they did to blacks and natives. They profited from the same slavery that they supposedly "hated" while never having to pay the price. They kept blacks in perpetual poverty and only gave them the vote when they could control the south during reconstruction. McPherson is your typical White Savior historian who attempts to hide all the bullshit of his ancestors by attacking the south as the reason for american racism. The south has been a powerless backwater shithole for 150 years, the north has controlled the country and they still support institutionalized white supremacy.
>/POL/ /POL/ IT MUST BE /POL/
get a grip faggot, it must be tiring fighting imaginary strawmen.
John Green is fine for someone summing up whole periods of history in ten minute videos. If you're complaining that he doesn't go into enough depth or given enough context, you have completely missed the point.
No one is complaining about that, you dumb shit. People complain about his "facts" are completely retarded and from a completely biased view of what happened. You cannot judge history from a modern (, shitty liberal California faggot) mindset. You simply cannot do that or anything of the sort because, honestly, that is not the way people back then thought and it's completely irrelevant.
The shit that he does spew out of his cavernous face asshole is polluted even more so by complete retardation and falseness, along with interjections of "well here is what my script tells me is wrong so I'll say it condescendingly."
Fuck you, fuck John Green, fuck whoever writes his scripts, and fuck whoever uses this tripe as a teaching tool.
It's autism now to want accurate information even if it's for ADHD riddled kids that can only have their attention held for five seconds at a time and any second not involving a jumpcut and speech is wasted time where they'll lose interest, click away, and then watch shitty Minecraft videos? Are you serious?
It's seriously autism now to want things to be CORRECT?
>>615182 >John Green is fine for someone summing up whole periods of history in ten minute videos. What is the point of doing this though? You're not helping anyone, by giving them vague scaffoldings have historical events. I speak as someone who about two years ago watched every single crash course history video. Let me tell you, they fucking suck. I felt like I knew heaps about the subjects, but when it came down to it, I couldn't tell you anything of meaning or use
/his/tards don't like him because he became rich spreding his knowledge about history while the regular /his/tard is just an arrogant prick who thinks he knows it all better than anybody else, includige Green himself. That's it, OP. Don't search for anything deeper.
>>611046 I know his show is called "crash course history" not "in-depth history" so he has to cut stuff to fit it into 10 minute videos but it just pisses me off to see that he picks and chooses what to put in and leave out in order to create a misleading view of history.
>>615258 > You're not helping anyone, by giving them vague scaffoldings have historical events That's exactly how they help people. They give a context into which they can weave all future learning. For me specifically they kicked off a period of reading of history that greatly expanded my knowledge.
Facts don't stick as well if you don't have context. For example, anything I read about the Ottoman empire would have gone in one ear and out the other because I didn't know how the Ottoman Empire fit into the grander scheme of human history.
If you thought a few Crash Course episodes made you an expert then that's your problem.
>>615302 Just because it's impossible doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it. Or make excuses for people we are deliberately trying to create a false narrative of history. Like John Green for example.
>>611046 The essential "Why doesnt 4chan like X" list:
>1. Its too popular, and 4chan is full of self hating hipsters. >2. Its too basic and simplistic, and 4chan is full of pseudo intellectuals who arent wise enough to see their own simplicity. >3. The "everything is shit" principle, where any given X is hated because of its nitpicked laws, and the only times that X is accepted as good is when its brought up to use as alternative to something else you are shitting on. >4. Tradition, because if something was thought to be bad 15 years ago, its still bad, thats never going to change and go back to Redit.
A screen flickers to light in a dark classroom in Stockholm, Sweden. The students eagerly await the video to load, so they can receive their anticipated lesson.
>Hi! I'm John Green and this is Crash Course: World History and we're going to talk about the Renaissance.
The Students clap and cheer violently, a round of applause going around the room and the children smile, knowing the all-wise John Green is here to educate them about the past.
>We all know those stupid Eurocentrists claim the Renaissance was driven by Italian innovation...
The students boo and frown, vaguely aware that the "Yuro-centrists" are always the bad guys in Mr. Green's lessons. A few are on the edge of their seats and in tears, hoping that Mr. Green will soon defeat the bad guys like he does every video.
>but every true non-fascist knows it wasn't done by privileged Italians at all...it was driven by Muslims!
The students cheer and cry tears of joy, knowing that at this point in the video they are transported into Mr. Green's "Thought Bubble", which shows them delightful images of men in turbans painting Renaissance art and raising children with white Italian mothers.
>But remember kids... the Renaissance didn't even matter! The Europeans still didn't have socialized healthcare and multiculturalism! See you next episode!
The screen suddenly goes dark, and the children dejectedly leave the classroom for their next class: Traditions of Islam and Cultural Awareness.
Just mentioned John Green to one of my Tumblrtard friends and as it turns out she's not a fan. >A girl once called him a creepy middle aged man for trying to appeal to teenage girls by acting like a quirky uncle >He tried to set loose his rabid fans to attack this girl >Green's plan backfired and copypastas about him eating cum spread like wildfire >Green got butthurt that his cuckholdery was under attack >Pic related
Also he "accidentally" stole a quote a 13 year old came up with and made money selling merchandise based off of it. http://www.dailylife.com.au/dl-people/how-a-13yearold8217s-oneline-tumblr-post-became-a-worldwide-meme-20150221-13kzsg.html
>>617555 after watching many of john green's videos and becoming sickened of the constant attacks on europe, the west, and whites, I watched his industrial revolution video thinking, "well he can't wriggle his way out of this one, he has to give credit where credit is due"
>no, no, you see, the industrial revolution was a worldwide phenomenon, because it was caused by the strong Indian textile industry :^).
literally says in the video that he's trying every possible way not to seem eurocentric. christ
>>611198 I reddit sometimes.I have watched most of John greens history stuff.the humour is bad but I found some stuff entertaining .but I'm too much of a filthy casual and haven't read any other history other than school books which were too focused on my country.and I've also listened to hardcore history. So give me a starter to history .not recent history. Where should I start .who is the best to read and why also thoughts on HH?
>>618994 The first real history book I read was Napoleon The Great by Andrew Roberts (Alternatively called, Napoleon: A Life). Someone on /lit/ recommended it to me a while ago and I loved it. There is another thread there now where it's been mentioned >>7630578
John puts his bias too often in his videos and is, as a person, an egotistical, conceited asshat, too full of his own opinions that no one can change them and they are to be known as fact.
However, when the history teacher needs some help getting students to pay attention to a lesson, his brief generalizations are adequate, and the alternate points of view he offers are at least much better than any text book.
Hank is a cool guy. He does science stuff, though, so it's hard for him to insert his opinion and for that opinion to not literally just be a restated fact like "Killing the environment is bad" kinda thing.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.